User talk:Secretlondon/Archive 4

I don't edit here any more. 22:02, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• Thats sad, why? I always liked you, finding you to be "fair and balanced" (and thats coming from an american ;) Sam [Spade] 23:04, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
• From what I've seen, you've done a great deal of great work here. I'll be sorry to see you go. I hope your absence is temporary. Either way, best wishes. -- Infrogmation 00:14, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
• Come on, you don't mean it. You won't be able to resist coming back. You know you want to! Come on, I'll cry if you don't. Just one edit a day — pretty please? — Chameleon My page/My talk 00:28, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
• What happened? I noticed you as a nice and helpful editor (as in your encouragement of Patricknoddy). If it's a dispute on the wiki, surely something can be done. But if you leave for personal reasons, I want to add my best wishes. Gzornenplatz 04:19, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)
• Please don't go. You're a great contributer. Take a vacation if you must, but please don't go. Wikipedia needs you... --Neutrality 21:26, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
• Oh dear. I just found out. What all the others have said - you'll be one hell of a loss. I hope you'll reconsider in time, but if you must, best wishes. Ambivalenthysteria 10:51, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
• As always when that happens, I'm late. But it is a pity. Lupo 13:02, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• I feared this day would come, given the stress you've had here. As always, if there is anything I can do to help fight the biases you see here, I will gladly aid you as well as I can. I hope someday you can return here -- if not as the active speaker on policy and fairness issues (though I hope you will), then at least as an editor who has many useful things to contribute. Take care, Jwrosenzweig 23:08, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Come on, you're a Wikipediholic. I bet you are not gone but just editing as a sockpuppet!  :) Anyway, come back! I promise I'll fight with you when dickheads attack you! BTW, I've got that article we worked on together (Mains power plug) made a featured article. — Chameleon Main/Talk/Images 23:30, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Secretlondon, I've just popped in (for the first time in quite a while) and found your resignation notice. You may be surprised to hear it, but I am disappointed. Yes, you probably know that I am your political opposite and disagree with you about a lot of other matters as well, but I've always liked you as a person and am truly sorry to see you go. I do hope that "Once a wikiholic, always a wikiholic" will ultimately bring you back here. In the meantime, I, for one, will miss you greatly. David Cannon 12:06, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Secret (if I may call you that), you'll be definitely missed. --Palapala 13:35, 2004 Aug 12 (UTC)

Personal attacks on the mailing list

I am sending the following message to multiple users I'd strongly appreciate it if fair-minded users responded to the latest string of baseless personal attacks on the mailing list ([1], [2], [3], [4]). Stan Shebs, Fred Bauder, and RickK started attacking me ferociously since it came up on the mailing list that one of the articles I'd written was featured, Russian constitutional crisis of 1993.

I know that I have made mistakes on Wikipedia; but those mistakes were not motivated by anything other than a passion to make Wikipedia into a serious, professional, quality encyclopedia, not a dumping ground for ungrammatical POV rubbish and fiction. This is making it harder and harder for me to be as efficacious as a user as I want to be. (The distorted impression of my work that these attacks engender are at the root of quite a large number of conflicts on Wikipedia.) That's why I feel that they should finally be thoroughly discredited. 172 05:51, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Article in need of category...

Since you seem to share a passion for all that is odd about London's geography... would you care to suggest a category for this page? The writing 'aint all that', however I think the picture is quite nice: The Parkland Walk.

Article Licensing

If you ever come back.... I've "started" the Free the Rambot Articles Project which aims to get users to release all of their contributions to the U.S. state, county, and city articles under the CC-by-sa 1.0 and 2.0 license (at minimum) or into the public domain if they prefer. A secondary goal is to get those users to release ALL of their edits for ALL articles. I've personally chosen to multi-license all of the rambot and Ram-Man contributions under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike License so that other projects, such as WikiTravel, can use our articles. I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all your contributions (or at minimum those on the geographic articles) so that we can keep most of the articles available under the multi-license. Many users use the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or even {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) on their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. If you only prefer using the GFDL, I understand, but I thought I'd at least ask, just in case, since the number of your edits is in the top 50. If you do want to do it, simply just copy and paste one of the above two templates into your user page and it will allow us to track those users who have done it. For example:

Option 1

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

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

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

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain (which many people do or don't like to do, see Wikipedia:Multi-licensing), you could replace {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} with {{MultiLicensePD}} -- Ram-Man 21:40, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

Proposals for AMA Membership Meeting

As AMA Coordinator I am requesting that suggestions be placed on Wikipedia:AMA Membership Meeting plans for our first membership meeting, to be held in the near future, (hopefully before any election occurs.) Since we have never had any kind of "official" meeting we need to discuss how this will occur (i.e. Wiki pages or IRC channel), how it will be structured (i.e. meeting agenda) and if there will be any "chair" to supervise the meeting and meeting "secretary" to write up minutes or keep some kind of official record of what transpires. Thanks in advance for your input and your continued work as an advocate. — © Alex756 20:18, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

OFFICIAL AMA MEETING NOTICE

The first AMA Membership meeting will be held on Sunday January 23, 2005 at 19:00 UTC on freenode IRC channel #AMA. That is 2 PM Eastern NA (Miami/Montreal) Time, 11 AM Pacific NA (Los Angeles/Vancover)Time, and 8 PM Central European (Amsterdam/Stokholm/Warsaw/Venice) Time. All members are invited to attend. — © Alex756

Logs of first AMA Membership meeting

You may view the log of the first meeting on the following two pages: Wikipedia:AMA IRC Meeting log (1-23-05) (first hour) and Wikipedia:AMA IRC Meeting log (1-23-05) Pt II (remainder of meeting). If you are interested in commenting on the agenda of the meeting please do so here:Wikipedia:AMA Meeting (suggested topics).

OFFICIAL SECOND MEETING NOTICE AND REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

"The second AMA Membership meeting will be held on Sunday January 30 2005 at 19:00 UTC on freenode IRC channel #AMA. That is 2 PM Eastern NA Time, 11 AM Pacific NA Time, and 8 PM Central European (Amsterdam/Stokholm/Warsaw/Venice) Time. All members are invited to attend."

The coordinator is requesting that members submit the following information for the upcoming coordinator’s report:

• How many individuals did you help as an advocate
• What is the maximum amount of time you put into a case
• Do you feel your work as an advocate was successful?
• How can the advocacy program of the AMA be improved?

Thank you. Please submit your responses here: Wikipedia:AMA Coordinator/January 2005 Survey

— © Alex756 23:14, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC) (The Coordinator)

OFFICIAL THIRD MEETING NOTICE AND REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

The second AMA IRC Membership meetingwas held on Sunday January 30, 2005 at 19:00 UTC on freenode.net IRC channel #AMA. Attending were Wally, Metasquares, Anthere, Sam Spade, and alex756 (coordinator). The log of the second meeting can be found here: Wikipedia:AMA IRC Meeting log (1-30-05).

"The third AMA Membership meeting will be held on Saturday February 12, 2005 at 17:00 UTC on freenode IRC channel #AMA. That is 12:00 Noon Eastern NA Time, 9 AM Pacific NA Time, and 6 PM Central European (Amsterdam/Stokholm/Warsaw/Venice) Time. All members are invited to attend.

Suggested Topics and Specific Proposals

MEMBERS PLEASE REVIEW

Suggestions for topics/proposals and agenda to be discussed at the next meeting are to be found at: Wikipedia:AMA Meeting (suggested topics). All members are requested to make proposals there and respond to proposals on the talk page there before the beginning of the next meeting so discussion can be held forthwith concerning such proposals. Thank you, your Coordinator.

The coordinator is requesting that members who have not done so already submit the following information for the upcoming coordinator’s report:

• How many individuals did you help as an advocate
• What is the maximum amount of time you put into a case
• Do you feel your work as an advocate was successful?
• How can the advocacy program of the AMA be improved?

Thank you. Please submit your responses here. — © Alex756 23:21, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Republics

Need your help and/or advice. The British Wikipedian Republican Party sought fit to delete Wikinfo:Classical definition of republic from Wikipedia. There is a terrible brouhaha at Talk:Republic. They won't even allow an external link! SimonP really doesn't know what he is doing. They deleted the Classical definition of republic and created mixed government and politeia instead. The official title of mixed government is a Republic and the Romans translated "politiea" as Republic. And then to top it off the new article Classical republicanism doesn't refer to the Classical republics of Crete, Sparta, Solonic Athens, or Rome but to Machiavelli's ideology. How can that be when Venice in the 13th century instituted a mixed government and called herself a "Republic".

With Jwrosenwieg and Kim Bruning there was a tacit agreement a year ago to have republic be the modern meaning and a [Classical definition of republic] to describe the ancient republics of Hellas and Rome and their influence. To say the least the "Republic section" is all messed up. We need some clarification. I have new information but User:Snowspinner won't let me bring this back up for undelete. (I do grant that a little bit of the Classical definition is original but the rest is not.) I will not let Sparta be called anything but a republic! I will not let the British wikipedian modern republicans strip Sparta, (my heritage and roots) of her rightful name. She is a Classical republic and needs to be called such! At the least, where is the damage in having an external link?WHEELER 15:20, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dom von helsinki.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Dom von helsinki.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —MetsBot 19:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)