User talk:Crohnie/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Archive 1 ← Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7

talkback (lingo)

Hi, I responded to your message here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:*Kat*/Lingo --*Kat* (talk) 00:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you responding there, --CrohnieGalTalk 23:42, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS September 2010 Newsletter

The

September 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib
) 04:19, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Can you tell me which 5?

Hi Crohnie,

ChrisO and Polargeo are the only two quality-users who have left over CC-arb that I was aware of. Who are the other three?

talk
) 23:30, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Well I have to say that is the most unique way of spelling my name. ;) I corrected it, I hope that's ok. Yes, we have Polegeo, ChrisO, Mark Nutley, Heyitspeter and I can't remember the last one but I put it on the PD talk page. I know the two are what you call fringe or alternate editors. I believe I may have added Atren into that count because of the forced wiki break he did but like i said I put them on the PD talk page. If you want I'll look tomorrow if you ask me to here. I am now done for the night as my meds make me almost useless by this time, well earlier but right now I'm lucky I know how to spell my name above. :) The point is this, to have editors leaving at such a rate like this I've never seen before. This case is difficult but I find it very upsetting about Polegeo and I don't even really know this editor. I just feel he was unfairly hounded and baited and he took the bait and it ended up on the PD. Look at the difs against him and you tell me if something isn't wrong with them. He said he only edited the one article about data theft and that seems to be the case. He and Lar didn't get along which was known by me and everyone involved in this case. Heck, Polegeo was the one who started the RFC/u so obviously he didn't get along. The Lar being involved and not involved was argued by more than just this editor but yet he's the only one I think that is being sanctioned about it. I said it before and I'll say it again, even Lar said it, the arbitrators should read Lar's talk page to get the full picture about things that went on. I'm about through with my comments there because I don't think there is anything more I can add to it. With all the noise going on there it's just not worth my time anymore. If you want anything else from me don't hesitate, I'll answer in the morning. I hope what I am saying makes sense and answers your question. Good night, and be well, --CrohnieGalTalk 23:58, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation; I appreciate it. Hope you're doing well.
talk
) 03:48, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Wiki Break

TY Dear One. I have gone to San Francisco. TYTY for your offer. Just read my page. I will take you up on it; thot you were still busy, I am my friend's 'puter and she is already whining, so I need to go. Hopefully things will be better by Wednesday. Fondly, J. DocOfSoc (talk) 01:24, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Zulu Papa 5

I don't usually do this, but in case my talk page at User talk:Tony Sidaway is not on your watchlist I decided to give you my own interpretation of what Zulu Papa 5 means. It's there now. Tasty monster (=TS ) 18:59, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, when I edit something it automatically goes on my watch list until I decide to remove it so I saw your response to me. Thank you for taking the time. I thought I responded back to you but maybe I left the computer without having done so. My husband needed me and I've been away from my computer for a few hours due to RL. Thank you for explaining things to me. I think I know what I have to do to stop things from spiraling out of control. Thanks again, --CrohnieGalTalk 22:10, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Hatting

Good call, and done. Lankiveil (speak to me) 21:34, 5 October 2010 (UTC).

I saw you did it, thank you very much. --CrohnieGalTalk 21:54, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
No sweat, it's not that I'm overly busy really, just in a different timezone to most of the active personalities on the case! Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:16, 6 October 2010 (UTC).
If you don't mind me asking where are you? I'm in Florida, USA. --CrohnieGalTalk 12:41, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Robert Conrad

I'm not sure whose posting you are seeing. There is no original research in using online newspaper articles and an interview with Robert Conrad you cited is a first person source. See

WP:Reliability. I've never posted any original research. If you have a fact checked published media source that explains the age discrepancy in the court records. Please provide it. Eudemis (talk
) 20:54, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I disagree with the sources you used. I gave you my reasons in my edit summaries and also on the talk page. Your sources are being used to show his birth year yet one source is a pay only source and the other was about his drunk driving and had nothing to do with his year of birth. The DUI is discussed lower on the page but it just not right to put the DUI in the beginning of the lead to show this. This is a
biography of a living person and you aren't treating it like one. You can't use two sources and combine them and say these sources both say this so this is true. Please discuss this on the talk page and do not revert that informaton back in especially the DUI reference you used. Thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk
11:02, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Polargeo

I'm going to collapse this thread now as all the speculation is probably not helping this editor disengage. The longer the discussion continues, the longer he will be tempted to return to contribute. This is unlikely to be in his best interests, at least in the short term.  Roger Davies talk 10:02, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Ok, though I think clarification about his tools would be helpful, you are right that he may feel the need to return so do what you think is best here. Thanks for letting me know. --CrohnieGalTalk 10:52, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Why would it be helpful? No arb has raised it. Though this is probably a red herring. If he has genuinely abandoned the admin account and has vaped the password, whether or not it has the tools is irrelevant as he has no access to them. One thing is certain though: using various accounts to say the same stuff over and over again is not a good idea and is doing him no favours at all.  Roger Davies talk 10:59, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
I agree with you that he is doing himself no favors. The tools stuff he talked about is here. I don't know who he had take them or the situation but I thought you should at least see this. Yes, do what you think is best. I don't want any editor to hurt themselves due to being too emotional which I think is the situation here. Thanks again Roger, I trust you to do the right thing here, --CrohnieGalTalk 11:21, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Ileitis
Houston Film Critics Society
Dutch process chocolate
Overlap syndrome
No Man's Land (1987 film)
Mixed connective tissue disease
Rodolfo B. Valentino
Joyce Compton
Parasitic disease
Toshia Mori
Anita Page
San Buono
National Society for Colitis and Crohn's Disease
Progressive disease
3rd Maryland Regiment
Judy Greer
Environmental disease
Theresa Harris
Jules Munshin
Cleanup
Detroit Film Critics Society
Kyle Bradford
Children in cocoa production
Merge
Domestic terrorist
Mainstreaming (education)
List of animated feature-length films
Add Sources
American Film Institute Awards 2001
Katharine Houghton
Hillside Strangler
Wikify
Caitlin Todd
Women's Electoral Lobby
Shar Pei
Expand
Gun Shy (film)
Meryl Streep
Caprine Arthritis Encephalitis

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:01, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Tareq Salahi Article

Thanks for policing and rolling back. Have templated User:Law90650 with a level 1 warning. Hope you don't mind. Regards (talk) 18:46, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

No problem on both accounts. I was in a hurry to finish up the move to get off my computer. Don't mind at all but pretty sure it's a throw away account. Thanks for dropping by, --CrohnieGalTalk 08:32, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Also, I cross-referenced NACC and CCFA, the equivalent association to NACC in the U.S. I also have CD; enjoyed your userpage. Saebvn (talk) 20:01, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

WR-a sock is a sock no matter where she goes

Hey, Crohnie! It does indeed appear that SRQ went from "NotASpamBot" to "anklet with the pom pom" over at Wikipedia Review (most likely because of her horrible reception the first time). Aside from knowing me and what she characterizes as a "few whiny females with emotional, mental, late-night-alcohol+editing, and physical disability issues" (I assume this to mean WHL, you and probably Doc #2), she has some knowledge of Sarek. Knowledge that closely mimics the wording of "NotASpamBot", who said, "You end up with a bunch of socially maladjusted people working out their grudges on high-school bullies of yore by swinging their dicks around online." From "anklet with the pom pom": "...uses Wikipedia as his place of "power" by working out old grudges against said bullies of yore on the hapless editors he chooses to target. He's just another of the socially maladjusted who sought to rise to the level of admin so he could swing his dick around online...". "Yore", "socially maladjusted" and the swinging of dicks around online all repeated like this... hmmmm. Is there a policy of no socking over at WP Review, I wonder? Maybe there should be... ;> Doc9871 (talk) 20:31, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, if she is changing ID's over there, there are enough editors there that are still active here that will know she has been socking her brains out over here. Her saying she didn't know how she got to my contributions to follow me is just so BSish. I mean most of the editors over there know how you get to someone's contributions. She is apparently for some unknown reason keeping an eye on my few hours a day of being online. One thing I credit the editors over there with is that they aren't going to put up with someone who is being disingenuous with what she is saying. She can say all she wants about me but when I know she has been busted for socking again, I will do as policy says. I will revert her off the project per
the duck test. She is so easy to tag and bag for the most part because she still doesn't see why she was a problem. It had nothing to do with editors here being too sick, drinking & editing or swinging their dicks as she says. She is indefinitely banned by the community and this time I think there were a lot of uninvolved editors who said she was a time sink and it was time to get rid of her. See, oops, I said it again! :) Yes, it was past the time to get rid of her. Thanks for sharing, by the way has she popped up on the radar here lately? I haven't been here that much and when I am, I am reading specific sections of the project until they wind down and close. I still don't understand one thing that maybe you can explain, what was the reason for bringing up the Climate change arbcom case over there to bash a group of uninvolved editors over here? The Good Locust was someone who seemed confused questioning what she was talking about bringing the CC case there. I know I am just as confused as they are. Note, for my talk page lurkers I bring you this so you know what is going on in case a comment would be entertained here. Thanks Doc #1 :), --CrohnieGalTalk
12:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
I figure since you put up that thread, this thread here should also be added. This shows that the user going by the id of 'anklet with the pom pom' is stalking editors in good standing on this project. It's bad enough she has been busted using multiple socks on this project, name is not added as to give her the lack satisfaction, but that she also felt the need to change her id over there because editors didn't like her behavior there either. This off project type of behavior needs to be figured out on how the project can protect editors here from the stalking and harrassment by indefinitely banned editors. I put this here because in the first thread posted in this thread an editor here made the assumption that I was a sock when the editor s/he was talking to was the serious serial sock here at this project. I have never had an alternate account at this project, hold to just this one account. I see no reason to use alternate accounts other than for maybe people using unsecure computers and then their alternate account should be the same as their original with maybe a number or something to make it completely identifiable. Anyways, I put this link here to show the connection of who she is interested in and how she came to be stalking my contributions. I hope this ends already, get over it already is all I'd like to say to user 'anklet with the pom pom'. --CrohnieGalTalk 12:09, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Sigh

Anklet with a pom pom is such a CUTE name for a sock. I am completely underwhelmed. Interesting reading tho. BRB, I have a note for you.DocOfSoc (talk) 02:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

User Westconnector‎ is vandalizing the Charles Karel Bouley page. I left a message on TFOWR page, and he took care of it. This may be SRQ. TF left a great warning and the page now been blanked. Sound familiar? Anyway,thought you should know and I guess there is no way to avoid mentioning the "Obsessed One". I will cc this to you know whom ;-) Joyously yours, DocOfSoc (talk) 02:38, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
She may have been disruptive before and now her socking but I've never known her to be a vandal too. I don't think that's her, sorry. I think that's some bored teenage homophobic kid or something. You can see what he says but this doesn't look like her trademark behavior. --CrohnieGalTalk 09:12, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I hope you are right. But she has made almost these exact same remarks before. Sigh......DocOfSoc (talk) 09:42, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

The last edits today leave NO doubt in my mind that this is SRQ. The name changes are the identical edits she made it the Bouley article. Not something a new editor would do. DocOfSoc (talk) 06:42, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Don't forget to hit Al Capone - she made a mess of it... Doc talk 22:34, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi guys, don't worry I just reverted everything she made a mess out of out of the project. Everything is back to what it was prior to her touching the articles. Finally got one myself Doc#1 :) Alls good, --CrohnieGalTalk 22:40, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Kudos! She may gnash her teeth over this one, so get ready to get trashed at WR! One (of many) things that stood out was when TCR was denied rollback(!) and said, "Thanks for considering my request (although I think you probably only took a split second to actually consider it, LOL! :-)". Something was definitely "off" with that response in its "tone". Well, another one down - maybe it is time for
WP:LTA after all...? Doc talk
22:53, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
I guess you were right about the Westconnect one it seems to have cleared out before editing. I can't find any contributions for it. Maybe I'm just too tired. Talk later, --CrohnieGalTalk 22:42, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Could use some help with clean up please.

Hey, I'm listing this here so that I can update others that the sock

WP:DENY
which says to remove the edits of banned users is preferred others may take the edits as their own if they would like. I've been cleaning up after the block but could use some help on the article(s) listed. The first one that the sock edited a lot is:

Well I think this is the last one to do. I did all the rest of them, can someone do this one please?  :) Thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 16:27, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 October 2010

Oh Boy

Got another one: (Deletion log); 12:49 . . SarekOfVulcan (talk | contribs) deleted "User:Eniskink" (G6: Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial) cleanup: unsigned warning placed on non-existent userpage) :-D DocOfSoc (talk) 13:34, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

It was a dup warning, it was in the wrong place, and it created a page where there wasn't one before -- of course I deleted it. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:54, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Are you talking about that being a sock? I have two more that seems to fit the pattern too. Email me if you want the names because I don't want her here.--CrohnieGalTalk 15:25, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Garbo

Per MoS, italic text is discouraged in articles. Natalie Portman and the other women who changed their last names or go under aliases do not have italicized text emphasizing the new name. I've since changed it back to standard. Estheroliver (talk) 02:19, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Paul Bern RfC

Hi. I just wanted to thank you again for commenting at the Paul Bern RfC. I feel like I'm banging my head against a wall right now, but your opinion was very helpful. Have a good one! Pinkadelica♣ 03:39, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

No problems I just commented there. Sounds like
conspiracy theories vs well I don't know. I don't understand what this other editors is saying to be honest. He agrees that it was a suicide and then continues on about wikipedia being able to tell the truth. Any of my talk page lurkers, would you please go to this articles Paul Bern and make a statement on the RFC that is on the page? There needs to be more input by other editors at this RFC since I am the only one who saw the request for comment. So it should be easy to be caught up to understand the differences in order to give your opinion. Thanks in advance, --CrohnieGalTalk
10:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Done :) --
chat!
) 12:00, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Done! ;-) DocOfSoc (talk) 13:15, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you to both of you, very much appreciated. The more the merrier I say for an RFC. :) Thanks again, --CrohnieGalTalk 16:59, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you guys so, so much for commenting! I've been dealing with this on my own for a bit and have just about reached my limit with it. I can deal with someone with a differing opinion, but I tend to shut down when that person becomes condescending and rude. Sorry, but it doesn't take a historian to read a source or figure out if a book is an acceptable source. I personally don't understand what Kraxler's issue is either (good to know I'm not the only one) as they seem to be contradicting themselves, but I think most of it stems from wanting to present what they think actually happened and lead the reader to believe the various theories presented outweigh the official verdict. This article has been unsourced for years and rife with POV content and I think it's about time it was brought up to acceptable standards. Thanks again everyone! Pinkadelica♣ 04:47, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Needling

I've moved the needling discussion to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Topic_banned_editors_needling_one_another for general discussion. --TS 20:22, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know Tony. --CrohnieGalTalk 22:11, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Apology

You started this on my talk page. I've moved it here because you asked me to ping you. --TS 23:57, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, if I said anything I shouldn't have in the discussion here I would like to say I'm sorry. I noticed you removed my comment and another's with a comment yourself, "don't come here again to discuss William M. Connolley or Lar). 19:0654, 21 October 2010". I am assuming that your comment is for me. I didn't mean to cause any problems. I'm going offline now so if you have a response would you ping me so I remember to look here tomorrow? Sorry again, --CrohnieGalTalk 23:39, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

No apology necessary. I was just trying to contain a fairly delicate situation where both Lar and William M. Connolley were editing my user talk page and I didn't want another squabble to break out. --TS 23:57, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for this clarification. I was very concerned that I upset you commenting there and I don't like upsetting people/editors. I always strive to make sure I don't too. I thought that you were upset at what I said to Lar at the time of your redaction and removal. Thanks again, I'm really off now :) Take care, --CrohnieGalTalk 00:19, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note

I was not retired due to the CC case (as I stated on my userpage). I was informed of a pending lawsuit regarding something, and wanted to be sure that I was in the clear with respect to the allegations there-in. Having had council review the complaint, it had nothing to do with me, and as such, I am returning. Hipocrite (talk) 13:28, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I made the wrong statement, if you point me to it I will strike it. I don't remember where I said it to be honest. I'm glad you are returning though. I've alway enjoyed your posts as being well thought out and interesting. Welcome back, --CrohnieGalTalk 14:05, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 October 2010

WMC block

You asked about the reason for the WMC block. The problems is in User_talk:William_M._Connolley#Misc_breakage. Those are links to CC issues. However, it is my belief that the topic ban did not include user talk pages, and it is my belief that most Arbs agreed. (Carcharoth excepted). However, I have failed to persuade the community, despite trying very hard.--SPhilbrickT 15:08, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

But those are from like 10-2 days ago so why the block now? Also, I saw your arguements and I happen to agree with what you say. It's too late for me to speak up since everyone has commented already, I mean the uninvolved agree the block should stand. Thanks though for explaining, --CrohnieGalTalk 16:08, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

check the diffs

You might want to remove that embarassing comment. Jimbo didn't sign the list.[1].--Cube lurker (talk) 13:13, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm not embarrassed since the list is a joke, I blew it on this one though, so I removed my comment. Thanks for bringing it to my attentions --CrohnieGalTalk 14:03, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
I think you misunderstand the list, but to each his own.--Cube lurker (talk) 14:06, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Well that's possible but a list like that for real isn't a good idea like what was said, right? ;) Have a good day, --CrohnieGalTalk 14:09, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: Ronz

I do recognize that BoP, TFI, and Griswaldo are being over-zealous about Ronz at ANI, but please don't let their excesses obscure the depth of the problem here. In fact, I suspect that the reason they are so zealous is Ronz' own f-up: he used extensive

baiting
tactics to rile them up in the hope that he could make them look like ravening idiots, but he miscalculated so that all of the anger he stirred up (which was supposed to make his opponents look bad) now looks like a legitimate response to his behavior.

Serves him right in my opinion; I just want to make sure that the lesson sticks.

This isn't the first time I've been on the receiving end of this kind of thing from Ronz, not to mention from others: it's a common tactic used by skeptical editors. My entire block log is due to one skeptic or another baiting me, which pretty much sucks. I'm personally getting better at dealing with it, of course, but I really don't see why anyone should have to deal with it at all. IMO, the clearer we make the message that this kind of activity is no longer acceptable on project, the sooner people will stop doing it, and the better for the project. That's why I'm pushing for a clearer acknowledgment of wrongdoing from Ronz: the more bad behavior he has to admit, the more collective embarrassment there will be among everyone who uses these kinds of tactics, and embarrassment (for reasons I can explain, if you like) is probably the only effective motivator in this situation.

Sorry this whole thing is uncomfortable. I don't think it's pleasant either, but I do think it's Ronz' own karma snapping back at him, and I think it's wise for that energy to play itself out in full. --Ludwigs2 16:00, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

The real question here is was there a BLP violation? Listen, I remember you having this kind of attitude about
:BullRangifer
too. You and Han's got on him badly. Now if you look at his contributions he only edits here ocassionally, like once a month or so. Why is it that editors that get into a dispute with you decided that they have had enough and decide it's better to leave than to stay?
This is a BLP violation which Ronz reverted. This editor The Founders Intent took it to the talk page to repeat the BLP vio here. I will have to recheck the article that was causing the problems but BLP vios are serious as you know. Now Ronz is thinking of leaving the project, is this what you think is best? I mean do you want him to leave? I have to admit that I am tired of long term editors that are in good standing leaving the project because of an arguement. The AN/i looks like a gang going after him, sorry but that's what it looks like to me. When I question this, I get a whole bunch of questions back at me about what I'm up to do. This doesn't make me feel any more secure in what is being said. If an editor, any editor, disagrees with a group of editors and gets called out for it, something is wrong in my opinion. Now may I ask, what brings you here now to talk about this since I haven't commented for a few days.
Ok, looking at the talk page of
Weston Price I find it amazing that only complaints about Ronz are raised since in this section Yobol is complaining about sources being massed deleted. Why are sources being deleted and more important why are you apparently fine with this? This section starts off with being uncivil but no one complains, why? I think the attacks of Ronz is being over blown. Read the talk page and see what is being said and who is saying it. Why is no one complaining? [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weston_Price&action=historysubmit&diff=393070292&oldid=393069208 Here Yobol adds sources back in that Griswaldo removed. This article has a lot of problems and banning, blocking or whatever it is you all want to do to Ronz is going to change these problems. I will do more research on this article when I have time which isn't right now but something is not right. You say Ronz is the problem, well I see others also being a problem. I'm curious, is this another article that you are playing the part of mediator? Have a good night, --CrohnieGalTalk
20:44, 28 October 2010 (UTC) I didn't proof this so there will probably be changes tomorrow for this, sorry.
I only had a mild interest in the Price article, and only occasionally did an edit. Then all of a sudden Ronz shows up all authoritative and unyielding, as though he were an admin. Take a look at all the threats to block people. I wasn't looking for trouble, and I didn't know Ronz. He came on like a know-it-all authority, dictating what was acceptible or not; based on the previous blowout with llena. He tried to dictate policy on this article to me, because he was involved in that. He never explains anything, just gives out the policy shortcuts....WP:BLP, WP:TALK, WP:THIS and WP:THAT. Sorry, but that doesn't fly, and that's not the way WP works. Those policies are not cold, unbending laws to be obeyed at all costs. Look at Ronz history on that article. He's added almost nothing of content; he's only about telling others what's allowed. We're doing the legwork, and he's acting like the Monday-morning Quarterback. Ronz attacked every editor that went to the noticeboards against him. He attacked us all at once. He's all about confrontation, I just want to write articles. But I'm not going to get pushed around. Yeah, I can get a little heated and I've gotten it from L and BG on that; I tell it like I see it. You talk about Ronz being so valuable; he hasn't been around much longer than me. He did nothing his first year. Ronz needs to understand that he isn't running the place, and that he has to respect consensus. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE GOOD WORKS 22:43, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
This isn't being hot headed. That is being rude. As for Ronz not doing anything his first year and onward, I think you better look closer at his contributions. He has done a lot, esp. in the spamming area. I think that spam project will back up what I am saying. Everyone here does their own bit to help the project. If you look at my edits you will see for the most part I do vandal patroling. That doesn't make me any less of a good editor now does it? The reasons I am standing up for him now, well I just can't say yet. Sorry if that's not the answer you are looking for in your repeated requests to me. I do the patroling but I also do other things too. I think I have got a good name here at the project for the things I do which includes helping editors. Ronz has admitted he made a mistake, what more do you want from him. You've been here also since 2007 yet you have less than 5K in edits. I have no problem with that except you are trying to get an editor banned that has a good reason for what happened. Please try to show some kindness to your fellow editors. --CrohnieGalTalk 15:20, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
You're not planning to drag this out right, because I'm not really interested. Anyway, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the way he came into that article, acting pushy and criticizing with apparent authority that he didn't have. Three editors working an article are not subject to a single editor's objections. Furthermore, show me where he added useful content; or how did he personally improve the article. But that's fine if he's on spam patrol, good on him. That's not the subject of the dispute. Over and out. Sorry Ludwigs. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE GOOD WORKS 18:00, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Eh. I wanted a conversation, not a fight - I only posted here, C, because I generally respect your opinion and wanted to explain where I was coming from. I'm sorry I posted anything now, and I'll withdraw from the discussion. --Ludwigs2 15:44, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey, I don't want to fight with you either. You came off looking for one, sorry if I misinterpreted what you were saying. I just know that I am being questioned repeatedly about why I support Ronz so maybe I got defensive a bit. You know me by now too, and I don't do fighting. So feel free to continue and I'll try to take it in the correct spirit you are giving it, ok? I've got to go for now though, hopefully we'll talk more, --CrohnieGalTalk 16:00, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
I actually don't mind you supporting Ronz. I'd like to support Ronz myself (the way I would like to support any dedicated editor); I just want him to use normal consensus discussion practices and not do the political thing. I cannot tell you how utterly tired I am of editors going all Machiavelli on me. I mean, you're right, I've had run-ins with a number of editors - Ronz, BullRangifer, Mathsci, and others to a lesser extent. Each time the same thing happens: they try to win an argument with me by running some gambit to discredit me or get me blocked, and I turn it back on them - publicly, and without a whole lot of sympathy. How they respond to the embarrassment of getting caught playing political games is not something I really care about (though I'd hope they'd man up to it and learn the lesson).
Beyond that, I don't know what to tell you. If you want to fault me for being stubbornly reasonable, then fault me, because I am. If you want to fault me for being skilled enough to deflect dishonest editing practices back on the originator, then fault me for that. If there's something else you want to fault me for, let me know what it is. I'm happy to discuss anything problematic that I've actually done, I'm just sick of having to deal with people who push crapulent ad hominems to cover the fact they can't make a decent argument. --Ludwigs2 18:34, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Ok, let me ask you this, Ronz admitted he messed up, do you accept that or do you want more like others in the AN/i discussion? --CrohnieGalTalk 19:42, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
I don't really want any concrete sanctions (not that I'd object to them, mind you, because I'm still a bit POed, but speaking pragmatically I don't think they're necessary). Ronz sort of admitted to disruptive/tendentious editing: what he actually said was [2] "I have a great deal I want to change in my approach to editing" and "[I want to] come up with something that will avoid all the problems that are of concern, especially WP:TE and WP:DE". It's evasive, but it's certainly something. I'd personally prefer a more overt admission, particularly about the baiting. It's one thing to get hung up on an idea and be a bear about it (that kind of thing happens to the best of us at times). It's another, more noxious thing to start getting manipulative with other editors. From what he's said so far I can't see any evidence that he's aware that the problem lies mostly in how he was treating other editors, not just in tendentiousness. Maybe he is aware and he's just not saying it, but... As I said over in ANI, I'm not completely satisfied with this resolution. I'd like it better if he made a more complete admission of the ways in which he goofed up. Then he could promise not to do it again, take down the retirement template, get back to editing, and we could forget all about this. --Ludwigs2 21:15, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Well as you know, we get what we get from editors. The main thing is that he said adjustments would be done. As for the retirement template, he hasn't decided whether he wants to stay or not so why should the template matter to anyone except editors who appreciate the work and time served by Ronz? I hope he stays but have the feeling he won't be back anytime soon. So you all don't need to worry I guess about anything for awhile at least. I've watch listed the article that started all of this and there is still an editor their saying that there are problems with some of the edits. I don't know the article so I need to have time to do some research into the man to know more about him and the sources which I don't have time to do right now. I have watch listed to see how things are going now that Ronz is no longer part of the equation there. Talk soon, need to go check my error below, --CrohnieGalTalk 22:39, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, we'll see what happens. I suspect he'll take a few days to re-evaluate and then be back to editing, and I hope he comes back with the kinds of adjustments that he says he's considering.
Also (piggyback from the lower thead), I'm surprised you're not an admin - I always though you were, and you should be. have you ever RfAed? --Ludwigs2 22:46, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Don't expect him back anytime soon. I just don't think he's interested in returning anytime soon. As for admistrator, no I've never run to become one and don't plan on it. I wouldn't make a good administrator plus I have no interest in becoming one. I think even running for one is such a stressful thing never mind if you do pass and become one it's a very thankless job. :) I think I'll stick with just being a plain ole editor and do what I can to help people and edit the best I can. Have you thought of running? --CrohnieGalTalk 22:58, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
On occasion I have, yeah, though that usually ends up with me vividly imagining the feedback I'd get from some quarters and doubling over in a fit of combined pain and laughter. There are a number of people on project who just don't have nice thoughts about me, and I wouldn't be honest if I claimed I didn't understand why. I may do it anyway someday: puddling around with the more boring administrative tasks actually appeals to me, and I could probably leverage it into avoiding conflict entirely and lead a nice, quiet, conflict free wiki-life. wouldn't that be nice... --Ludwigs2 01:25, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Well good luck with it if you decide to give it a try. Personally I don't want to try with the kind of system that is now in place. Too much of an an attack on editors for my taste anyways.
I have a question, why wasn't this brought to my attention? Esp. the comment from NY Brad? All the broohaa that went on and Brad says he sees no behaviorial problems. Didn't you think this was important of a dif to share with me? I'm trying to calm the waters and I'm getting difs of convenience but not all of the difs involved. This I find unfair to me. Please respond when you have a moment Ludwig. I really would like to know why this wasn't brought to my attention. Thanks in advance, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:05, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi Crohnie. I'm not convinced those complaining on
WP:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification
. On ORN it was or is simply the same editors talking about the same things but at a different URL on en.wikipedia.org. Somebody more familiar with the workings of wikipedia might possibly be able to explain the point of that.
From what I can tell, the main user editing tendentiously on the article at the moment seems to be
Weston Price
. At the moment they seem to have nothing to do with either Ronz or QuackGuru, the editors mentioned at the beginning of the ANI thread.
Surely the people who could cast a helpful and instructional light on all these matters are experienced medical editors like User:MastCell and User:Eubulides.
So Crohnie, I have a problem with so many noticeboard reports at the same time. In all this morass, which extends to policy pages, MastCell has made some insightful comments. When people come a cropper with him, there is usually something not quite right. Mathsci (talk) 13:01, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes I agree, I am just finding more and more places this is playing out and it's not being disclosed on AN/i. Want to help me with that? I am going there now to open a new can of worms I think. This whole thread was screaming something was wrong and I accidentially fell on the dif I added and question above. I now have that page on my watch list. I can or won't put all those boards on my watch list. My watch list is bad enough now that my articles have trouble coming through to me. I am going to refer this comment to the AN/i board so it can be seen. Thanks for letting me know more than I already knew since I am trying to some helpful things in the background here. Be well, --CrohnieGalTalk 13:25, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Crohnie - I'm sorry, when I opened that thread I just notified the people directly involved. It just didn't occur to me to give more broad notification, and if it had occurred to me I would have been worried about violating
wp:CANVASS
. If I do anything like that in the future, I'll let you know though. With respect to NYBrad, I was waiting until the case closed formally before approaching him for his ideas in talk.
Mathsci is correct about BruceGrubb. I've worked with Bruce productively elsewhere (or so I seem to remember) but he seems to be wanting to use Price's bio to push a bit on modern manifestations of focal infection theory. I'm not sure why that is. --Ludwigs2 14:28, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Arbitration Enforcement

I hate to be a pain, but since you aren't an admin, please do not post in the section entitled "Result of the appeal", as per the italic text below that that says, " This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the sections above." Thank you. Courcelles 21:54, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, that was accidental and you're not being a pain telling me about it. I didn't mean to comment in the section for administrators only. I will move or remove my comment if you haven't already. Again, sorry, --CrohnieGalTalk 22:30, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Crohnie. You have new messages at Saebvn's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Notation, responded there. --CrohnieGalTalk 18:51, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILM October 2010 Newsletter

The Octoberr 2010 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:43, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

Tareq Salahi

The information you put into this page is not factual. It is properly reported in the WaPo article as statements made in a court filing by a plaintiff - meaning it is their opinion, not fact. I'd love to work with you on some proposed way to word it if you disagree, but please don't put it back in for now. 96.247.118.213 (talk) 16:08, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, not their opinion but rather an allegation made by them. 96.247.118.213 (talk) 16:09, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
I've responded on the talk page with my opinion. Any of my watch page lurkers, if you are available, we could actually use more opinions there. Thanks in advance. --CrohnieGalTalk 18:02, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Done and done. And, I'm not sure the issues are "major," as I described in my post at Talk:Tareq Salahi. All the best. Saebvn (talk) 18:10, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll take a look, --CrohnieGalTalk 18:16, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Sorry to be one of your many lurkers...  :) Saebvn (talk) 18:16, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey no problem. It actually comes in handy to have lurkers. Apparently I have quite a few of them too. ;) Comment anytime you wish. I'm easy when it comes to anyone talking on my page, as a matter of fact, I like to encourgage it as it keeps me honest. Thank you for lurkering but more importantly thank you for commenting, --CrohnieGalTalk 18:22, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Check back to Talk:Tareq Salahi. The IP has reverted w/o discussion. Right now, I'm with you. Saebvn (talk) 18:24, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

They reverted me once and took it to the talk page. I just reverted because I feel there is a possible problem with their edits violating blp. Are you saying they reverted me a second time? I'll go look again. We can't have gossip from a newspaper used as actuals in a BLP. The paper is usually a reliable source but I believe the IP is taking things out of context and not being true to what the paper is saying. What do you think? --CrohnieGalTalk 18:30, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

You might want to check again. I think they may have reverted a second time. I'll comment further on the Article's talk page. Agree with you on the IP taking it out of context. Will go back to the Talk page... Saebvn (talk) 18:36, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
For the record, I reverted once and started this section. I have replied at length on the article discussion page. 96.247.118.213 (talk) 04:50, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
I am not ignoring, I am waiting for others to respond. Please do not revert me until this gets resolved by more editor responding. Also, I am concerned about sock puppetry and need to here more about this from others. --CrohnieGalTalk 18:54, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
More on socking, To the IP, do you or have you had any named accounts? I'm sorry to have to ask this but it is necessary unfortunately. --CrohnieGalTalk 19:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
  • I am again requesting that my talk page lurkers to please respond to this. There is discussion going on at the talk page but it's also been brought here. Thanks in advance, --CrohnieGalTalk 19:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) This is clearly an IP who has been at WP for awhile as at least one other account[3], but whether that alone would make this a "sock" is debatable, since IPs are allowed to edit anonymously and don't have to register. There are some things that are "interesting" about the IP's editing behavior - announcing the "cleanup" and then invalidating referenced statements[4], undoing your reversion with no edit summary, and some other things I won't mention just yet. The IP is right about there being some possible plagiarism in the article, and that should be handled appropriately. Very doubtful it's who you're thinking right now, especially as the 74.7.121.69 IP goes back before she ever "needed" to sock. I disagree with the IP's sourcing issue, and hopefully s/he will respond here if they care why that is. Cheers :> Doc talk 22:11, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
Behaviour is eerily familiar.DocOfSoc (talk) 22:41, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
It is, but the 74 IP threw a monkey wrench into it ;> I was becoming more suspicious until I saw their edit contributions and geolocate, and then it became clear to me that it's not her (this time). The IP does ask someone with a registered account to change an article[5], which could mean that it's a blocked user: or not. At the time of this edit, SRQ was engaged in a heated debate with WHL at the Ted Bundy article, and it's unlikely the IP would make this edit[6], sign in as SRQ 1 minute later for this[7], sign out for the IP[8][9], and then back to SRQ[10] within the span of just a few minutes. Not back then, at least. The articles the 74 IP edited are not in SRQ's interests (peppered with sports stuff) as well. Cheers to both of you :> Doc talk 23:10, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
P.S. - Didn't see it at the time, but
WP:LTA at some point... Doc talk
16:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes IP 70 is her with her worst nastiness I've seen. I marked it but saw you changed the marking. Darn I always use the wrong one but at least my hearts in the right place. :) What does it take to finally go to
WP:LTA. It's been going on now with multiple accounts and now she is trying to start wars with her behavior. Did you read what she wrote? Did you see the behavior coming from that editor she wrote it to? It's like it's believed and so uncool. We need something more done, now. Can a filter be set up for her? I don't know much about the filters but I've read were some have been used for editors that don't belong and a bot or something gets rid of the trash. Please, pretty please with sugar on top, I really could use some good news. Thanks Doc, --CrohnieGalTalk
19:55, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

MickMacNee

Re your comment at ANI, you can but try. If you've never had any dealings with Mick, he may appreciate a totally neutral, uninvolved admin's attempts at mediation. On the other hand, he may not. Despite what he says, I'm not out to eliminate him from the project, but there needs to be an improvement in his contributions and the way he communicates with other editors. Mjroots (talk) 05:45, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Going to take my comments to this users talk page. --CrohnieGalTalk 19:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Crohnie, No, it doesn't matter to me that you are not an admin. It may matter to Mick, it may not. He has been unblocked, so it might not be necessary for you to open an discussion with him. Mick has strong opinions on a number of issues, and isn't afraid to let others know what they are. I'm not going to tell you what to say or what issues to raise. If you are going to do some investigation beforehand then it will be pretty obvious what the issues are. Mjroots (talk) 22:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Well since he isn't blocked anymore, hopefully he understands now that the community is losing their patience with him. If a problem starts again, please let me know early on and I will research the problems and make an educated comment to him at his talkpage. Hopefully now he understands though. --CrohnieGalTalk 22:34, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

There is a question for you

Hi, you did a drive by revert of mine without adding anything to the discussion other than notifying editors there that the IP brought the same discussion to a third location, the BLP notice board. I would appreciate a response to my question at the Tareq Salahi talk page. Thank you in advance, --CrohnieGalTalk 19:53, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Ity wasn't a drive by revert. It was a considered removal in response to a thread at the BLPN with an edit summary of BLP if in doubt keep it out, if the discussion supports the content then it can be replaced and a talkpage comment of - Note - this issue has also been reported to the BLP noticeboard here. I have also reverted user Crohnie's addition of the disputed content as it can easily be replaced if consensus supports it. As for the article, it is bloated and attacking in nature imo. Off2riorob (talk) 6:45 pm, 31 October 2010, last Sunday (3 days ago) (UTC+0) - I saw, and still see no reason to insist on keeping disputed content in the article while it is under discussion. Plagiarism claims are quite topical and seem to be treated quite seriously, the content appeared very close indeed to the source and to err on the side of caution I though better to keep it out while it is discussed. Your comment You reverted me saying there is a consensus for the edits would you expand on this because I see two editors and one IP talking about this and so far one editors agrees with my reason to revert the edits made by the IP. - does not reflect my edit summary, I didn't speak about any already formed consensus, but was referring to one that would arise from detailed discussion. If the discussion arrives that there is no copyright issues or plagiarism or libel,then it is easy to replace.
Off2riorob (talk
) 10:13, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Just curious but before you did the revert, did you look at the source being used? Thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 10:37, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
As I remember I did a google search for the words as I usually do when there are claims of plagiarism and copyright and as I remember the results were close enough to get me to remove the content while further discussion cleared the issue up, as in .. we are recommended to err on the side of caution. Apart from that quite small issue, the article is awful and bloated and attacking a living person in nature and if I though I could get away with it without wasting my time being reverted I would happily remove half of the content. Trivia and gossip have no place in a BLP.
Off2riorob (talk
) 10:46, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey go for it, you won't get any problems from me about it. The article was written mostly when it first happened. I really haven't done much with that article except for vandalism reverting. All the best, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:24, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Wiki has long since broken me of such attempts to improve our articles. I have spent similar wasted hours carefully removing and rewriting such poor content only to have it replaced in a single revert by another user that likes it. No worries, I think we just both were attempting to protect the article and got ourselves in a mini muddle, excuse me for that, best. This not notable game from the BLP (cited to the game itself) is a reflection of pure trivia http://www.addictinggames.com/whitehousepartycrashers.html - mildly amusing but not at all encyclopedic.
Off2riorob (talk
) 16:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Sorry to hear that but I do understand why, it can be quite frustrating to change something only to have someone come by and remove it with a click of a button. I still have problems with the edit that IP is making because I don't feel it's being true to the source, on top of that, for the claims being made, better sources are needed. Add to the fact I am not sure but having the feeling that this editor whose edit count is low, is not a newbie and knows too much for such a small amount of edits. This I find very concerning. You take care Rob, I have no hard feelings towards you and I hope you hold no hard feeling with me. I hope to see you around under better circumstances though I do see you around, I don't think we have actually communicated before this which I hope will change. If you want to tackle this article with me, I am game, let me know. Have a good day, --CrohnieGalTalk 19:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
I feel the love, hopefully I can add to that. I can commisserate on the concept of getting reverted on well thought through edits as well. It's the exact reason I work anon, in fact. I prefer to do "Don't Look Back" editing on the principle that the 20 other edits I can make in the time I would spend discussing one particular edit can add more value to the overall project. Crohnie, the only reason I stopped and spent time on the back and forth here was that I truly felt that there was plagiarism and the same defmataion types of problems you were concerned about in the original article. I had stopped to read it and saw that it claimed that Salahi had stolen stuff from the winery, and there was no way that could be backed up properly since it's flatly libellous. That's my edit style: I read WP as a resource or for pleasure, and when I see a problem I jump in. I hope you can read over my comments all along and see that I've worked in good faith: I even tried twice to edit to your expressed concerns and said a number of times that I could see what you were saying about my edits not being the greatest. I was just dead set against going back to the original due to the specific issues of plagiarism and saying things that weren't verifiable. I also apologize for not referring to my post on BLN Noticeboard - I was simply unaware that it was the proper etiquette to do so and won't make same mistake in the future. I'm happy to see any further edits to improve what I provisionally put in there, let's just not do a full revert. Just jump in and make specific changes to the remaining problems as you see them. I'll tell you one: one sentence that I didn't even touch is still plagiarized. I held off on that due to the concerns expressed, but it's time to change it. In general I think that reverts to good faith edits are a bad idea: the project is supposed to take in all viewpoints and usually there is a grain of useful info in whatever an editor proposes. Too much page protectionism out there, IMHO, but again that's why I'm an IP... 74.7.121.69 (talk) 19:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Actually I did some looking at this article and it needs some serious gutting. The sources for what it has to say just isn't strong enough to use plus there is even more copyright problems going on in the article. The copyright problems go on throughout the article I believe. I don't have time to do it myself but if you have the time, go ahead and gut it. If not I may see about just deleting the article though I've never done that before. But this article has become a very bad article. So if you are interested go for it. I'll see if I can help here and there but right now with the time I have here I have myself stretched out too much doing too many things that I promised I'd do and those have to come first with me. I gave my word to do them and I am going to. This article needs work badly, I am hoping you or someone will pick it up and work it. Thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 19:43, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello

today: 01:13, 4 November 2010 Bluetalonsteel (talk | contribs) (24,379 bytes) (Undid revision 394699042 by DocOfSoc (talk)) (undo) (Tag: section blanking)

I am hearing bells.DocOfSoc (talk) 02:17, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Question asked at
WP:LTA

For those of you who know and have dealt with the serial sockmaster that has become a nuisance and actually very mean spirited lately, I have decided to go to

WP:DENY at this point and don't give too much information which is also stated on the main page. Basically I am just letting everyone know so that they can keep an eye on the answers if any are forth coming. Thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk
12:28, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I blocked that sock. What's the name of the original blocked account? Kafziel Complaint Department: Please take a number 17:25, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Whether that SPA account was or was not SkagitRiverQueen (talk · contribs), it certainly was reverting without discussing anything and is better off blocked. Doc talk 17:39, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
I believe that the behavior of chasing Doc #2 shows her to be SRQ. That editor didn't just revert Doc #2 at one article but followed her to three or four of them to just blind revert with most not even having a comment. I really believe this too. Thanks for blocking it's appreciated. Doc #1 you don't see the editing pattern? SRQ has taken to doing edits that are completely vandalalism looking in the way this editor did too. Thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 20:05, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
I see it, but I tend to be overly cautious in identifying a SRQ sock nowadays, since we can only go on behavior (no CU help is forthcoming, even for the named accounts that have edited recently). It's been tough enough to get people to act in this long-standing case, and if we brand an editor "too quickly" as being SRQ, it undermines our ability to stop her if we are wrong. She even made light of this: I just want to be dead solid positive before I say one is her, that's all. I trust both of your instincts, and this is probably her. I'm still working on this, and I know you are too. Cheers :> Doc talk 20:22, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
I understand your concerns but with this new account there are reasons to believe it's SRQ for the following reasons. If you look at the contributions, Doc #2 is the target of this accounts attentions. It only goes to articles that Doc #2 has edited minus I believe one, the last contributions where the edits were false and were not supported at all by the source which is the
WP:LTA a try to see if things can be better controlled? So far no one has responded to my question so we can wait a bit more to see if someone happens along or we could just sign her onto the main page. What's your thoughts of this? Thanks as usual, --CrohnieGalTalk
23:55, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
I am reluctant to comment here. When I know,I KNOW! or I wouldn't say so. Another suspicious one today. LTA is the way to go. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DocOfSoc (talk • contribs)

oops LOL DocOfSoc (talk) 00:31, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Hope that wasn't a case of
WP:KETTLE ;> Sorry - that was really a bad one... :> Doc talk
00:37, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Baaaaaaaaad Doc #1 lol DocOfSoc (talk) 01
05, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
I know, I know - at least you signed this time ;> Doc talk 01:06, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
thhhppppppppt! DocOfSoc (talk) 01:19, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
It's small, but it's a start.[11] Don't get me quoting Macbeth now... Doc talk 01:22, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
You ARE # 1!!! DocOfSoc (talk) 02:09, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Post on Manson talk page

Crohnie — I just saw your message of 12:08, 7 November 2010, at the talk page of Doc9871. I mean your message about the new post on the Manson talk page. You might be right that the post is the work of a banned user; in fact, since I'm the banned user who posted it, I'm sure you're right.

I took a lot of trouble there, Crohnie, to identify, transcribe, and link source material, for the good of the article. I think you should just read carefully what I wrote and then carry out the reversion I suggest. The article contains a serious error, which should be eliminated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.242.114.149 (talk) 05:44, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

So you are that banned user. Okay, then... Doc talk 05:51, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes, Doc — I'm John Bonaccorsi. Really — I think Crohnie and you should have taken a moment to try to understand what's going on here. I did Wikipedia the courtesy of pointing out a serious error on the Manson page. I provided all the pertinent source material. I recommended that somebody take about thirty seconds to make a simple reversion — i.e., change the words "in preparation for the assault" back to ", on Family matters." That's all. All Crohnie or you had to do was make the change. The article, in its current form, is presenting the world with erroneous information — never before presented anywhere else — that the Tate murders were somehow planned before the night on which they took place. That's not at all true — as the source material I provided makes clear. Why don't you just fix it — and do Wikipedia and the world a favor. You're so busy trying to be a wiki-cop that you're not realizing that somebody is trying to help the article. Crohnie and you are really okay in my book. I like both of you — but really, you weren't using your heads this time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.242.114.149 (talk) 06:58, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I changed it because it was incorrect. Don't sock here, and don't tell me about trying to be a "wiki-cop", okay? Cheers... Doc talk 07:04, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm glad you fixed it. Cheers.71.242.114.149 (talk) 07:09, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
PS: Sorry about "wiki-cop." From what I've seen, your efforts to police the encyclopedia have done much good.71.242.114.149 (talk) 07:13, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Don't worry about it. And don't be like the troll who laughed as you got yourself indeffed. She's banned, and you're blocked. You could conceivably come back to edit, but not if you sock like she does. It is far too late for SRQ. Good luck... Doc talk 07:18, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks.71.242.114.149 (talk) 07:24, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

John if that's really you get yourself unblocked. It really is easy for you to do and I will back you up. I'm sure even Doc will back you up. If you want to know how to unblock yourself and don't know how email me. I couldn't think with the edit for personal reasons which is why I passed it to Doc. I was thinking it might be her but it didn't sound like her at all so I didn't do anything. I planned to go back to it when I could focus better on what was being said. I couldn't get it so I backed off of it. Drop me an email, let's talk again. --CrohnieGalTalk 09:26, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Crohnie. Yes — it's really I. (I don't know who typed the preceding sentence, with the words boorish and childish in it, but that was not I.) I'll send you e-mail, sometime later today, so you'll be sure of my identity, but I have some chores I should do first. Yes, I figured you had not had time to read the long post on the Manson page and that that's why you had passed it on to Doc. Anyway — everything's straightened out now. Good to hear your voice. As I've told you before, you're a good egg (and so is Doc). John.71.242.114.149 (talk) 16:13, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi John, now that I see the writing I know it's you. I know you didn't write that trash so no problem about that, it's been removed. Sure drop me a line anyways when you get time. I'd love to hear from you. --CrohnieGalTalk 16:18, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Crohn's questions

Hey, when was you diagnosed with Crohns? How old are you (roughly)? If you have an email you can send me these answers privately. Thanks. Genjix (talk) 19:08, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't mind answering here. I was diagnosed in Feb., 2001 after emergency, exploratory surgery. I guess that would have made me 43 years of age at the time. My Crohn's disease went active in 1999 after a few bouts with a stomach bug, then diverticulitis, My G.I. quack back then couldn't get past diagnosing me as have IBS even with all the bleeding and transfusions I needed to have the years prior to the surgery. If you have more questions esp. if you feel they will/are embarrassing ones feel free to email them to me. Just click the email this user on the left. I don't personally get embarrassed that much about any of it with what I have gone through with my disease and having a baby, well there is nothing left to be embarrassed about I don't think.  :) That being said, a lot of people do get uncomfortable with a lot of the problems IBD causes so feel free to email me. --CrohnieGalTalk 19:29, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Ah cool, thanks. :) That's great. I didn't know you could email Wikipedia users. How is that done? I looked around. Genjix (talk) 16:53, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Ok, look on the left side of my talk page. You will see 'email this user', just click on it. It only works with editors who allow this and have an email set up in their preferences. Ok? --CrohnieGalTalk 18:34, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
I just looked and you are not set up to receive emails. For that you need to go to your preferences and put in an email address. Not sure what tab at the moment but it shouldn't be hard to find. --CrohnieGalTalk 18:37, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
I have great lurkers of my page, I'm sure someone will help you if I am away and can't. --CrohnieGalTalk 18:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


Ah no worries. I don't want to hassle you too much. I'll try to setup the email thing and just reply if you get time :) It's not too important. Thanks. Genjix (talk) 22:49, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

AN/I

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Doc talk 04:14, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Here, specifically. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:01, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you both, I commented.--CrohnieGalTalk 17:04, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 November 2010

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Overlap syndrome
Michael Muhney
Mount Kurama
Dutch process chocolate
Dionne Quan
Jesse Anderson
Peter Szatmari
Deadfall (1993 film)
Robert Graysmith
Rodolfo B. Valentino
A Woman Rebels
Nikki SooHoo
Lycée Français de Los Angeles
Jules Munshin
Jeff Pomerantz
Evan Ellingson
Progressive disease
Leonore Lemmon
Ileitis
Cleanup
Systemic disease
Hillside Strangler
Kyle Bradford
Merge
Pannus
Take-all
List of animated feature-length films
Add Sources
Chicago Film Critics Association Award for Best Actor
American Film Institute Awards 2001
Elizabeth Taylor
Wikify
La Jolla Institute for Allergy and Immunology
Non-communicable disease
Naturalistic disease theories
Expand
Caprine Arthritis Encephalitis
Jim Morrison
Lynn Redgrave

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:36, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

The Mediation Award The Mediation Award
Thanks for your help with the recent Man content dispute. I know a number of people helped, but I think your early contributions and cool head helped to set a constructive tone and shaped the discussion. And I think it's worked out OK for now - socks got blocked, everyone had their say, and the heat was dissipated -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:53, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, this was totally unexpected. I didn't think I did much help there. Do you think the article protection will be lifted soon so that the work can be finished? I think you could ask for it now that the talk page has finally calmed down though. Thanks again, --CrohnieGalTalk 11:16, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Oh yes, good point - I'll request unprotection. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:37, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Ok, let me know if I can be of any other help. Happy editing, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:13, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 November 2010

Recent events

Hi Crohnie, I saw your (non-)post on my talk page and I'm glad things worked out OK. I had some really serious doubts about my opposition there, what with how the legs were cut out from underneath my entire premise. :( It's good you got the certainty you were looking for. Unfortunately it seems that my broader concerns are now just dangling in the wind. I suppose it's possible that lack of response means just continue to

IAR but we'll nail you if we get the chance. Dunno... Anyway, you know I am available for any help. Franamax (talk
) 00:35, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

No. It's not good enough. I like that it was closed but I think the safety net should still be there for added insurances. You were correct in your thinking which is why after asking you how you came to your conclusions no one argued with you. Saying IAR doesn't always cut it. I've watched the things that go on with
banning policy returned for protection of good faith editors versus sock puppet. Any suggestions? I know we can ping the editors that were discussing other changes in the discussion above our questions like FT2 and others what do you think of that? He's quite co-operative and listens to concerns as do the others in that discussions. --CrohnieGalTalk
10:03, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Love Hurts Tour

Hey, seeing you are involved in articles regarding Cher, could you comment in the good article reassessment of the Love Hurts Tour? Thanks, Xwomanizerx (talk) 04:12, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll see if I have time later to take a look. Doc, if you read this, would you be interested in taking a peek too, I will only be online briefly today, doctor appointment for me. I will leave myself a note to take a look though when I get a chance to check everything out. There is also a lot of talk page lurkers for here, so anyone else seeing this, if you have time can you help this editor out too? We would appreciate all that have time to assist, thank you, --CrohnieGalTalk 10:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

practice what you preach

Please mind your own business, and don't get involved in other peoples' conversations. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE 17:35, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I am minding my business, remember I'm the one who took time to talk to Ronz? Now stop harassing him, stop being uncivil and looking for problems and also stop the personal attacks please. Do you not have anything better to do than to start a battle? --CrohnieGalTalk 17:38, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
This is really none of your business, and you didn't deal with him for two months and have him promise to change. He hasn't. Is he your BF or something? --THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE 04:21, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Listen, don't tell my husband of 35 years, he might get jealous. ;) I have edited with him off and on around the project since I started here which means years not a few months like you. I will step in again if you refuse to stop trying to start a battle, so just stop and save a lot of us the time. Happy editing, --CrohnieGalTalk 11:39, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

(ec) TFI, can you please redact the comment you wrote above? You seem to be harassing Crohnie. Please stop this at once. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 04:34, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) What's actually none of your business, The Founders Intent, is what her business is on WP. I just love it when editors tell others to "mind their own business" or "go write articles". There is no "job description" for what editors are to do here; and there's a lot of really, really shitty and hideously written articles, too. You do what you do, she can do what she does, and I'll do what I do. It's the price we pay for the freedom of editing this quite public website that anyone is allowed to edit. If you think editors are not allowed to "step in" and voice their opinions on anything that happens here: you're not correct in that assumption. Cheers :> Doc talk 04:33, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Doc and Mathsci, appreciate the back up. The Founders of Intent just needs to learn I guess is that the past is the past and it's best to keep it there. I just didn't want their comments reigniting a bad situation again. I hope the two of you are well and enjoying the weekend. --CrohnieGalTalk 11:44, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving and I echo the sentiment expressed above. PLEASE mind MY business ;-) DocOfSoc (talk) 00:06, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

Question for my lurkers

On the talk page of Man there is at the top the the template for censor. I put a dif that has all the discussions I think about this template. First, I've never seen a template like this used this way and second it looks like it's being used to stifle any conversations that was is the RFC which also was archived and this template put up. It just seems wrong to me so I need others to look at this talk page and give me an opinion. I am asking my talk page watchers to help me out on this one. You can respond here or at the talk page of man but please give me a pointer to the discussion. I am having a problem with the return of the censor template because of the reasons and comments given for it to be returned. Thanks to anyone who helps, --CrohnieGalTalk 19:30, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

My impression was that it was there as a warning b/c some nude pictures of "Man" might be in the article, or discussed on the Talk Page, and some might find that objectionable. May be wrong, though. Saebvn (talk) 22:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Man contributors

These are the talk pages of the people who took part in the Man discussions, from the RfC onwards - I think I got them all, and there are none of the socks...

*User talk:Soap

*User talk:Elen of the Roads

*User talk:Baseball Bugs

-- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

IP Tag

Hey, Crohnie! Been off a couple of days and just got back on. I noticed a new addition[12] to the sockpuppet list, but I really don't think this is her. It's Verizon, but that's about it - doesn't match the signature of the other ones. The IP has only one edit, and that edit isn't enough for me to be comfortable at all about calling it a SRQ sock. As such, I think the tags should be removed: since we have to go with

WP:DUCK, this IP is not quacking. Hope all is well, and I'll be on a little more than I have. Cheers :> Doc talk
00:52, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, done but never hesitate to undue me for something. :) I know I can make errors too. Hope you are well and have a Happy Thanksgiving. --CrohnieGalTalk 11:59, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't undo first without asking questions on a good faith edit - it's good that it's been dealt with :> Turkey gravy and rolls for breakfast - so soon ;> Doc talk 13:20, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, thanks for the suggestion re the deleted comment. I've reverted the change to reinstate the comment made on 25 Oct, but left out the messages below it because I think they really were duplicated (they're at the top of the talk page). Hope that makes sense (yep, I'm also getting confused!). Let me know if I've made a mistake. Best regards, Ben Dawid (talk) 01:30, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Ping

I've commented on the proposed notification re Man, and explained the duplicated comments I removed (some *post* RfC comments were duplicated *within* the restored RfC), over on my Talk page -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Your edits are good

Hi Crohnie, I saw your corrections on Al Capone and wanted to thank you for fixing that vandalism. I just read your story, and wow, I really hope you get well soon, you have overcome alot. I am glad your original biopsy was not cancerous. Stay strong. I hope you feel better, and have a good holiday season. (Freejohngotti (talk) 18:25, 28 November 2010 (UTC))

Thanks for the kind words. I try to help out when I can which isn't too much these days. I see you are new here, if you need any help, please don't hesitate to ask. Enjoy editing and happy holidays to you too, --CrohnieGalTalk 19:14, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Peter Lawford's incompleate Wikipedia page

As i stated, i consider Peter Lawford's page incomplete and missing important data, which is mentioned in James Spada's biographical book on the actor. That's why I decided to add some of the important things, but all of my edits, including the one about his debut in Poor Old Bill back in 1931 have been reverted by several people including you.

Will be frank and tell you i consider your reasons completely unserious. What do you consider "gossip"? The fact that

Robert Kennedy didn't want his brother to have anything to do with Sinatra who had links to the mafia or maybe the fact that he was the last person to speak to Marilyn Monroe
and in later years went to be treated agains alcoholism or that he said JFK's murder was higher up or that he was a military brat.

All of the above are Cold Hard Facts. As to whether they are encyclopedic, well i don't since they came from an official biography, why they can't be placed in an internet encyclopedia. Don't you think that biographies are much more reliable than the internet, mainly because half of Wikipedia's references come from biographies like James Spada's reliable book on the life of Peter Lawford.

I will not go to the talk page, simply because i see no reason to do so. I have sourced everything and have put facts not "gossip". So i will kindly ask you to restore my edits. Because these are facts and you and the other two editors, who refuse to accept these facts are driving me crazy goddamit.89.215.148.48 (talk) 15:06, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

(ec) I'm sorry you don't agree but three editors, yes including me, reverted you. Follow policy and take it to the talk page and make your comments there, not here please. I will not self revert. I started a discussion on the talk page for you to follow in case you didn't know how to do it. Now please, use the talk page and wait for editors to respond to your comments. I am about to leave my computer so you will have to be patient if you want me to comment. Also, please use your account not your IP esp. when discussing or editing the same article. Thank you in advance, --CrohnieGalTalk 15:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

WP:ANEW

Hey, there's a link at the top of the page somewhere that gives you a from to fill in to make a report, but it doesn't really matter. It would be helpful if you could link the page where the 3RR vio took place if you have to make a report in future. Anyway, I blocked the editor you reported for 24 hours. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:54, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I looked for the form but didn't find it. Is it the one that says it can help add difs in? I didn't click on that because I already know how to difs. I hate filling out forms. :) I have a question for you though, there were three editors reverting the additions, do you think they are all the same editor? I am talking about BHillbillies, who you blocked for 24 hrs, plus the IP that I put in the report but then this IGG8998 showed up not too long after the IP editor. I guess with dealing with socks like I have, I don't feel like these are coincindendial edits. Just for a sanity check, what do you think? Here's the history of the article again. This is an open question that anyone can respond to if they would like to. I need a sanity check of this complaint and editors involved. Thanks in advance and again thank you HJ Mitchell for your help. --CrohnieGalTalk 18:08, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Randomly popping in

Oi! How's the bionic woman doing? :) I've not been around for a while, so I thought to say hello and ask the state of your world. Vassyana (talk) 05:57, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Nice to see you here. I've been offline for a few days too, hardware failure for my computer this time. I'm doing good. The weather here has been cold for the past week or so which as a Floridian I am not used to. I'm used to 70 degrees around this time of year not 40 or 50's like we've been having. How are things with you? Did you take the time to vote for arbcom? I was surprised to see how few editors felt the need to vote, it's kind of sad for the project that there wasn't more of an interest. Drop by anytime, --CrohnieGalTalk 10:25, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Outlines deletion

Could you please revisit Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Contents/Outlines. I believe that your opinion there was based on an incorrect impression you may have gotten from reasons that were posted as if they were based on policy, when in fact they were not. After you posted, the claims made by the nominator received a significant degree of analysis. I would appreciate it if you looked at the full discussion and arguments again, and check whether your opinion actually reflects the facts in this case. Sincerely, The Transhumanist 00:48, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look. --CrohnieGalTalk 17:53, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Crohnie. You have new messages at C.Fred's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Responded thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 17:53, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks to you

Hi, I have only to say thanks to you, you really are the first user to thank me for my work on Wikipedia, it really makes me feel good and I say this because I see that some registered users, IP users, only want to attack the talk pages. Again thanks to you. --D6h What's on your mind? 20:24, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Sprot

Hi Crohnie, I've semi-protected this page for a week. It won't exactly stop the nonsense, just make it a bit harder to do. If you don't like having protection on your user pages let me know and I'll reverse it. Actually, since I'm heading out soon to say goodbye to a very dear family pet, you might get quicker service elsewhere. :( Franamax (talk) 17:33, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

No leave it. If I have a problem I know of ways to get the protection removed. Thanks and go say your good byes. I understand the need, talk soon, --CrohnieGalTalk 17:38, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

To all my talk page lurkers! :)

Hi all, I just want to wish everyone a very Happy, Healthy Holiday Season! May the New Year bring good health and happiness to you all.

I would also like to add that so many of you have been so kind to me and helpful that I really don't know what to say other than thank you. My time here at Wikipedia of course has had the normal ups and downs that usually happen on the internet. But when I needed help, advice or really need to vent frustrations, I have so many I can go to to which I have to admit is quite awesome. The editors I have met here have been wonderful. To all of you a big thank you and again Happy Holidays, --CrohnieGalTalk 11:55, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

easiest way, I think

{{Resolved|Here's why. ~~~~}}

Cheers! Gwen Gale (talk) 12:26, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, very much appreciated. Have a happy, healthy holiday, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:52, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Reply

No bother, i will look into sourcing the awards that are currently listed also. Monkeymanman (talk) 15:07, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 15:11, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

Your comments at Cher's discussion

I combined two discussions at Cher's discussion page both related to Cher's birthname. I placed them all following the time they were posted in. If it's not too much trouble, please emphasize the name of the editor your directing your comments to, which is All Hallow's Wraith, I believe. Currently, it appears as though your comments are directed to my editing. Thank you.--Harout72 (talk) 00:19, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I'll take a look, thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 11:34, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

To all my talk page lurkers and friends...

I just want to wish all of you a very Happy and Healthy New Year! May 2011 bring you all you wish for and for it to be better than this year. Happy New Year, --CrohnieGalTalk 18:01, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Crohnie. You have new messages at Jayjg's talk page.
Message added 19:20, 27 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thanks, responded, --CrohnieGalTalk 23:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Pseudoscience CN request tag

You removed my CN tag here[13], which I put in here[14]. Why?69.199.196.246 (talk) 04:13, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Heh. That wasn't Crohnie; That was me. It seems I'm not the only one misreading diffs tonight :p Just kidding! I responded on your talkpage and the article talk page. All the best,
edits
 05:34, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi guys, it would have been nice to know I wasn't in the middle of all of this. Please next time just say sorry, please ignore or something to let me know it was an error and that I wasn't involved. I read both of your talk pages which gave me enough info to know I wasn't in this that you talk about. I did remove something else but nothing that had to do with this. Both of you have a happy, healthy holiday. It was nice to see you both talking politely about things. :) All's well, hope you both got a good nights sleep, --CrohnieGalTalk 10:06, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 December 2010

happy new year

Hello, I saw your page as the result of some browsing, and was struck by your comment that "I guess odd years are not good for me." I know this isn't meant to be a social networking site, but just a quick comment to say I very much hope that 2011 breaks that pattern for you. Regards, Scil100 (talk) 20:19, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for such a kind and warm thoughts. I know I'll do everything I can to break the pattern. You have a wonderful happy & healthy New Year! --CrohnieGalTalk 23:04, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Crohnie. You have new messages at ResidentAnthropologist's talk page.
Message added 22:02, 30 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thanks, replied there, --CrohnieGalTalk 23:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Crohnie. You have new messages at ResidentAnthropologist's talk page.
Message added 01:13, 31 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Happy New Year

All Around Amazing Barnstar
For unfailingly good advice and humour. You are truly Amazing in all that you do despite RL intruding. You present an example that all would be wise to follow. Thank you with all my heart. DocOfSoc (talk) 23:51, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for thinking of me. I didn't really do that much except help you control your temper and make you go to sleep when you were too tired to edit. :) I hope you and your family have a Happy and Healthy New Year. --CrohnieGalTalk 16:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

WP:FILM December 2010 Newsletter

The December 2010 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:01, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Question

Hi, after having similar disagreements over awards on other BLP's of actors (as on nicole kidman), i was wondering if there was a specific guideline or policy (perhaps from the project wiki films) that covered which awards were to be included or not? Thanks and happy new year :) Monkeymanman (talk) 18:52, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, I missed you here. Yes, it was a discussion at either
WP:Actors quite some time ago. I don't remember exactly where the discussion took place but I do know that everyone thought that only the best notable awards should be used and not the use of the other awards not notable. It was basically stated that it bloated actors films with minor awards being applied, so we agreed to the most notable. I hope this helps but the discussions were quite some time ago. Again sorry for the delay in responding. --CrohnieGalTalk
12:38, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey!

Hey, thanks for the note! I didn't see your note until just now, I have hardly been around at all lately. Hope you had a good holiday and you're doing well, health wise and otherwise! If you want to get a hold of me and I'm not around here, feel free to email any time. Take care, delldot ∇. 19:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

No problem, I just did the same thing above. Sometimes it's easy to miss when multiple comments are on the page. Stay well and keep in touch. --CrohnieGalTalk 12:39, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

ELN

If you're not yet heartily sick of Find A Grave, then I wanted to remind you that Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites exists and that you'd be welcome to help improve it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:40, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I've been following the discussions after I got caught up from being basically inactive for a few days. The discussions really were interesting and showed me at least what I thought was true when I first got there to ask about it. I am sorry I didn't think to look into the archives before posting there though but still maybe this time we have a better idea about consensus. I know editors are still saying there is no consensus there but I basically saw only one editor who was in disagreement to the rest of the editors. I looked at the Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites and it will be helpful, again at least to me, to be able to connect to this page to explain why I am removing the site. So far the pages I removed the Find a Grave from, I've had no issues. At this time I don't think I have anything more to add to the page though I will keep it on my watchlist. Thanks for bringing it to my attentions though. --CrohnieGalTalk 12:46, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Find a grave links

I appreciate that you don't like the find a grave site but if you are going to remove it from articles then replace it with a better reference or wait until there is actually consensus on not using the site. I noticed you removed it as a ref from several articles and then deleted the content it sourced or left CN tags. If you know that the information is wrong or is a copyright problem then thats one thing but other than that I would ask you to leave it. --

talk
) 15:18, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Noted. I removed the link where they were not needed. The ones I removed were put there long ago and since then the articles were updated and improved with other sources. The need was not there. I am trying to be careful when I remove them going by what the discussions from everyone has said, not by a POV of mine. I hope you saw that I was being careful. I left the link in a few articles in the EL section. I hope that explains what I've been doing. --CrohnieGalTalk 17:30, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
It does thanks. --
talk
) 17:32, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Your welcome. Glad to see this was resolved nicely. Thanks for understanding, --CrohnieGalTalk 17:38, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
In case you didn't notice more comments and questions were added here. Please feel to add your comments if you are still interested. To my talk page lurkers, we could desperately use some outside opinions at this page. If you have the time please drop by and see if you can help, thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 15:09, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Being careful is good. Footdragging on the least desirable instances on the grounds that Kumioko has not yet agreed that a rought consensus exists (probably because the consensus does not match Kumioko's own position), however, is not good. Let me encourage you to use your best judgment, and keep removing poorly chosen links as you happen to find them. There's no rush, but there's no need to keep links that, in your best judgment, do not improve the article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:16, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I did and he reverted me. He also said
WP:ELPEREN was not a policy or guideline, which I understand. I was using the link to 'explain' my removal of the site. Still though I got reverted and the articles had Find a Grave in EL and I believe it was only one article that had it in EL but also in the article as a source. The articles I remove it from, don't remember the names off the top of my head but they aren't hard to find in my contribution (I just don't have time at this moment) looked like the article were expanded and improved since after the Find a Grave was added. It's frustrating already I have to admit. We have to get this settled before good editors get too frustrated. Thanks for popping in though. (Sorry, had a violent death in the family so I'm a bit out of it.) --CrohnieGalTalk
22:06, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Please accept my sympathy for your loss.
You can cite any page you want as an explanation for your views—even your own user page. OE's excuse for reverting you is invalid, but perhaps s/he had other, unstated reasons, and anyway edit warring at individual articles is never helpful. I have, in the past, found that it's far more useful for widespread misused links to ignore reversions and move on to new pages. You can usually remove 10 obviously undesirable links, with 9 out of 10 being supported or at least uncontested, in the time that it takes to start a discussion over a single link. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:15, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your sympathy comment, it does help more than you know.
I don't do edit wars unless I am positive it's a block or banned troll, so no worry there from me. I agree with what you say about moving on to other pages, which I did and the edits stuck as far as I know. Just for the record, the one edit I was talking about was reverted by
WP:ELPEREN. (I need to proof read this so please excuse errors) Thanks again, --CrohnieGalTalk
23:58, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
At Dr Pepper, where the Find a Grave URL is totally redundant? Perhaps Kumioko didn't look it over carefully. He keeps saying that Find a Grave should only be used as a semi-reliable source when no other source is available, e.g., here, and then only for specified types of information. However, he reverts your removal of a completely redundant citation (the information is present in the citation at the end of the sentence) that is supporting claims that are not on the limited list of information that he says he thinks the site should be acceptable for.
If this happens once, then it's doubtless an accident. However, if it keeps happening, we'll need to have a conversation about how saying "only X" in public while actually doing "not only X, but also Y and Z and whenever else I can get away with it" at individual articles will disprove the assumption of good faith and destroy his credibility.
As for really, truly, finally solving the problem: I really don't think there's any quick solution here. We'll get there eventually, but it will probably take months. And even when we get there, there will still be the tedious work of making the articles match the community's preferences. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:02, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Just for the record I didn't revert it this time because your right it is somewhat redundant. I also think its interesting that you are so worried about Find a grave you left a useless external link to MySpace intact. If you are concerned about poor links on articles I recommend looking at MySpace, Facebook, twitter and the like. Just for the record though its true you can use anything as justification for deleting something but if you reference something dubious or subjective in the edit summery don't be surprised if it gets reverted. I also want to mention that although I have for the most part been the voice of reason in all this, if you do start deleting links it will likely draw the attention of others and even if you do by some chance get a concensus to delete the links (after numerous attempts from others in the past) it will not be long before someone else comes along and tries to revert that "consensus". So even if it does some how in the next few months get eliminated (which I doubt) it probably won't stick for too long. As much as it may seem I am not the only person that uses this site, I am just the only one at the moment willing to invest countless ours and thousands of words. --
talk
) 03:06, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Kumioko, your comment really only proves to me that, after all this time, you still haven't figured out the difference between an
WP:External link. I removed a dubious "reliable source": This is a good thing. It's true that I did not also weed the external link farm. There are many things I didn't do for this article. For example, I did not correct grammar in the article, or clean up the formatting, or change the outdated "Image:" namespace to the correct "File:" designator, or make the citations use a consistent format, or remove the inappropriate use of honorifics—just to name a few problems that need to be addressed. But there's no rule that says fixing one simple problem requires you to fix all of the simple problems. If you're worried about the MySpace link, let me suggest that you click here to fix it. WhatamIdoing (talk
) 03:45, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Kumioko, I would like to ask you, in good faith, this is not meant as an attack, what your interest is in F-a-G? I noticed that you keep an active list of articles that you have made. In that list are a lot of stubs using F-a-G. At least the stubs and articles I've come across while looking for Find a Grave were started by you and a lot of the ones I saw were only using the F-a-G link. Please, I am really interested in the reasons you are so strongly pro this site and why you keep the running count of your started articles which seems to be connected to this link. Thank you in advance, --CrohnieGalTalk 16:22, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Your edits to filmographies

Not sure what you are on about here, but

WP:NFF for the rationale). There is no confusion as to who is involved and not when filming have begun, and even more so if a movie is complete or is in post-production. Nymf hideliho!
16:04, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to me. My understanding is that movies should not be added until they are released to the public because a lot can happen prior to that. The movie can be stopped for multiple reasons, (ie: the death of an actor, money problems (this is just a couple of ideas why a movie could be stopped.)). I've been told or seen, don't remember which, that movies should be removed if they are not released which make sense to me, doesn't it to you? I've seen movies added that are supposed to be ready for the public in 2011 and onward to 2014. Are we supposed to leave all of them in too since it says it's in production? --CrohnieGalTalk 16:11, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM January 2011 Newsletter

The January 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:11, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

ANI:GoodDay

I thank you for comment and feel that what you said was no harsher than what GD's accusers said. Raul17 (talk) 01:28, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

No problem at all. I just felt that there was too much piling on by editors who are involved with this editor. If there continues to be a problem perceived than I hope next time there will be an RFCu instead of a AN/i report. I did leave a message at GoodDay's talk page. Nothing major, mostly I corrected my user name spelling. :) Thank you for dropping in. Be well, --CrohnieGalTalk 14:04, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

editing

At your comment on the recent AN/I for GoodDay, you seem to also have removed my comment from a related AfD. [15]. As my comment was in the nature of an apology to another editor, I think it's important that it be restored, even though that AfD is now closed. We usually do restore such mistakes. I think it would be considerably better that it be you who does that., but if you authorize me, I will. (However, if you did deliberately remove it, please tell me so & we can discuss it from there.) DGG ( talk ) 21:34, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I'm just checking in real quick but don't have time to do anything. It had to be an edit conflict or something. I did not intentionally remove anyone's post. Please do me a favor and restore the comment removed if you don't mind. My sincerest apologies. I would do it but I have to go due to RL issues, just got out of the hospital a couple of days ago and hubby will not be happy I'm online. Please fix it and leave me a note here that it has been done or it'll have to wait until morning if I have time though I have a doctor appt early. Thank you for letting me know and again I do apologize for the inconvenience. --CrohnieGalTalk 00:46, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
OK, I'll take care of it. No problem. (I was wondering in case I had been perhaps too aggressive; I didn't think I had been, but one can never tell the effect. DGG ( talk ) 02:43, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Responding at DGG's talk page. --CrohnieGalTalk 11:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Courtesy notification

Hi. Since the time that you have commented at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Unblock_request (where there was some messy brainstorming about what terms are necessary for an unblock), a specific proposal has been made by Doc James about the restrictions/conditions that will come into effect upon the user being unblocked. Your comments/views on this proposal are welcome. Regards, Ncmvocalist (talk) 09:03, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, I've responded there to support this proposal. Thanks for letting me know. --CrohnieGalTalk 11:00, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Hospital

I am currently in the hospital. Been here awhile. Hate using cell phone so see you when I get out. --CrohnieGalTalk 23:36, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

I hope everything is going okay. Thank you for letting us know what was going on. —Soap— 23:49, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
I am so sorry you are stuck in the hospital, what a pain! Write me when you get a chance. YOU are in my prayers. I had a anaphylactic reaction and ended up in the hospital myself. WE will talk soon. I am taking a semi wikibreak until I can confer with you my trusted friend. Get well-er soon. I hope you like hospital food. xoxo DocOfSoc (talk) 11:43, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you both. I finally got sprung last night getting home around 9 pm. It was so wonderful sleeping in my own bed without someone waking me every hour for bodily fluids or something else. Sleep and hospital are two words that are not compatable. I am still extremely weak and will be sleeping and resting a lot for a few weeks or more. There are serious cases of the flu and chronic bronchile (sp?) problems going around right now so I've been adviced to stay indoors as much as possible, which I am going to do. I am breathing a lot better and my oxygen level is finally holding. Anyways, it's wonderful to be home again. Doc #2, I'll get in touch. Sorry to hear you too have been ill. The weather here has been so strange from going into really cold weather for FL to going back up to FL type temperatures that my body couldn't figure out how to deal with the different temperatures. The docs at the hospital said that my Crohn's had a lot to do with this somehow though I didn't totally understand what they said it basically came down to my body starting to attack itself to try to give me protections I didn't need. Anyways, thanks for the nice comments. I hope to be at my best in a month. I am still on steroids, yuck, I hate them. I am in hyperdrive still but my miligrams have been reduced that I should start to feel a bit less active here soon. The good thing about the steroids though is that they did help my appetite which I desperately needed so I think I actually gained some weight off the disgusting hospital food, and it was the worse food. I did get food from the outside from my son though which I ate quickly like my burger was filet mignon. :) Hopefully I'm on my road to being better now and will get my health stable and my weight back up. Thanks again, --CrohnieGalTalk 15:11, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
(passerby) I'm so sorry that you are having health issues and I hope you have a speedy recovery. Don't worry about this place. just focus on getting rest and getting better.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 01:13, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
I just saw on DocOfSoc's page that you're recently out of the hospital. I'm glad for that and hope it's a very long time before you return. Stay well.   Will Beback  talk  09:38, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you both, it's slow going but I am trying to rest as much as possible. It's going to take some time though is what I was told. I have only been online here a little since getting out as I find it relaxing to get away from my health issues. I am though trying to stay away from stressful things here. :) Thanks again for thinking of me, --CrohnieGalTalk 11:56, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Little Dragon's external link discussion

Hi Crohnie,

I saw your input on the discussion about a blog as an external link on

you can join in? I appreciate your feedback. Thanks and kind regards, --Soetermans | drop me a line | what I'd do now?
19:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I think it may be time to take this to AN/i and get the wider opinions of what should be done about this by the community. This way you will also have the ears of administrators that can do something about it to stop the reverting. The revert war has to stop though by both of you. As seen in that thread you show above, the group there seemed to agree that the blog didn't belong and obviously I agreed with it's removal. If you decide to take it to the AN/i board leave me a note with the dif and I'd be more than happy to give my input there. I just don't see anything happening at the ELN board that is going to be listened to at this time but I will keep an eye on it to see what is said and add anything if I feel I have something worth while to add to the discussion. Let me know, --CrohnieGalTalk 22:27, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Added template for SuggestBot

Hi,

Thanks for being one of SuggestBot's users! I hope you have found the bot's suggestions useful.

We are in the process of switching from our previous list-based signup process to using templates and userboxes, and I have therefore added the appropriate template to your user talk page. You should receive the first set of suggestions within a day, and since we'll be automating SuggestBot you will from then on continue to receive them regularly at the desired frequency.

We now also have a userbox that you can use to let others know you're using SuggestBot, and if you don't want to clutter your user talk page the bot can post to a sub-page in your userspace. More information about the userbox and usage of the template is available on User:SuggestBot/Getting Recommendations Regularly.

If there are any questions, please don't hesitate to get in touch with me on my user talk page. Thanks again, Nettrom (talk) 22:15, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Rodolfo B. Valentino
The Velocity of Gary
Lycée Français de Los Angeles
Fifi D'Orsay
Robert Graysmith
A Woman Rebels
Paul Clinton
Evan Ellingson
Skyler Shaye
Jules Munshin
Dionne Quan
United States presidential election in California, 1964
Joyce Compton
Leonore Lemmon
1983 Australian GT Championship season
California gubernatorial election, 1958
Houston Film Critics Society
First Look Studios
California gubernatorial election, 1986
Cleanup
Nicolas Cage
Jessica Biel
Callum MacLeod
Merge
1987 Australian Manufacturers' Championship
10th (North Lincoln) Regiment of Foot
List of Days of our Lives characters
Add Sources
Kim Wilde discography
Katharine Houghton
Laryngopharyngeal reflux
Wikify
Caitlin Todd
La Jolla Institute for Allergy and Immunology
New Zealand Film and TV Awards
Expand
Gun Shy (film)
Jerry Vale
Lynn Redgrave

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:18, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Crohnie. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{
ygm
}} template.

That's about it really.

complex
13:03, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks and replied to it. :) --CrohnieGalTalk 15:04, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM February 2011 Newsletter

The February 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:11, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
1974 British Speedway League Division Two
Mother Is a Freshman
ATWA
1974 British Speedway League
Bradford Tatum
FC Metalurh-2 Zaporizhya
Stephen White (author)
Too Young to Die?
FC Oskil Kupyansk
1973 British Speedway League Division Two
Gotham Awards
Michael Muhney
Ramona (1936 film)
Carole Bouquet
Dan Barry (reporter)
1972 British Speedway League Division Two
The Manson Family (film)
1980 British Speedway League
Larry Crowne
Cleanup
Clint Eastwood
Robert Downey, Jr.
2007 North American Under 21 World Qualifier
Merge
Christian Bale
Functional colonic disease
Disease burden
Add Sources
Elizabeth Taylor
Demi Moore
Miley Cyrus
Wikify
Thunder discography
Pulmonary sequestration
Hobo (magazine)
Expand
Kelly Preston
Alfie Darling
1994 Australian Formula Ford Championship

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:10, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Please see

Please see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites; it involves an essay that you contributed to. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:24, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I just responded there. Thanks again, --CrohnieGalTalk 10:23, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
No Man's Land (1987 film)
The Life of Jimmy Dolan
Mary Lou
1972 British Speedway League
1976 British Speedway League
1981 British Speedway League
Deadfall (1993 film)
Honduras Salzburg
1977 British Speedway League
1975 British Speedway League
1984 British Speedway League
1982 British Speedway League
Evilenko
Fire on the Amazon
National Association of Theatre Owners
Jansen Panettiere
Losin' It
Compassionate release
FC Dynamo-3 Kyiv
Cleanup
2008 North American Under 21 World Qualifier
1989 British Speedway Under 21 Championship
List of MJHL players drafted by the NHL
Merge
Sex and illness
Minor characters of Days of our Lives
Ricky Gervais
Add Sources
History of the South Sydney Rabbitohs
Konrad Kujau
Federal Medical Center, Carswell
Wikify
2009 BFL season
Ganga Sahai Sharma
National Training School for Boys
Expand
Bill Hader
The Fenn School
The Dark Side of the Sun (film)

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 10:46, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

ELN

Hi Crohnie,

You're of course, free to do what you wish, but I consider it patently transparent that Bittergrey's comments at ELN are both unrelated to the external links, and that his comments only reflect poorly on him, not I. In a rare display of common sense, I'm not going to bother

complex
20:21, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I already came to the same conclusions as you state here. I said in my last post that I was done responding to him but if any other editor had something to say or ask I'd be more than happy to do my best to answer them. I know there is a lot to give an administrator and I am (fingers just barely touching) that close to asking for an administrator to stop all this nonsense already. I'm ok though so don't worry about me or my health as I am not stressing over this and I know that is something you are worried about. :) I do not plan on talking to this editor again. If he continues, I will go to an administrator to put a stop to it. Thanks for dropping by to let me know the above, --CrohnieGalTalk 20:59, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Consensus can be demonstrated by editing, so an editor reverting his change indicates that there is no support for his perception of things. If enough people do it, consensus is both obvious, and can result in a 3RR block. I'm sick of his idiosyncratic perception of things resulting in fights.
In other words, it's up to you but if you think my close of the section has merit, you are supported in re-closing the section.
complex
21:15, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

Just because

DocOfSoc has given you a breath of Spring to promote WikiLove gratitude, and Joy ;-)

— DocOfSoc • Talk • 07:46, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

HI ya Dear! Question: How can I tell one of my tsp's that long and critical edit summaries are totally unnecessary. He is a good guy, who lacks a funny bone. He is really helpful but his summaries are really annoying. e.g. "External links don't go in the text of the article. They go in an "External links" section at the bottom, where this particular external link is already listed. We don't need to duplicate links." Hope this finds you well!!! Help! xoxo — DocOfSoc • Talk • 07:46, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

You can try to politely ask him to focus more on what he edited and use a link to the policy instead of writing it all out like this. If that doesn't work than it's best to just read what is important and ignore the rest. Sorry, this is the only thing I can think of. It's really nothing major so ignoring the parts that is not focused is the best you can do until they tire of writing out long explanations like this. If they are new, show them what they could have written instead of what they did write to be helpful to a newbie. HTH! --CrohnieGalTalk 14:09, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I have appologized to the editor for the problems I caused, which I didn't know were probelms until today. I thought I was supposed to explain my edit in the edit summary so that other editors understood what I was doing. I just didn't know I wasn't supposed to be as specific. I'm going to stay away from editing California articles, and do work elsewhere, so can we just leave it at that? Cmr08 (talk) 17:28, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I don't know the details of all of this but let me say this. When you do an edit summary just say what you did to the article. For instance if you move something say you move a paragraph from a to b location. If you are removing vandalism just say removing vandalism. You can edit the articles. If you have a long reason than use the talk page and let editors know that way. I don't think there's a problem so don't worry. If I can help please let me know. Doc #2 will work with you and I will help both of you if needed. I think the two of you can work together nicely, just sounds like communications are a little off for the two of you. Let me know if I can help either of you about this. I will be back online tomorrow morning EST. I hope this helps, --CrohnieGalTalk 20:59, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

My Friend Cmr are just fine. TY so much for your help! We just had a a small "Failure to communicate..." Feel free to archive this, except your flower of course :-D — DocOfSoc • Talk • 06:02, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

That's what I thought. Glad everything is worked out now. We'll talk soon, --CrohnieGalTalk 08:54, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

Noticeboard discussion

An editor you have been involved with at Nicole Kidman is the subject of a discussion at the Admin Notice Board here. As you have been an editor on the page in question, your comments may prove helpful. --Tenebrae (talk) 06:24, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. --CrohnieGalTalk 11:41, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Crohnie. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{
ygm
}} template.
ok, thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 11:57, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Juventud Rebelde
Jimmy Zoppi
Gabourey Sidibe
Yukimi Nagano
1971 British Speedway League Division Two
One Little Indian (film)
Allison Abbate
Alphaherpesvirinae
1973 British Speedway League
1971 British Speedway League
1970 British Speedway League Division Two
Marcel Jenni
Hammers Over the Anvil
Timothy R. McVeigh
E Line (RTD)
Golan Regional Council
Natasha Gregson Wagner
Optic stalk
The Story of Alexander Graham Bell
Cleanup
2006 North American Under 21 World Qualifier
1975 Speedway World Team Cup
Detroit Film Critics Society
Merge
Possession of stolen goods
Isleworth Studios
Co-production (filmmaking)
Add Sources
Brittany Murphy
Broadcast Film Critics Association Award for Best Cast
Julia Roberts
Wikify
Naturalistic disease theories
Marisa Coulter
Desson Thomson
Expand
Jamie Foxx
George A. Romero filmography
A Film with Me in It

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:43, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM March 2011 Newsletter

The March 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 21:08, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

Congratulations on your new file mover access

Should be up and running now - good luck! - 2/0 (cont.) 15:01, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Responding on editors talk page, thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 19:32, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

Hello, Crohnie. You have new messages at DoctorJoeE's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ludwigs2's comments

Hi Crohnie. I saw your comments on User talk:Ludwigs2 along with his latest reply. Thank you for being one of the few people to speak up on my behalf.

He has been barred from the arbitration workshop pages for making personal attacks on me. His latest reply to you seems also to be a misrepresentation. As one example, a meatpuppet of two topic-banned users was identified by a large body of evidence provided privately to ArbCom. Of course evidence of meatpuppetry, involving as it does real life identities, cannot be discussed on wikipedia. Ludwigs2 has chosen to misinterpret that in the first point of his reply. As for the rest of my editing patterns, I cannot recognize myself from anything in his description.

I take a wikibreak (from article editing) at the beginning of each year because I give a graduate course in Cambridge for 2 months and so am away from France. That wikibreak has been prolonged by an unexpected bout of bronchitis, which seems to be going the rounds in the UK and, from what I hear, the US.

Any way, thank you again for talking to Ludwigs2.

Regards, Mathsci (talk) 18:00, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

No problem, I call it as I see it. That bronchitis is going around here in the US too, at least it is where I am. I ended up in the hospital for 4 days in the beginning of March and I'm still battling it. It's a nasty sickness that takes a long time to get rid of. I try to stay at home as much as possible so that I don't get it again to start all over again. Again your welcome, --CrohnieGalTalk 21:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
He doesn't seem to have given up. After trying to label me as a "troll", for which he was banned from the workshop pages, he's now trying his new favourite word "slanderer". He has been warned by the clerk to disengage, but he doesn't seem to have taken any notice of that request. Mathsci (talk) 22:53, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Did you get my email? I have some questions for you... I did comment about the slander stuff. Using slander on the project just doesn't see, right. If you have something to say about using slander on site say it on the PD page. It's late for me to be online plus we're not feeling real well here. We means 2 of us. :) Take care and I will continue to watch the PD page & look forward to hearing from you. --CrohnieGalTalk 23:00, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Hola

Hello, Crohnie. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{
ygm
}} template.
Didn't get it yet. --CrohnieGalTalk 09:19, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Never mind received it as I was writing the above, thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 09:20, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Ileitis
Katrina Bowden
Marisa Abegg
Grand Champion
Pretty/Handsome
Beth Winslet
1992 British Speedway League
Clive of India (film)
National Assembly for Wales election, 1999
Jim Dunbar
Gammaherpesvirinae
1969 British Speedway League Division Two
Alina Foley
Senior Skip Day
Vincent Canby
Rowena, Texas
Bangli Regency
Gillian Zinser
Along Came Jones (film)
Cleanup
1965 Speedway World Team Cup
1979 Speedway World Team Cup
Kyle Bradford
Merge
Tea Party movement
Web API
Glycogen storage disease type VI
Add Sources
Thomas Downey High School
Denver Film Critics Society
Golden Globe Award for Best Actress – Motion Picture Musical or Comedy
Wikify
Fields' disease
Epidemiological surveillance
Regenerative Cell Division Syndrome
Expand
Furry Vengeance
Lech Kaczyński
Australian referendum, 1913 (Corporations)

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 08:17, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

Test

This is a test to see if a semicolon makes everything written bold. --CrohnieGalTalk 19
16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
As you can see, a semicolon does make my comment bold. Ok, is this something new or is this something I didn't know about? Any of my talk page lurkers have an answer to this? If you do, I'd love to hear it, thanks in advance, --CrohnieGalTalk 19:19, 17 April 2011 (UTC)


The use of semicolons...
...is supposed to be something like this.
That way...
...you can have headers in lists without actually having section headers. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:23, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, I think I understand. Is this new? I've been running into things that I knew that I now don't know like how to do hide/show. That doesn't work anymore like it used to. It's getting frustrating because I don't know if it's my memory failing me (with my medical situation, this would not be good) or if the software people are making changes. Thanks again, --CrohnieGalTalk 19:34, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Nope, that's been around for many years now. It's just not very popular because of the use of ==Headings== and I personally find it looks rather odd - my impulse in mainspace is normally to turn it into some sort of heading if possible. You can even mix : with ; to produce various indents and whatnot:
:::; produces an indent with a bold line
;;;; does the same thing
;::: just produces an indent
:;:;:; produces a bold indent
Basically it looks like the colon and semi-colon both cause the paragraph to move inwards by five spaces per : or ;, and whatever the last one is will determine if it's bold versus plain. Neat, I learned something! SCIENCE IS FUN!!!
Did you ever get that subpage set up, and if not did you want me to do it for you?
complex
15:01, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Your comments are invited

As an editor at

Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts#Abusive, edit-warring DeadSend4. --Tenebrae (talk
) 20:36, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

DeadSend4 (talk) 20:46, 18 April 2011 (UTC) This contributor has had an unknown issue with me and reverts my edits without any explanation completely disregarding the fact that I sourced and added several bits of information. The only way I can get this contributor to understand is by continuing to repeat my point, but to no avail this person doesn't listen.

I don't understand you reverting the ENTIRE article, rather than taking section by section. You do realize you're reverting some sources and information that were needed in the article you actually reverted right? For example I found three citations for the Far and Away (which the article asked for) yet your reverts delete it and the article goes back to asking for multiple citations, when I MYSELF, went in and reverted it without looking. I think this is the reason why were are constantly going through edit wars YOU ARE NOT READING MY EDITS! Seriously, go and look at my edits you are reverting, your revert goes back to 'citations needed' (when I went back and added them), your revert mentions her auditioning for Ghost and Forrest Gump this was an issue another contributor had with me even though I never added those bits of information to begin with, so with your reverts it's being added back on. I clearly remember that being an issue, so why is it ok all of sudden to add the information back? Considering I was blocked, it seems like I wasn't blocked because of that but for another reason. So I invite you to please look at what exactly you are reverting. There's so many bits of information that was sourced and worded correctly but with your edits you go back and reverse the very thing I was trying to fix. DeadSend4 (talk) 19:16, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Cate Blanchett concerns

I may not have much time over the next few weeks to do detailed reference checking/research on the referencing on Cate Blanchett. However, you might consider raising your concerns at the BLP Noticeboard if you need additional assistance. Dl2000 (talk) 02:11, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

By all means, please check all the sources and quotes, considering I found them and sourced them I wouldn't make up any quotes nor get them from non-reputable magazines and publications. But if you don't believe me please feel free to check the 40+ citations I added. :) DeadSend4 (talk) 19:10, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
@ Dl2000, the editor has been blocked for 48 hrs. for edit warring on the Nicole Kidman case for a series of edits close to those done at Cate Blanchett. I decided the best option was to revert back to article's original state prior to the edits that were made. Too much info was added to clean up the article IMHO. Edits can be returned at a slower rate for easier assessment of references added. Thank you, --CrohnieGalTalk 13:21, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Since you reverted all of my edits, what can I do in order for us to compromise on the article itself? I have added a lot of information and I don't think it's fair for it to be reverted. We need to go section by section so we can discuss the changes I want to make in order for us to come to a compromise. Let me know, thanks. DeadSend4 (talk) 03:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) That's what's going to have to happen. Crohnie, please respond to my e-mail on a completely unrelated matter, will ya?

- I'm starting to get worried about you. Cheers :> Doc talk 04:07, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. By the way, the revert you made two days ago has incorrect information and missing citations I have added. I think we can go by heading and go from there. But the fact is, there was a lot of valuable information this article. But just letting you know, as it stands the article already has some major errors. But I won't edit it in fear that I'll be reported again. DeadSend4 (talk) 05:37, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Two more things, one I read this comment you made, "The problem I have is that this editor is rewriting multiple articles. With having a low edit count and the mistakes being made s/he needs to slow down and not make such big edits." If you can take the time and look through my history of edits, I've been writing articles for mostly musicians and actresses for years, so I am not sure where you see a "low edit count". Regardless someone's edit count shouldn't have much to do if their edits aren't vandalism, are properly sourced and contribute to the article. So if you can show me examples that would be greatly appreciated. I am still waiting for us to start our collaboration on editing the Cate Blanchett article. If you haven't I invite you to visit Miss Blanchett's talkpage so we can get started. Going on with your remark, "The Cate Blanchett article has a lot of mistakes in it. From overlinking to the articles not saying what the sources say, this is a major problem and a major clean up esp. if this needs to be done at multiple articles." Again, I invite you to point out which sentences, paragraphs have such mistakes. We can go through section by section as I've mentioned before. Overlinking (this I mentioed to you before, not sure if you ignored it/overlooked) probably comes from the actors, awards in their respective years, film titles, magazine/newspapers, critic/journalist names, etc. I'm not sure what the issue with that is and I have made sure not to wikilink her repeat co-stars, e.g. Brad Pitt, Dame Judi Dench. So please show me where the overlinking it.
"The threatening posts to Tenebrae should bring a block for being uncivil. Also the editor usually signs first and then makes their comment (see my talk page). The comment on my talk page shows the lack of assuming good faith. I'm sorry DeadSend4 but you have a lot to learn here and you could learn a lot from Tenebrae which would be better than picking an argument with him/her. This is irrelvant, in the past and the suggestion that I could "learn a lot" from this contributor leaves me speechless frankly. "Please, slow down and don't rewrite articles." Isn't the point of Wiki rewriting and adding to the articles if it is needed? I think people are just overwhelmed with the amount of information I put into these articles, yes it is overwhelming but that doesn't mean it immediately calls for reverting the entire article. Every single person who has reverted my article has alluded to the fact that "I went through the edits and most of it is incorrect." If you did have the time to read through it why not leave what you feel is the correct information (e.g. me finding sources for her box-office scores, quotes, awards, etc.) and take out things that you may thing don't belong that we can later discuss. To me if feels as if the person is telling me, "Your hours of hard work were not appreciated, there are some mistakes, thus me reverting all of your work." Also me signing my replies in front of my response comment, that's irrelevant I'm not sure why it was brought up. I don't have to know everything about using wiki, I know how to sign and respond but it was a simple mistake and irrelevant. I have listed various examples in the discussion page of actresses who have double the amount if information in their articles, those who were 10 years old when Blanchett was in Elizabeth, so it is only justified if someone wants to take time out of the their day and expand her article. I hope to hear from you soon and again please visit the discussion page, I have written there yesterday and await your response.
Second comment, you had accused me of editing while blocked, this was one of three accusations and I believe there were more, that were going around yesterday. While I agreed to move on and put this all in the past, I would not feel comfortable without letting you that it was not me editing. Nor do I think you bothered to check but just got told it was me and ran with it, but I'm over it, just had to let you know that. I don't think you read my response in my talk page so I am repeating myself. :) Yes, I know my edits may be overwhelming, in fact when I do start an article for the first time, I go section by section. What I don't get is the people who skim past my multiple edits and go to the last edit before my contributions ever existed. I think taking the time to read the edits would be more of the common sense thing to do. So again, I would love for us to take some time and go through section by section and find a happy medium. I think if you are a fan of Blachett (and who isn't right?) we can definitely give her the article and all the knowledge we all know about how great of an actress this woman is. The article just doesn't do her justice and I cannot fathom anyone who would want to deny her that. Again, I've been accused of being 'too PR' with my edits, but may I remind everyone I also include the bad reviews, critic reviews and anything else that should be noted. If you look at a recent edit for Christina Aguilera, I noted in her discussion page and an edit in her opening summary that the poor sales of her latest album should be noted. This along with other things I edited in her page noting commercial dissapointments. I do not try to hold any actor I admire to a higher standard than anyone else, I give credit where credit is due and I do the same with criticism. I await our collaboration and cannot wait to hear your opinions on this! Perhaps you have some other sources of information we can include that would add a lot of rich information to her article? :) Have a wonderful day! DeadSend4 (talk) 20:26, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Just a friendly suggestion: It would be easier to follow your posts if you trimmed them down and/or used paragraphs. I (and others, I would imagine) find it hard to grasp the general gist of what you are trying to convey. It's not easy to read these wall of texts. Nymf hideliho! 21:38, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks I'll keep note of that. I hope that wasn't the excuse for many people for not reading what I have to say, regardless of how long a paragraph is, it should be read. DeadSend4 (talk) 21:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Just for all of your information, I've been in the hospital since last Thursday so I am not ignoring anything here. I've just been unavailable. I'm still very weak so please be patient and let me catch up slowly with everyhing. Obviously I won't be online that much until I get my strength back. Thanks for understanding. --CrohnieGalTalk 10:32, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes of course, by all means take your time and we will get started on the page whenever you are feeling 100% Have a great rest of your week and have a speedy recovery. DeadSend4 (talk) 19:22, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, --CrohnieGalTalk 20:01, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Taking it slow...

Note to all, I've been real ill since last March now but this last hospital stay was a wake up call of sorts for me. I will be around off and on but overall I am taking it easy and trying to get my strength and breath back. Hopefully in no time I will be back to strength and myself again, thanks for all the kind thoughts...--CrohnieGalTalk 10:39, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Extremely happy you're back, and please get better. I sent you an e-mail back - no rush as usual ;> Be well, Crohnie! Doc talk 05:41, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

John Gotti

Welcome back. Good edit on the vandalism @ Gotti. I reinserted what I think was a good edit of mine that your reversion took out with garbarge. Good luck with all. Tapered (talk) 22:29, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, sorry about removing your edit, missed it. Thanks again, --CrohnieGalTalk 13:59, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
1968 British Speedway League Division Two
Chris van der Drift
Don Chastain
Potato wedges
VK Selver Tallinn
The Pornographer
Bavarian Forest
Addie Horton
Caravan (1934 film)
Base 30
Prawn cocktail
Spitfire (1934 film)
1993 British Speedway League
National Distance Running Hall of Fame
H Line (RTD)
Moviecom
Marjolein Beumer
Robert Wahlberg
Sonny (film)
Cleanup
Dennis Hopper
Bon Levi
1995 Eastern Creek 12 Hour
Merge
Doner kebab
Flavored liquor
Amazon Flexible Payments Service
Add Sources
Calendars of 2007
Dallas-Fort Worth Film Critics Association Award for Best Actor
Broadcast Film Critics Association Award for Best Actress
Wikify
Mother of Disease
Hypnotherapy
Colin James & The Little Big Band: Christmas
Expand
List of Iranian cities and towns by province
David Hasselhoff
Fascism

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:46, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Reason?

I couldn't see the reason for your revert of the Sylvia Browne date, so I reverted back to 2011. If there's something I am missing, please re-revert but note why in the edit summary. Moriori (talk) 22:12, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I reverted because I thought it was just a drive by number changing while doing vandal patroling. I didn't see any change to references. Sorry if I was in error. Thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 22:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Updated archiving

Hola, I updated your archive dates and mostly am dropping by to see how you're doing. I'll drop you an e-mail too.

complex
18:25, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks as always for tidying up for me. :) It's been a long and tedious recovery for me. To be honest I haven't left the house since getting home for fear of catching something again. But I think I am on the way finally to recovery. Going out today with the family for Mother's Day. First outing and I guess I'll see if my fears are real or not. I look forward to hearing from you. Stay well WLU, talk soon, CrohnieGalTalk 13:59, 8 May 2011 (UTC) is it just me? I am not getting any toolbar when I open an edit box. All I get is a big white space, is there something I am suppose to change to get my toolbar back, it's driving me nuts?

Happy Mother's Day!

You are one special lady and I hope your road to recovery is uneventful. Be well, you are loved! Namaste.. — DocOfSoc • Talk • 14:21, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much for thinking of me and your nice comments. The recovery is slow but at least not too painful. Going to dinner at a place that makes wonderful Cobb salad so I am really looking forward to this. Take care sweetie, talk soon, CrohnieGalTalk 14:25, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

To anyone watching my page, if you can help please do before I find a new hobby.

I am having a weird problem that is becoming quite frustrating. First my popups aren't working at all now. That has been bouncing in and out the past few days. Next my editing box shows no toolbar at all when I edit a page. Does anyone know what is going on with this? Needless to say this is becoming quite frustrating having to click on everything I want to see, yea I know I'm spoiled. Plus my memory isn't that good for not having toolbars available. Any help with this would be more than welcomed. I'm about to find a new hobby already.  ;) Thanks in advance, CrohnieGalTalk 16:38, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Remove the text in User:Crohnie/monobook.js, as it's definitely not correct javascript. Then log out of Wikipedia and close any open Wikipedia windows. Then empty your browser cache (in Internet Explorer, Tools->Internet Options->Browser history->Delete) and try again. That's all I can suggest, maybe it will work, maybe not. If not, I've heard that origami is an absorbing hobby. ;) Franamax (talk) 18:42, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
First I am an idiot with this stuff so when I click on my monobook.js all I have there is User:Crohnie/monobook.js . If I go to the monobook.css I have whats below. Are you saying get rid of the one above or below. I know you say the js but I want to be sure before I do anything. Thanks for the help. CrohnieGalTalk 22:42, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
a:visited {
  color: #990099;
}
 
#bodyContent div span img {
  display: none;
}
It is monobook.js that you want to clear out. The .css file looks OK, but the .js is definitely not valid javascript (so you won't lose anything by blanking it). Franamax (talk) 23:18, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
Well I did all that and nothing changed. I put in a question about this at the
WP:VPT CrohnieGalTalk
10:57, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Update Apparently from what I've understood from a thread here the problems I'm having is from a security patch the IE isn't responding well to by many editors. The fix has high priority for repair. I'm off for now since it's not easy hitting every dif to see what is going on. I miss my popups. :( CrohnieGalTalk 13:08, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Support origami. Barong 14:37, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Support switching to Firefox. Is there any reason why you have to stay with Internet Explorer? Firefox 4 is really good. The pages load faster, and all the pop-ups etc are working fine on my computers. --Ninja Diannaa (Talk) 15:51, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
  • My computer is taken care of by my spouse. I don't download anything to my computer on my own, I get into trouble with bad things happening to my computer when I do. I can see what he says about it but it seems the software people are working on things now because at this time my popups is working and my toolbars are back.  :) Thanks everyone, --CrohnieGalTalk 15:57, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Great! At least one headache taken care of! Hope you feel better. Loved our chat! xoxo — DocOfSoc • Talk • 21:36, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 May 2011

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Ryan White (ice hockey)
1979 British Speedway League
Léopold Zborowski
Mattias Nilsson
Black Jack (horse)
Lauren Lane
Chris Harrington (ice hockey)
Kerry Condon
1978 British Speedway League
Murilo Benício
Torpedo Run
Susan Ward
The Ballad of Bonnie and Clyde
Black rage (law)
Bush Christmas
1991 British Speedway League
2003 Speedway Premier League
1963 Provincial Speedway League
CSS Animations
Cleanup
Manuscript Society
Meryl Streep
1982 Speedway World Team Cup
Merge
Tess (character)
William McCloundy
War on Terror
Add Sources
Penélope Cruz
Kim Novak
Las Vegas Film Critics Society Award for Best Actress
Wikify
Health Resources and Services Administration
List of Rohingya villages
Forrester Blanchard Washington
Expand
1959 World Ice Hockey Championships
Italian general election, 1996 (Sardinia)
Rock This Party (Everybody Dance Now)

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

Cate Blanchett article

Hi remember me? I'm still waiting for your reply. Not to be rude but you did accuse me of editing while blocked several weeks ago (which you were mistaken) and you never acknowledged that, which is fine that's not the issue at hand. But I do feel you should back up what you say and actually contribute and collaborate with me on this article. You were the one that made the rewrite an issue and put it into the discussion page. After 1 month+ of me waiting for your reply and not touching the article AT ALL, I'd expect some type of answer. Before you answer me with "well I forgot" I would just like to remind one of the many reasons why I was blocked was because of several comments you made towards other admins and whatnot. While that is in the past and I accept all the consequences, I'm actually doing what was told. You should too, or at least follow through with what you told me. I'm glad you are out of the hospital and feeling better, but seeing you collaborating with other people and not me after what you put me through and accused me is just a slap in the face. Honestly, I wouldn't be suprised if you forgot who I was, but I never forget. Especially if I was blocked temporarily for no reason, ESPECIALLY when now I'm following the rules and have not contributed much the past few weeks in hopes that SOMEONE will collaborate with me.

You what upsets me the most. If I were to revert those edits to how they were previously, I can bet within 1 day they will be reverted because they were done by ME. Hope to actually hear from you, it's kind of sad that I had to wait this long for a response don't you think? DeadSend4 (talk) 00:43, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry you are upset, to be honest, you are right, I don't remember the details to what you are talking about. I do remember some of it but please see my post below. I will try to check out what you are talking about hopefully in the next week but I can't make any promises since my health comes first and I won't be online that often for awhile. Sorry, --CrohnieGalTalk 10:36, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Trying to briefly refresh my memory slowly I go and read this. I demand this be refactored immediately. I have not been well like you said and I have almost died now three times including this past Sunday morning. Who do you think you are to judge people like you do? Refactor, than maybe we can talk. There are no deadlines and my health comes way before any of your demands. If I sound angry now, you bet I am. --CrohnieGalTalk 22:40, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
@DeadSend4 - You haven't made any edits to any article since May 5th (at least from this account): and it wasn't because you were blocked for that time. If you are interested in haranguing this user for some imagined "non-collaboration" issue, I would find a new interest. You have now been warned by me not to make this user's time here unpleasant, because she doesn't deserve it. I suggest that you move along and find something else to do around here. And don't wait another month to do it. Doc talk 23:48, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Excuse me Doc but please don't chime in here if you do not know the issue at hand. This is just between me and her and I am in no way making her time here miserable or difficult. I sent her many regards towards her health and have mentioned that I hope she get better, so please, do not tell me why I was blocked and so on. Everything you are telling me I know, so this isn't new information. Just going in circles, I'm focused on working on the present no dwelling in the past. So thanks.
But back to the issue at hand Chronie girl thanks for the response. If you nearly died three times then I suggest editing here isn't the best for you do to. Your stress and being upset over this is not helping. I never once said you should meet any deadlines, I never once said you should answer me immeditately, if I did I wouldn't have waited over one month. I saw you making contributions with other people not ONCE did I know you nearly died three times. I'm just pointing out a few facts, you wrongly accused me of something (never got an apology), you told me you would collaborate with me and to put my suggestions in the discussion (which I did and you never backed up what you said). With all that said, considering you nearly perished three times this month, I don't think I should have any further communcation with you. Only because I fear your health might deteriorate. Why are you on here in the first place? You should focus on your health, coming back onto this site after nearly dying this past week doesn't seem like a good idea. Just an observation from someone who is majoring in health. That isn't healthy. With that said, I'll just work on my own and forget about whatever written agreement we had. DeadSend4 (talk) 20:18, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Ok enough is definitely enough with you. I originally asked you to use the talk page at the Cate Blanchett article so that editors there could comment on your major rewrite you wanted to do. As for you trying to make things difficult for me, well maybe you should reread what you posted on the talk page of this article that is now hatted. You saying, and I quote,
"So in case no one knows about the issues with this article and Nicole Kidman's regarding me wanting to contribute and whatnot. But in a nutshell I was pretty much blocked, fasley accused, badgered, blocked again all because people disagreed with my edits. Now that I'm doing the right thing and going into the discussion page in collaborating with others, what happens? I'm ignored. So now that I'm doing what was asked of me there is not one person who has even bothered (except one) which I appreciate. It makes me feel like me being blocked was for a completely different reason. I mean, I waited what over a month not ONCE touching this page and seeing if anyone had feedback. I was told to not make any edits and contribute with other people and ask for their suggestions. So it's not ok for me to touch an article but I can be ignored in the discussion? I understand --Crohnie has been in the hospital. But now that she's good now (thankfully) she's collaborating with OTHERS but not me. Isn't this kind of a slap in the face?
You what upsets me the most. If I were to revert those edits to how they were previously, I can bet within 1 day they will be reverted because they were done by ME. I have never seen someone treated with such disrespect on here. Lastly, I don't want to hear the excuse "well I barely saw this" or "I forgot about this article" because it's been over a month and I have not ONCE touched this article because I wanted to RESPECT this article. Now do me a favor and try to show me some respect. DeadSend4 (talk) 00:42, 5 June 2011 (UTC)"
Now if you can't see a problem with your tone and behavior here than I don't know what to say. All I see is you screaming victim and blaming everyone else for your problems when it was you doing the socking.
As for me editing here, well that's my business isn't it?! It's not up to you to tell me whether I can or cannot or should or should not come to this project because of my health issues. As you so much like to say to others about not knowing what they are talking about well I say the same to you. You do not know why my health is in trouble nor do you know why I come to this project to volunteer my time. If you want to set the record straight then let's do it. I didn't tell you not to edit the article. I asked you to use the talk page because you were making large edits without using any edit summaries for editors to see what you were doing. You got a response from Rossrs when you posted your ideas for a change and also another editor chimed in. You didn't need to tell everyone to wait for me to return, now did you? You had people ready and able to discuss the article with you and you cut them off or ignored them focusing on me for some reason. I came back briefly and posted a few times but I didn't go back to the article or to you when I saw that you were at SPI with two other accounts being socks of yours. I don't deal with socks and at that point I lost interest in you. When you came this last time demanding that I don't reply that I don't remember the situation was total BS because at the time I didn't remember the situation or the socks. I do remember Jane his wife account that you used prior to it being blocked indefinitely. So in a nutshell, you are not an innocent here. You are agressive and demanding when you have no right to be either to others. I will edit here when I want to and where I want to. Looking at things you have gone to everyone who has commented here to tell them off and tell them they don't know what they are talking about as can be seen here, here, and here. Now that was real polite of you wasn't it, I think not. The editors who responded here are editors who lurk on my talk page just so you understand why they came here and said something. Now I think the best that can happen is for you to stop talking about editors and do more talking about the edits done. Though the section is hatted, I would have preferred it be refactored and you apologize. But since that didn't happen doing that now would be useless. Demanding an apology never works and if it does work it doesn't mean anything. So do me a favor and go away now, thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:24, 10 June 2011 (UTC) PS: Please take note of how to spell my user name since everywhere you have gone you have mispelt it. It's Crohnie, like in Crohn's disease, thanks again, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:24, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Sweetie I'm done with you and you need to move on, I have. DeadSend4 (talk) 18:50, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if I have not responded to you somewhere...

Hi, I have again just gotten out of the hospital. I have some major health issues that have been uncontrollable for me lately that has been sending me to the hospital a lot. I hope to get this settled down with some better preparations for things here in my home. If I haven't gotten back to you well this is the reason. I will be popping in but I won't be online long since I have to get my strength back and have a lot of things to do in RL. Again, I'm sorry if I have not gotten back to you. Thank you in advance for understanding, --CrohnieGalTalk 10:31, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to stalk, but I happened to be on DeadSend's page as well and found this message. She referred to you, I think, on my talk page as the hospital victim (if I may use that word). I'm quite sorry to hear about all you're going through and I will be first to say take all the time you need. Your health is more important than an online encyclopedia any day. CycloneGU (talk) 13:41, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Just curious, are you acting as a mentor in this situation? Thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Please see my response here. As for you saying "hospital victim", I take offense to this too for the same reasons I state above. What is wrong here? Why so damn rude? If this is a baiting contest or something similar please find somewhere else to do it. --CrohnieGalTalk 22:44, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
I'll be glad to weigh on and I'm sorry this is happening to you, too, espcially after you tried so hard to help. It may take me a little while since I'm at a family thing, but I promise, --Tenebrae (talk) 23:24, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
No problem, enjoy the family. No need to comment now, I think the points have been made now. Thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Yikes, clearly in my offering sympathy I've used the wrong word - I don't get why I do that, I couldn't think of the right word as I was typing that (I've been somewhat sick myself the last few days, it impaired my thinking). I suppose I should have just said "in the hospital". Rudeness was not intended, I apologize for clearly offending you. One thing I did say still stands, however, that your health is more important than anything that happens here. CycloneGU (talk) 01:17, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Apology accepted. I'm sorry but not feeling well I can understand. Thank you for your apology, it really means a lot to me. --CrohnieGalTalk 17:45, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure where people got the assumption that I was "rushing" you to respond to me or that I seemed like I was being selfish because I didn't care about your health and preffered you worked with me. Because that is NOT the issue, not even close to it. I honestly feel like people do not read what I write. Did anyone not see me wish her the best? To "by all means take your time and get well"? The fact that I waited an entire month without editing? Now when I post on her discussion page to remind her I'm suddenly a jerk? This is another example of me being targeted unfairly. I'm referring specifically to 'Doc' who I believe is an admin, I don't think people should chime in unless they know what the situation is. With that said, Chronie girl, I never once was trying to rush you or telling you that your health should take a backseat. If that's what you or anyone else thinks I'd like for you to point out where that insensitive text came from. Because I am in no way making you sacrifice your health over something like this, that would be incredibly ridiculous. I hope you do feel better, and like I mentioned, I think it'd be best for me to not respond to you anymore, I would not want your health to get worse. In fact, I personally don't see why you're on here if you nearly died three times, but again I'm not in your situation.
  • See response above. Oh and if you ever get into a situation where you breathe and no oxygen gets into your system then you can talk to me about what is best for me, but not until then. --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Lastly, I'm a him. ;) Not a girl. I also don't think CycloneGU meant any harm with the comment. He has been helping me and I only messaged him a few days ago because I had not gotten a response in weeks. DeadSend4 (talk) 20:30, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
  • I agree with this which is why I accepted his/her apology for the comment. --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I'd also like to suggest, that bringing Tenebrae into this is NOT a good idea. Maybe this is someone you call on constantly for help or advice, but in my case, we do not get along nor do I want to hear or read what he has to say. ANYONE but him please. That may sound rude but it's really going to save us a lot of time, he's just going to go around and circles around me and point out things about me that bothers him. So please, not him, not ever. Again Crohnie girl, sorry you are upset and I'm sorry if I came off an insensitive, but you gave me a suggestion and followed through with it. I was expecting the same from you, you forgot who I was, and that's ok. But I'm just pointing out facts, that's all. DeadSend4 (talk) 20:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
  • The only one I know real well here is Doc9871. Him and I talk about all kinds of things, mostly not about this project. And for the record, Doc is not an administrator. As for the others, I have had contact with them and they all know that I try real hard to be polite and respond when needed. --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi, CrohnieGal. So sorry to hear you have been ultra-sick. While I don't personally agree with removing the discussion from the Talk:Cate Blanchett page, I am gonna put a collapse box around it for the time being. Regards, --Diannaa (Talk) 23:57, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank you Diannaa for your help. I would really prefer the whole section be removed since it talks about me and not the article. But hatting works too. Thanks again, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
    • Well if that is the case, why did you copy DeadSend4's remarks over here to your Talk page? The main reason I hatted it up was so that you wouldn't have to look at it any more. Now I am confused. --Diannaa (Talk) 15:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
      • The reason I did that is because he was denying everything and acting the victim so I wanted my records here to show what he said that started this. I plan on archiving these sections soon to get them out of the way which is something I won't do, not yet anyways, at the article talk page that is supposed to be about the article and not about editors. I am called out in that speech of his and I don't care for it. I would appreciate it if someone else archived it or removed it but I will do it myself if that is preferred. These sections will be up for about 24 hrs. so that everyone can say what's on their mind but it then will be archived. I am hoping that everyone will get whatever off their chest so that there is no hard feelings about this later. I really don't want to have bad feeling towards anyone else or them about me. I hope this clarifies my thinking, if not please ask. I am strong enough to be here or I wouldn't be here. I just woke up again and I will be leaving the computer again. If you are more comfortable, any of you, please feel free to email me. All of you, all I wish for is happy editing, --CrohnieGalTalk 16:26, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
  • DeadSend4 already apologised on June 9 at 20:42. Every post he has made since has been an attempt to disengage. Continuing to drag this matter out after the user has already apologised is not a productive response. In my opinion you should hat up or archive this talk page discussion right away, and move on. It's up to you, obviously, but that's my opinion. Sincerely, --Diannaa (Talk) 18:25, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Diannaa! I wanted the focus to be on the article, so collapsing that section is very much needed. DeadSend4 (talk) 03:27, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Point taken on the gender - I usually assume male unless otherwise indicated female (i.e. a nickname like GirlieGirl), but for some reason DeadSend came across to me as female at one point. I did see references to "him", "he" elsewhere and now know better. =)
I also noted Tenebrae's comments not here specifically, but at the article's talk page (now collapsed by Diannaa). Please let's not start arguments in public spaces again. I witnessed their confrontation after DeadSend's block expired where I courtesy blanked his talk page because I figured he would want a fresh start (I offered it on an earlier revision - there were lots of confrontations earlier, too, and one even erupted on MY talk page), and I also think those two would be best not to be near each other on the Wiki. There is clearly some bad blood there. For clarity purposes, I have no problem with either editor, personally; I've just been witness to this fight. CycloneGU (talk) 05:10, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Also for this record, Tenebrae was not the one who started that argument. Again though, thank you for trying to help and for also apologizing. I really appreciate that. --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

So let's move on shall we? Not sure why I was asked about breathing control since this has nothing to do with the issue. I already suggested that Crohnie take a break, clearly stress and anger does not hinder someone's health. I'm moving on, collaborating with others. DeadSend4 (talk) 17:46, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Peter Lawford

Hi there. Hope all is well. Just wanted to let you know that I mentioned your name regarding a very old dispute with User:BHillbillies here. For whatever reason, they have decided that I am the only one who objected to the additions they made to the article back in December 2010 (!), and felt the need to leave me two messages on my talk page (that I have since removed). I doubt much will come from it, but I just wanted to let you know I brought you name into the mix (sorry!). Have a good one! Pinkadelica♣ 18:05, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem using my name like this, ever. Feel free to as a matter of fact. I will check this out also at the article history and the talk page. If I remember correctly this editor got blocked for his behavior not long after but I have to check my facts on this. Have a good night and no problem reminding them that they have editors disagreeing, but I too don't remember anyone agree with this editor. Thanks though for letting me know. I hope you are well, --CrohnieGalTalk 22:48, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Is it me, is there an IP also pushing his ideas? [16] I am finding this in 2010 too. Please check it out when you get a chance. Or, Pinging Doc #1, need you to check out the IP's editing in this article, please go back to 2010, December I think. Thanks to both of you, --CrohnieGalTalk 23:10, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Bateauxny and Gwen Gales forage into subterfuge and IP rollbacking of me.

Chroniegal, I am leaving the below request by the "Benedict Arnold" of the Whitman Article, Bateauxny for you to read. I have always been suspicious of Bateauxny as he/she exclusively edited McCoy references on the Whitman page, that were contributed by me. I will post on the Whitman discussion page as well, though it may be futile with the rollback tag in place. 71.85.120.252 (talk) 03:44, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Reading the current discussion on the Whitman page, an IP User states As much as I hated to read the article announcing his condition and circumstances, it would be a tribute to McCoy to be able to use his history (and the history of how he was treated by those who could have helped him before I met him (I have documents from clinics where he presented with PTSD issues to professionals, well before I helped him, and they missed the diagnosis), as well as the APD being non respondent and the City of Austin sueing him for the awards I got him. 71.85.120.252 (talk) 09:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

The above statement is a strong indication that this IP user is one in the same of the many who have been blocked/banned as he refers to himself helping Mccoy, same as has been stated in the past. I also feel that the statement "I have documents from clinics where he presented with PTSD issues to professionals, well, before I helped him, and they missed the diagnosis" would be personal medical history and does not belong on a public forum discussion page.

I chose to make you aware because you possibly know more history than I do and if it is in fact the same editor, then we went round and round a few months back and I would rather not go that route again because it was not pleasant and IP user 71.85.120.252 already left a message on my talk page stating I appear to have a "bone to pick" so I don't want to make matters worse Bateauxny (talk) 21:27, 22 May 2011 (UTC) 71.85.120.252 (talk) 03:44, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

My response to Bateauxny on his/her talk

McCoy's illness

Are you going to remove all of the health issue related entries in articles like Zsa Zsa Gabor, and others who are near death? As I stated in the summary, you appear to have a bone to pick, and you mostly edit McCoy and Whitman. What's your problem? Maybe we can work out a compromise.71.85.120.252 (talk) 16:12, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

That was a good edit on the Whitman page. Some of the info was already in the article and I missed it. Good job! 71.85.120.252 (talk) 19:08, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey slick, you could have at least told Gwen Gale something bad about me. You could have even showed her the cruel compliment I paid you above. Hell...you might have even mentioned that I requested to work with you, but no, the "bone to pick" was so obscene and worthy of mentioning, that you must have been literally driven insane by that remark.

I must admit I thought you were McCoy's daughter, she works the same way you do, like...tell something about someone that is a positive and turn it into a negative. Look at your complaints you presented; I helped McCoy; I was his POA, which lasted almost ten years for no pay; I complained about how the medical community failed to see McCoy's PTSD until I came along; how I got him his SSD, Texas Workman's Compensation Award, only to have the City of Austin, after another licensed attorney came on the record, refused to pay McCoy the Award, which may have saved him from his recent diagnosis and given him a few more years. If I hadn't become McCoy's POA when I did, his obituary would have been written several years ago he was in such bad shape. But let's not blame the Hero, let's blame the dirty rotten scoundrel POA! One thing is certain, you know McCoy, and are as evil as he is in keeping a secret. That is not slander, it a fact and I have the proofs, don't test me on that one! At least I was his POA, which stands for Power Of Attorney, since you might not know. At least I am not a POS like you are struck as personal attack. Franamax (talk) 04:36, 23 May 2011 (UTC). If you don't know what that means...look it up in the dictionary, it is somewhere between the letters A to Z! Now run along and cry to another admin about this mean old man! 71.85.120.252 (talk) 04:09, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 71.85.120.252 (talk) 04:20, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Cate Blanchett article

Hi remember me? I'm still waiting for your reply. Not to be rude but you did accuse me of editing while blocked several weeks ago (which you were mistaken) and you never acknowledged that, which is fine that's not the issue at hand. But I do feel you should back up what you say and actually contribute and collaborate with me on this article. You were the one that made the rewrite an issue and put it into the discussion page. After 1 month+ of me waiting for your reply and not touching the article AT ALL, I'd expect some type of answer. Before you answer me with "well I forgot" I would just like to remind one of the many reasons why I was blocked was because of several comments you made towards other admins and whatnot. While that is in the past and I accept all the consequences, I'm actually doing what was told. You should too, or at least follow through with what you told me. I'm glad you are out of the hospital and feeling better, but seeing you collaborating with other people and not me after what you put me through and accused me is just a slap in the face. Honestly, I wouldn't be suprised if you forgot who I was, but I never forget. Especially if I was blocked temporarily for no reason, ESPECIALLY when now I'm following the rules and have not contributed much the past few weeks in hopes that SOMEONE will collaborate with me.

You what upsets me the most. If I were to revert those edits to how they were previously, I can bet within 1 day they will be reverted because they were done by ME. Hope to actually hear from you, it's kind of sad that I had to wait this long for a response don't you think? DeadSend4 (talk) 00:43, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry you are upset, to be honest, you are right, I don't remember the details to what you are talking about. I do remember some of it but please see my post below. I will try to check out what you are talking about hopefully in the next week but I can't make any promises since my health comes first and I won't be online that often for awhile. Sorry, --CrohnieGalTalk 10:36, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Trying to briefly refresh my memory slowly I go and read this. I demand this be refactored immediately. I have not been well like you said and I have almost died now three times including this past Sunday morning. Who do you think you are to judge people like you do? Refactor, than maybe we can talk. There are no deadlines and my health comes way before any of your demands. If I sound angry now, you bet I am. --CrohnieGalTalk 22:40, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
@DeadSend4 - You haven't made any edits to any article since May 5th (at least from this account): and it wasn't because you were blocked for that time. If you are interested in haranguing this user for some imagined "non-collaboration" issue, I would find a new interest. You have now been warned by me not to make this user's time here unpleasant, because she doesn't deserve it. I suggest that you move along and find something else to do around here. And don't wait another month to do it. Doc talk 23:48, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Excuse me Doc but please don't chime in here if you do not know the issue at hand. This is just between me and her and I am in no way making her time here miserable or difficult. I sent her many regards towards her health and have mentioned that I hope she get better, so please, do not tell me why I was blocked and so on. Everything you are telling me I know, so this isn't new information. Just going in circles, I'm focused on working on the present no dwelling in the past. So thanks.
But back to the issue at hand Chronie girl thanks for the response. If you nearly died three times then I suggest editing here isn't the best for you do to. Your stress and being upset over this is not helping. I never once said you should meet any deadlines, I never once said you should answer me immeditately, if I did I wouldn't have waited over one month. I saw you making contributions with other people not ONCE did I know you nearly died three times. I'm just pointing out a few facts, you wrongly accused me of something (never got an apology), you told me you would collaborate with me and to put my suggestions in the discussion (which I did and you never backed up what you said). With all that said, considering you nearly perished three times this month, I don't think I should have any further communcation with you. Only because I fear your health might deteriorate. Why are you on here in the first place? You should focus on your health, coming back onto this site after nearly dying this past week doesn't seem like a good idea. Just an observation from someone who is majoring in health. That isn't healthy. With that said, I'll just work on my own and forget about whatever written agreement we had. DeadSend4 (talk) 20:18, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Ok enough is definitely enough with you. I originally asked you to use the talk page at the Cate Blanchett article so that editors there could comment on your major rewrite you wanted to do. As for you trying to make things difficult for me, well maybe you should reread what you posted on the talk page of this article that is now hatted. You saying, and I quote,
"So in case no one knows about the issues with this article and Nicole Kidman's regarding me wanting to contribute and whatnot. But in a nutshell I was pretty much blocked, fasley accused, badgered, blocked again all because people disagreed with my edits. Now that I'm doing the right thing and going into the discussion page in collaborating with others, what happens? I'm ignored. So now that I'm doing what was asked of me there is not one person who has even bothered (except one) which I appreciate. It makes me feel like me being blocked was for a completely different reason. I mean, I waited what over a month not ONCE touching this page and seeing if anyone had feedback. I was told to not make any edits and contribute with other people and ask for their suggestions. So it's not ok for me to touch an article but I can be ignored in the discussion? I understand --Crohnie has been in the hospital. But now that she's good now (thankfully) she's collaborating with OTHERS but not me. Isn't this kind of a slap in the face?
You what upsets me the most. If I were to revert those edits to how they were previously, I can bet within 1 day they will be reverted because they were done by ME. I have never seen someone treated with such disrespect on here. Lastly, I don't want to hear the excuse "well I barely saw this" or "I forgot about this article" because it's been over a month and I have not ONCE touched this article because I wanted to RESPECT this article. Now do me a favor and try to show me some respect. DeadSend4 (talk) 00:42, 5 June 2011 (UTC)"
Now if you can't see a problem with your tone and behavior here than I don't know what to say. All I see is you screaming victim and blaming everyone else for your problems when it was you doing the socking.
As for me editing here, well that's my business isn't it?! It's not up to you to tell me whether I can or cannot or should or should not come to this project because of my health issues. As you so much like to say to others about not knowing what they are talking about well I say the same to you. You do not know why my health is in trouble nor do you know why I come to this project to volunteer my time. If you want to set the record straight then let's do it. I didn't tell you not to edit the article. I asked you to use the talk page because you were making large edits without using any edit summaries for editors to see what you were doing. You got a response from Rossrs when you posted your ideas for a change and also another editor chimed in. You didn't need to tell everyone to wait for me to return, now did you? You had people ready and able to discuss the article with you and you cut them off or ignored them focusing on me for some reason. I came back briefly and posted a few times but I didn't go back to the article or to you when I saw that you were at SPI with two other accounts being socks of yours. I don't deal with socks and at that point I lost interest in you. When you came this last time demanding that I don't reply that I don't remember the situation was total BS because at the time I didn't remember the situation or the socks. I do remember Jane his wife account that you used prior to it being blocked indefinitely. So in a nutshell, you are not an innocent here. You are agressive and demanding when you have no right to be either to others. I will edit here when I want to and where I want to. Looking at things you have gone to everyone who has commented here to tell them off and tell them they don't know what they are talking about as can be seen here, here, and here. Now that was real polite of you wasn't it, I think not. The editors who responded here are editors who lurk on my talk page just so you understand why they came here and said something. Now I think the best that can happen is for you to stop talking about editors and do more talking about the edits done. Though the section is hatted, I would have preferred it be refactored and you apologize. But since that didn't happen doing that now would be useless. Demanding an apology never works and if it does work it doesn't mean anything. So do me a favor and go away now, thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:24, 10 June 2011 (UTC) PS: Please take note of how to spell my user name since everywhere you have gone you have mispelt it. It's Crohnie, like in Crohn's disease, thanks again, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:24, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Sweetie step away from the computer before you die a fourth time. I'm done with you and you need to move on, I have. DeadSend4 (talk) 18:50, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if I have not responded to you somewhere...

Hi, I have again just gotten out of the hospital. I have some major health issues that have been uncontrollable for me lately that has been sending me to the hospital a lot. I hope to get this settled down with some better preparations for things here in my home. If I haven't gotten back to you well this is the reason. I will be popping in but I won't be online long since I have to get my strength back and have a lot of things to do in RL. Again, I'm sorry if I have not gotten back to you. Thank you in advance for understanding, --CrohnieGalTalk 10:31, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to stalk, but I happened to be on DeadSend's page as well and found this message. She referred to you, I think, on my talk page as the hospital victim (if I may use that word). I'm quite sorry to hear about all you're going through and I will be first to say take all the time you need. Your health is more important than an online encyclopedia any day. CycloneGU (talk) 13:41, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Just curious, are you acting as a mentor in this situation? Thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Please see my response here. As for you saying "hospital victim", I take offense to this too for the same reasons I state above. What is wrong here? Why so damn rude? If this is a baiting contest or something similar please find somewhere else to do it. --CrohnieGalTalk 22:44, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
I'll be glad to weigh on and I'm sorry this is happening to you, too, espcially after you tried so hard to help. It may take me a little while since I'm at a family thing, but I promise, --Tenebrae (talk) 23:24, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
No problem, enjoy the family. No need to comment now, I think the points have been made now. Thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Yikes, clearly in my offering sympathy I've used the wrong word - I don't get why I do that, I couldn't think of the right word as I was typing that (I've been somewhat sick myself the last few days, it impaired my thinking). I suppose I should have just said "in the hospital". Rudeness was not intended, I apologize for clearly offending you. One thing I did say still stands, however, that your health is more important than anything that happens here. CycloneGU (talk) 01:17, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Apology accepted. I'm sorry but not feeling well I can understand. Thank you for your apology, it really means a lot to me. --CrohnieGalTalk 17:45, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure where people got the assumption that I was "rushing" you to respond to me or that I seemed like I was being selfish because I didn't care about your health and preffered you worked with me. Because that is NOT the issue, not even close to it. I honestly feel like people do not read what I write. Did anyone not see me wish her the best? To "by all means take your time and get well"? The fact that I waited an entire month without editing? Now when I post on her discussion page to remind her I'm suddenly a jerk? This is another example of me being targeted unfairly. I'm referring specifically to 'Doc' who I believe is an admin, I don't think people should chime in unless they know what the situation is. With that said, Chronie girl, I never once was trying to rush you or telling you that your health should take a backseat. If that's what you or anyone else thinks I'd like for you to point out where that insensitive text came from. Because I am in no way making you sacrifice your health over something like this, that would be incredibly ridiculous. I hope you do feel better, and like I mentioned, I think it'd be best for me to not respond to you anymore, I would not want your health to get worse. In fact, I personally don't see why you're on here if you nearly died three times, but again I'm not in your situation.
  • See response above. Oh and if you ever get into a situation where you breathe and no oxygen gets into your system then you can talk to me about what is best for me, but not until then. --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Lastly, I'm a him. ;) Not a girl. I also don't think CycloneGU meant any harm with the comment. He has been helping me and I only messaged him a few days ago because I had not gotten a response in weeks. DeadSend4 (talk) 20:30, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
  • I agree with this which is why I accepted his/her apology for the comment. --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I'd also like to suggest, that bringing Tenebrae into this is NOT a good idea. Maybe this is someone you call on constantly for help or advice, but in my case, we do not get along nor do I want to hear or read what he has to say. ANYONE but him please. That may sound rude but it's really going to save us a lot of time, he's just going to go around and circles around me and point out things about me that bothers him. So please, not him, not ever. Again Crohnie girl, sorry you are upset and I'm sorry if I came off an insensitive, but you gave me a suggestion and followed through with it. I was expecting the same from you, you forgot who I was, and that's ok. But I'm just pointing out facts, that's all. DeadSend4 (talk) 20:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
  • The only one I know real well here is Doc9871. Him and I talk about all kinds of things, mostly not about this project. And for the record, Doc is not an administrator. As for the others, I have had contact with them and they all know that I try real hard to be polite and respond when needed. --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi, CrohnieGal. So sorry to hear you have been ultra-sick. While I don't personally agree with removing the discussion from the Talk:Cate Blanchett page, I am gonna put a collapse box around it for the time being. Regards, --Diannaa (Talk) 23:57, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank you Diannaa for your help. I would really prefer the whole section be removed since it talks about me and not the article. But hatting works too. Thanks again, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
    • Well if that is the case, why did you copy DeadSend4's remarks over here to your Talk page? The main reason I hatted it up was so that you wouldn't have to look at it any more. Now I am confused. --Diannaa (Talk) 15:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
      • The reason I did that is because he was denying everything and acting the victim so I wanted my records here to show what he said that started this. I plan on archiving these sections soon to get them out of the way which is something I won't do, not yet anyways, at the article talk page that is supposed to be about the article and not about editors. I am called out in that speech of his and I don't care for it. I would appreciate it if someone else archived it or removed it but I will do it myself if that is preferred. These sections will be up for about 24 hrs. so that everyone can say what's on their mind but it then will be archived. I am hoping that everyone will get whatever off their chest so that there is no hard feelings about this later. I really don't want to have bad feeling towards anyone else or them about me. I hope this clarifies my thinking, if not please ask. I am strong enough to be here or I wouldn't be here. I just woke up again and I will be leaving the computer again. If you are more comfortable, any of you, please feel free to email me. All of you, all I wish for is happy editing, --CrohnieGalTalk 16:26, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
  • DeadSend4 already apologised on June 9 at 20:42. Every post he has made since has been an attempt to disengage. Continuing to drag this matter out after the user has already apologised is not a productive response. In my opinion you should hat up or archive this talk page discussion right away, and move on. It's up to you, obviously, but that's my opinion. Sincerely, --Diannaa (Talk) 18:25, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Diannaa! I wanted the focus to be on the article, so collapsing that section is very much needed. DeadSend4 (talk) 03:27, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Point taken on the gender - I usually assume male unless otherwise indicated female (i.e. a nickname like GirlieGirl), but for some reason DeadSend came across to me as female at one point. I did see references to "him", "he" elsewhere and now know better. =)
I also noted Tenebrae's comments not here specifically, but at the article's talk page (now collapsed by Diannaa). Please let's not start arguments in public spaces again. I witnessed their confrontation after DeadSend's block expired where I courtesy blanked his talk page because I figured he would want a fresh start (I offered it on an earlier revision - there were lots of confrontations earlier, too, and one even erupted on MY talk page), and I also think those two would be best not to be near each other on the Wiki. There is clearly some bad blood there. For clarity purposes, I have no problem with either editor, personally; I've just been witness to this fight. CycloneGU (talk) 05:10, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Also for this record, Tenebrae was not the one who started that argument. Again though, thank you for trying to help and for also apologizing. I really appreciate that. --CrohnieGalTalk 12:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

So let's move on shall we? Not sure why I was asked about breathing control since this has nothing to do with the issue. I already suggested that Chronie take a break, clearly stress and anger does not hinder someone's health. I'm moving on, collaborating with others. DeadSend4 (talk) 17:46, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

My user page

This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.

Preamble

Living with

surgeries
related to Crohn's. I try to stay away from editing when things are really bad but sometimes coming here when I don't feel well helps me to try and focus on something other then myself. I thank those of you who understand and go out of your way to help, it is very much appreciated.

I have Crohn's disease which is active and gives me a horrendous rash [17] that is hard to deal with. I also have

tumor
. I guess odd years are not good for me.

I have a partial tear of the

shoulder blade
area).

I think I should also explain that I have a serious problem with

medications if I make a mistake please correct me. I do not get upset when another editor makes a correction for me or delete what I added. Assume good faith
is always appreciated. I also try to follow this myself at all times.

Again I want to thank a lot of you for your patience and help. I am not a perfect editor, this I know, but I do try really hard. Thanks again everyone for being so kind to me! I really do appreciate it.

Update: On September 11, 2009 I had surgery on my back. I had 3 disks in my neck fused together with a titanium implant. The cost of the implant is enough to give someone a heart attack! :) I also had two other locations in my spine cleaned up. I went into the hospital on Friday and amazingly I got out four days later. Though I was partially paralized on my left side, I was able to use a walker. I used the walker for only two weeks. It took a lot of hard work but I got to the point where I only needed a cane which was also only required for two weeks before I was walking on my own. I never got total feeling back but the surgery was quite successful for me. Thanks to all who kept me in their prayers and thoughts during this hard time. I appreciate it more than I can say. Maybe more later, this definintely needs some more clean up but another day. :) --CrohnieGalTalk 15:40, 11 April 2010 (UTC)


  • This edit made my 10,000 edit to the project. Never thought I would get this many of edits but I did. I will continue to keep trying to help the project and I hope you will too if you're reading this. :) --CrohnieGalTalk 20:12, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


Userboxes and other handy stuff

  • WP:BLACKLIST

Image information

Templates

Tools suggestions

Barnstars

  • WP:PUA
  • WP:WPPA
  • WP:ORA

Editing and user tools

Vandalism and other disagreeable things

Wikipedia:Reference desk
WP:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism
WP:Linking_to_external_harassment
  • WP:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace
Template:Uw-3rr
Category:CSD_warning_templates
UTM (Template messages/user talk namespace)
Template:RfC2
TFD (templates for deletion)
http://diberri.dyndns.org/wikipedia/templates/?ddb=&type=pmid (Template for medical links)
Template:Skepticism
Template:Wikibreak
Template:Archive_box
Category:Navbox (navigational) templates
Template:Imbox (Read)
Template:Cmbox (read)
http://toolserver.org/~eagle/linksearch
http://wiki.ts.wikimedia.org/view/Main_Page (toolserver wiki)
http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~ms609/Wiki/Wiki (reference tool)
http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/CheckUsage.php?w=_100000&i=Image:Crohnie_sores_4.JPG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof (several tools for more easily finding and reverting vandalism)
Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(capital_letters)#Section_headings

Dispute resolution and noticeboards

Full title Short cut Summary
Wikipedia:Dispute resolution WP:DR The entry page into all types of dispute resolution
Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal WP:MED For mediating between disagreeing editors over content disputes
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard WP:AN For general discussions requiring long-term attention (such as
community bans
Wikipedia:Coordination
 WP:CORD For cooridination of various discussions throughout Wikipedia. **This is like a watchlist for all boards**
Wikipedia:Content noticeboard WP:CNB, WP:AWN, & WP:CNOTICE For discussions pertaining to encyclopedic content and associated issues
Wikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard/Incidents
 WP:DRAMA, WP:ANI For incidents which require the attention of an administrator or the use of tools (quick and dirty discussions)
Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser WP:RFCU To request a checkuser, an examination of an editors' IP address, usually due to suspected
sockpuppeting
Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts
 WP:WQA For discussions and outside input into
wikiquette
and minor issues of editors' behavior; non-binding and informal
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations WP:SPI Discussion over whether specific editors are evading community bans or editorial restrictions
Wikipedia:Third Opinion
 WP:3O (note an "oh", not "zero" For disputes between two editors, asking a third to give an opinion over article content; informal and non-binding. If the dispute involves more than two editors, seek a request for comment
Wikipedia:Requests for page protection WP:RFPP To restrict editing of specific pages to established editors or administrators due to sustained vandalism of a specific article
Wikipedia:Requests for comment WP:RFC For third-party input when more than two editors are disagreeing; more formal and binding than a 3O, but less than arbitration. Has three sub-sections; content-based, policy based, on users and Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/All.
WIkipedia:Requests for arbitration
 WP:RFARB The last stage in dispute resolution, generally over user conduct. Very serious!
Wikipedia:Request for adminship
 RFC Editors applying for and voting for administrators
Wikipedia:Request for oversight
WP:RFO
 Email things that should be removed from the project
Wikipedia:Abuse filter
WP:FILTER
 AbuseFilter is a tool used to allow privileged users to set specific controls on user activity and create automated reactions for certain behaviors.

User essays

Full title Short cut Summary
Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions WP:ATA Fallacies that are acknowledged as not convincing during
deletion discussions
ATA sections
WP:IDONTLIKEIT
 "This page should be deleted because I don't like it"
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
 "This page shouldn't be deleted because this related page isn't being deleted"
Wikipedia:Don't stuff beans up your nose WP:BEANS Don't give vandals ideas
Wikipedia:The Truth WP:TRUTH Remember that you're right, no matter how wrong you actually are (a satirical essay)
WP:Outlines None Outline articles are a type of list article about a subject. An outline is a hierarchical list showing the structure of the subject. Together, outlines form an
outline of knowledge
.
Wikipedia:You should not spread your fetish across Wikipedia WP:SANDWICH Wikipedia and fetishism shouldn't meet (but often do )
Wikipedia:Don't cry wolf WP:WOLF Personal attacks and harassment are not accusations to be made idly
User:WLU/Generic_sandbox None Essay for new editors. Fun to read, points to good sources and worth the time!
User:Jehochman/Umbrage
WP:PIQUE
 'Editors should not take personal offense at healthy disagreements"

Barnstars and gifts

Barnstars & gifts

The Special Barnstar
A Special Barnstar for a Special Person. Sometimes the people that work the hardest are the ones that are recognized the least. It's your turn. Thanks for all you do to get the story right. -- Dēmatt (chat) 03:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


The Editor's Barnstar
The editor's barnstar is awarded to Crohnie for providing an excellent suggestion of removing controversial text from
talk
) 22:51, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


The Content Creativity Barnstar
For everyone here - you've done an incredible job working hard at working together. The section is coming together without any edit wars; there've been no personal remarks and in general, everyone has been incredibly civil and helpful. This is a very impressive way to turn things around - feel free to yank this barnstar and put it in your own user space :) Shell babelfish 19:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


momoricks make my day has given you balloons! Balloons are meant to uplift the morale of people with an illness, and has hopefully made your day a little better. Spread good health by giving someone else who is a bit ill a balloon.

Spread the good health by adding {{subst:Balloons}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I admire your constantly upbeat attitude and am proud to call you a Wikifriend.
Thanks so much for the Mother's Day wishes. You are in my thoughts. Please keep me posted regarding your surgery. If you'd rather correspond via email, the link is at the top of my user and talk pages. Take care, momoricks 03:13, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

sign
)

You bring clarity to any discussion - like a ray of sunshine your cogent comments invariably cut to the heart of any issue, be it of sourcing, weight, or behavior. Your edits add value without acrimony, and show a keen insight into when to compromise and when hold firm. Whenever I see Crohnie/Archive 5 at the top of my watchlist, I know all is well. - 2/0 (cont.) 19:57, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Vassyana has given you a

Hershey Bar! Hershey bars promote WikiLove
through chololately goodness and hopefully this one has made your day better. Hershey bars are wonderfully delicious! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Hershey bar, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the goodness of Hershey bars by adding {{subst:Hershey Bar}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Flies cemetery


The Purple Star The Purple Star
You deserve a dozen of these for enduring the recent arbitration hullabaloo. momoricks 21:54, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


The Good Heart Barnstar The Good Heart Barnstar
For your consistent kindness, courage and diplomacy; you make Wikipedia a better place. momoricks 21:54, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

DocOfSoc (talk) has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!

Spread the awesomeness of bubble teas by adding {{

User:Download/Bubble tea
}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!


The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
You are nice even to the horrid vandals! Cheers :> Doc9871 (talk) 02:21, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


The Purple Star The Purple Star
you are loved.... DocOfSoc (talk) 21:34, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


You are a much appreciated "CupyCake" Thank You!!! Fondly DocOfSoc (talk) 08:10, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Chocolate butterfly cake
Here it is, took me awhile to find chocolate. TYTY for everything! DocOfSoc (talk) 03:04, 16 July 2010 (UTC)




The Special Barnstar
Just for being You!! Fondly-DocOfSoc (talk)


The Real Life Barnstar

Your user page really touched me. I present you this barnstar in recognition for your real life efforts to live a good life, overcoming all your suffering. You are an example to all us. Anna Lincoln 20:15, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeesh, all you
better
to do?
... Oh wait - that is a good thing :) - 2/0 (cont.) 21:36, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Crohnie has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
so I've officially declared today as Crohnie's Day!
For being a great person and awesome Wikipedian,
enjoy being the star of the day, Crohnie!

Signed, Neutralhomer

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

The Your Opinion is More Important than You Think Barnstar
For making respectful, relevant, focused, and helpful comments in relation to the current Wikipedia arbitration case on Climate change. Crohnie, your input has been impressive, and it has certainly not gone unnoticed or unappreciated. Keep it up! Ncmvocalist (talk) 16:13, 12 September 2010 (UTC)


The Mediation Award The Mediation Award
Thanks for your help with the recent Man content dispute. I know a number of people helped, but I think your early contributions and cool head helped to set a constructive tone and shaped the discussion. And I think it's worked out OK for now - socks got blocked, everyone had their say, and the heat was dissipated -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:53, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


All Around Amazing Barnstar
For unfailingly good advice and humour. You are truly Amazing in all that you do despite RL intruding. You present an example that all would be wise to follow. Thank you with all my heart. DocOfSoc (talk) 23:51, 31 December 2010 (UTC)





Welcome page

Welcome

Hello Crohnie!
sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing and above all else enjoy your time here! QuackGuru TALK
23:30, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines
The community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Images

Images uploaded (WARNING: SOME ARE VERY GRAPHIC)--CrohnieGalTalk 11:03, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Erythema nodosum - lesions that occur in patients suffering from iritable bowel syndrome
chronic
.
Fentanyl lollipop, for oral administration.
Fentanyl transdermal patch (for pain relief)

Whitman talk page and reversion issues

Hello Crohnie, after your reversion in the Charles Whitman article, I was trying to take your advise and move into the discussion area. However, I found that IP adresses are not allowed, so I am in a catch 22 here. One of the many things I dislike about the WP format is the Moniker system. I choose to be an IP moniker instead. I would prefer real names, as they position parties to be all of the courtesies that WP requires, instead, Monikers allow a veil for anyone with suspicious motives and can always return if banned under a different Moniker. So what is the point really?

To the reversion issues going on with the news of McCoy being terminally ill, there was one objection to relevancy that I modified to be respectful and saw the issue. Then the next reverter, stepped in without a good reason, so I again modified the contribution, hoping that would help. It didn't and the same party used another tactic. Then I tried to communicate with the party about the reversion, and the fact that they appear to edit McCoy's paragraph exclusively [[18]]. I did not bring up the issue of WP:OWN, as I did not want to be confrontational, except to mention that the party appeared to have a bone to pick. The party did not respond to my message directly, but did so in a summary review, during another reversion. What I decided to do ultimately was to Source the material with a quote from the source. There were no complaints after that. As to why you have reverted the contribution and earmarked it to the talk page, is out of my scope of understanding. Can you fill me in? Thanks!71.85.120.252 (talk) 22:07, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I'm sorry I didn't realize the talk page was semi protected. It's unusual for talk pages to be semi protected. I'll get one of the administrators to remove it so that you can take this to the talk page. You need to be able to discuss this with the editors that are reverting you. Revert wars are not the way to go about getting changes to articles which is why I reverted you and asked you to follow
notability which is what is needed for him to have an article. But first we need to get the talk page opened up so that you can bring your concerns to it. So please be patient and watch the talk page to see when the protection is removed. I'll do the request for you now. Happy editing, --CrohnieGalTalk
10:13, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
I put in a request here if you want to add something please feel free to do so. You don't have to since hopefully an administrator will see my request and take the protection off. I'm not sure if I put my request in the right place but I know it will be seen there. --CrohnieGalTalk 10:32, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for all your efforts Crohniegal. Whether or not the edit war was perceived as such, I don't think that was as much the issue as a particular editor that I mentioned and linked in my original response above. If you open the link above, you will find my attempt to compromise, if you open this link [[19]], you will find what was removed, and that the editor never responded to me (not a good sign for using the talk page). Also, if you look at the contrib history of the editor, it is almost exclusive to the Charles Whitman article, especially McCoy. I have already addressed the corrections of previous reverts and feel a discussion is unwarranted at this time on the talk page; contingent to one last, brief referece that was there before you reverted.
You have raised a few points worth addressing and I will try to modify my response to a brief response. You are correct about undue weight in one regard, however, McCoy, in my searching the history, had an article previously devoted to him that was removed, Martinez' was not, so...??? If you open Martinez' article and combine it with the Whitman article, the weight shifts to Martinez. I think you see where I am going...I am not inclined to start a McCoy page, where a potential problem may re-surface. As to the PTSD not needing caps, when I studied
Glioblastoma Multiforme
is a specific form of cancer, cancer is generic and does not need capitalization, once cancer takes the form of a specific noun, it should be capitalized.
With all of the above considered, let me be bold one last time before a trip to planet discussion, where the fog of discussion and parallax interpretations take over. I will merely input the Austin American reference to McCoy's illness, which I feel is not a weight issue, it is a historical fact, and if objections arise, we can go to the discussion page. Thanks again for your guidance. 71.85.120.252 (talk) 16:14, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
There is one thing you need to take into consideration, the article is about Charles Whitman not about the police officers who ended his life. This is where, IMHO, undo weight comes in. Mentioning briefly the officers is fine, but I think you are taking it too far, sorry. If you want to start a page about McCoy, go ahead, I will look forward to it and even help you if I can. The last one got deleted by a consensus of editors that, if I remember correctly, he didn't meet notability guidelines. It was a one event for him type of thing. I'm not trying to discourage you from trying but do look up why the article was deleted so you don't fail the same way with an article and/or waste your time. This of course is just a suggestions. I will check what you added to the article at Whitman's and if I disagree I will comment on that talk page. Thank you for your clear explanation. Be well, --CrohnieGalTalk 16:28, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
You are correct that the article is about Charles Whitman. Charles Whitman's actions are what put McCoy into the position of killing Whitman, and Whitman's actions, caused McCoy's PTSD - they can not be separated. You be well also. 71.85.120.252 (talk) 16:36, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
You're correct that this one event connects them forever but it's still
WP:One event which is where undue weight comes in. Undue weight can sometime be hard to understand for newbies and old editors alike. I too have troubles with when it applies or not. But this has been discussed before, so maybe you should check out the archives about it. Maybe that will help, I'm not sure to be honest. I guess it can't hurt. :) --CrohnieGalTalk
16:43, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
I know why WHL left and that you were friends. We have all had civil discussions in the archives. In fact, I am the archives! lol! No, I was not suggesting that you had any cause in WHL leaving. I hope her eyesight has been worked on and other health issues as well. I left the "Lady Gaga" reference in hopes you would pick up on it. No matter, I didn't really leave in a "huff" as Berean Hunter said, he and I have had good times working together before as well. Allow me this, per your words, "Mentioning a little bit about McCoy is alright but it should be short and about what he did in regards to Whitman."; that is not what the Houston McCoy and Ramiro section does, for either of them. In fact, it reads as a mini autobiography of both of them, in a small section. Since McCoy had his article removed by Wales, and Martinez' has his own article, I am going to put the information into the article in the appropriate places, eliminating the simi-mini auto biographies of both. If you don't agree after careful consideration, and with Berean Hunter, who is a good ol' North Carolina boy as well (referring to me), then revert it, and I will leave it alone. The McCoy - Martinez section has always looked autobiograhical to me, and does not deal with Whitman, which I will change. Just a note to let you and B Hunter know. BTW, you should visit Asheville and the Riverside graveyard where Thomas Wolfe and his family plot is. It is, IMO, second only to the Sleepy Hollow Cemetary in Westchester County, NY, for diversity and beauty. They even have a Civil War section where the graves are marked with "Rebel" Confederate flags, and the graveyard is Segratated, the Jews have their own section, lol! 71.85.120.252 (talk) 05:26, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello Vic, I thought that was you. I have visited Thomas Wolfe's homesite as well as Zebulon Vance's. Asheville is beautiful. I love Biltmore Estate...We are both up late though ;)
Why is it so important to get the McCoy mentions in? That has flown over my head a bit. It seems like such a minor thing. Objectively, convince us that it is necessary.
Are you still working on the documentary? I've still never seen a very good one...and I try to keep up with the Jones's.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 05:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Yep, the documentary costs money for equipment, which I now have most of it in cameras and gear. All the documents are ready and shooting has already begun on preleminary issues, like Camp Lejuene, Jacksonville, Savannah, etc. I visited East Carolina where Whitman took a class, they could find no records without going through their archives; too much time and cost for a potentially uninteresting period. I have rearranged the the information andremoved the McCoy and Martinez section as being too autobiograhical within Whitman's article. I put Martinez' sentence in his article. Whatta ya' think?!? If your still up? lol!71.85.120.252 (talk) 05:56, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm running on low fuel...Jim Beam is running out...kitchen is next then bed for me. I'll review when my head is clearer. When I visited East Carolina, we were playing out of a bar called "the Attic" which I believe has burned down now. Do you still have my email?
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 06:11, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Convience break

First, I apologize for talking down to you Victor. I didn't make a connection until real late yesterday, and with some help. ;) I'll take a look at what you've done. What documentary are you both talking about, Whitman? He started down here where I live. He went to the same high school as I did though he was a couple years older than I was so I didn't know him personally, just knew the name. So fill me in as I'd be interested in knowing about it. --CrohnieGalTalk 09:25, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Apologize?!? For what? Personally, when I do get treated with respect - I know I've done something wrong! lol! Yeah, I'm doing a documentary on Whitman, actually, I like to refer to it as a Bi-Op, it will be the records come to life and obviously, there will have to be some carefully considered licensing to fill the loss of actual conversation. I got a lot of insight from interviews I have with friends, victims and professors of Whitman. I was in Lake Worth last year and filmed his grave where he, his mother and brother John are buried. I believe Patrick (another brother) was cremated due to his struggle with AIDS.
So you went to St. Ann's, was Sister Estelle there when you went? I know you are in West Palm Beach, but what city? I found Lake Worth to be very interesting, but I don't believe it reflects with Whitman's formative years. There are a few early town structures and obviously the Church and School are still there, but few people even knew of Whitman whenI tried to find interviewee's in the the neighborhood. All I saw going on in the Palm Beach Area was new skyscrapers that were vacant for the most part. All of that, plus the expansion of I-95 must have changed the business district, from what it was. 71.85.120.252 (talk) 03:47, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
No, when the tragedy happened with him the rumor was that he was a student of
Palm Beach County, like in the Everglades. Well it used to be the Everglades but they filled it in so it was livable, it pisses me off that they did this. When I was down here prior to moving to the north, there was basically nothing past I-95 and esp. the turnpike. Usually what was found was farms, but now most of them are gone which is really sad. Another one closed down in this past year. When I was young we used to go to some farms to pick strawberries and one time to pick corn. Picking corn is hard and heavy (plus you can't eat it while picking like you could picking strawberries.) Well I've gotten off track here but at least they were good memories. As for Whitman, like I said, what I heard was rumors which I believed. To this day I do not know if he really went to my high school or not but until I'm told other wise, I am going to believe what they said at the school. There was no reason for them to lie about it but who knows? When do you figure your film will be completed? Do you have someone to air it? I bet it's hard to find people from back then. I've tried to find friend I had in high school and it's been hard. The area down here has changed dramatically. I grew up in Lantana. Back then no one knew Lantana, it wasn't on any maps and it was 2 miles x 2 miles in size. It's much bigger now. Lake Worth, PB county and the rest of the counties went through the same kind of changes. They got bigger, got more people and to be honest, the changes haven't been for the best. I find it horrible down here compared to when I was young. I wish I could tell you an easy way to find friends of his but there isn't any. We (my brother and I) found some of our childhood and school friends through Facebook. If you haven't tried that maybe it would help. Just a thought, --CrohnieGalTalk
10:23, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
"Sister Estelle stated that her records reveal that Charles Joseph Whitman attended primary parochial grades at the Church of the Sacred Heart, Lake Worth, Florida. He entered St. Ann's High School, West Palm Beach, on September 1, 1955, and was graduated on May 31, 1959. She added that his birth is reflected as June 24, 1941, at Lake Worth, Florida, and his address during the time he attended St. Ann's High School is reflected as 820 S. It Lit Street, Lake Worth, Florida."
I copied the above from the FBI files interview with Sister Estelle, a short while after the tragedy. There are no records (that I have) of Whitman attending LWHS. Hope this helps. I agree with your assessment of growing up in one climate, to have it radically change over time into something unknown - I was born in the South - raised in Detroit. After the '67 riots, Detroit became slowly unknowable. Now, except for a few isolated areas, it is not the Detroit I knew. 71.85.120.252 (talk) 17:52, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
My deep condolences on your recent loss Chroniegal! 71.85.120.252 (talk) 16:13, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Crohnie/Archive_5&oldid=1151045137"