User talk:Harro5/Archive1

John Howard page

Hi Harro5. There has been discussion as regards the usage of boxes for PM's, and the current feeling among editors is that they're undesirable (redundant and ugly). For that reason, I will remove the box (although I don't mind it much myself). Slac speak up! 04:19, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Point taken. They do add a nice touch though. Note that every senior US politician has a box, but then, I'm not an editor.

--Harro5 04:33, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

why are you americanising the dates on john howard?

Xtra 00:12, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

oh. and melbourne is going to lose on sunday. Xtra 00:13, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

---

Adam, I think you deserve a Barnstar of National Merit for all the work you have put into pages purtaining to Australian history and politicians. While nearly every American politician down to the Deputy Undersecretary for International Toe-Nailing Clipping Relations has a thorough Wiki page, we Aussies don't see our pollies represented as well. Thanks for the work you've done to write on past and present Australian politicians. If you would like to, please show this award on your page. --Harro5 04:46, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Dear Harro, thanks very much for your splendid award [1], which I much appreciate. Go Dees. Adam 05:19, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

---

Adam, in the future, could you please look at re-writing the articles for Victoria's two most recent Governors - John Landy and James Gobbo. They are two in dire need of expansion. Thanks --Harro5 06:02, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

I have a lot on my waiting list at present, but I will have a look. Adam 06:09, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Peter Cosgrove

Harro5, while Peter Cosgrove has not yet stood down, therefore the removal of the 2005 from the succession box is justified, he WILL be stepping down in July as stated in the entry... unless... well, there is no unless that is foreseeable. I'm not making anything of this, it's just that the 2005 entry was obvious when the context of his statements surrounding the end of his time were understood. Peter Ellis 09:22, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Succession boxes

Hi, regarding the succession boxes for U.S. Senate Majority and Minority leaders--is that your own idea, or a wikiproject? Where could I go to suggest changes? Yours, Meelar (talk) 07:20, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

OK. Well, I was just thinking that it would be simpler to only have boxes for Democratic and Republican leader; it would greatly simplify the presentation, esp. on people like Tom Daschle. I was wondering if you thought similarly, and where I could go to get such a change formatting. Thanks for all the work, incidentally--the new succession boxes are a great improvement, and I appreciate them greatly. Best, Meelar (talk) 07:26, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

Well, I'd hate to undo your work, and it is more useful, if a tad harder to get. I guess we can leave it as is. Again, congratulations and thanks on all you're doing. Meelar (talk) 07:34, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

kudos

Thanks for your timely updating of John Negroponte. -- Viajero 22:36, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The John Edwards Vandal

It wasnt protected. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 07:11, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

He is being sneaky. He added the {{protected}} template, although he doesn't have the power to protect or unprotect articles of course. If the "edit" tab is still there, that means you can (and should) still edit it and remove the inaccurate template. — Knowledge Seeker দ 07:15, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You're right; most vandalism comes from anonymous users. But anonymous users also make a lot of great edits and help fight vandalism, so it would be unfair to characterize them all the same way. Besides, I was an anonymous user once too =) Ideally, this guy will find an area of Wikipedia to which he can make positive contributions, and stay. — Knowledge Seeker দ 07:28, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

thank you for your revert. Xtra 03:14, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Message regarding "random comments"

The comments are not entirely random. They are historical facts. User: Gzuckier had added a list of "sensationalized deaths" under the "miscellaneous" section on the Yale University page on April 20, 2005. I was not certain that such additional material was suitable for Wikipedia and it seemed to show a certain negative bias, but rather than enter into a "revert" war, I decided to take a Netural Point of View NPOV and add lists of deaths for other universities. If you look at my history of contributions, I added them to MIT, Harvard, and Stanford. I hope that these additions will generate thoughtful discussions or a quick consensus. If consensus is reached whereby these lists of deaths should be removed from the Wiki pages of any one institution, then in the interest of NPOV, the lists should be removed from the Wiki pages for all of the institutions. I have no problem if the lists are all removed, but no favoritism should be shown.

PS. If you want to take the initiative and remove the lists from all insitutions, feel free to do so, but please help in enforcing the edits from reversions for all of the pages. (Personally, I would prefer all of the lists to be removed myself!)

Well, if the topic of random murders of students on the way to class and its impact on admissions is worthy of discussion by the faculty admissions committee at Yale (which it was), then I would myself be loath to consider it irrelevant to any discussion of that institution. If that is also a problem at Harvard or MIT, then by all means it should be discussed there. In the meantime, NPOV doesn't mean that any unattractive factors associated with a particular institution be deleted because they do not exist in other competing institutions. BTW, if you consulted the Yale talk page, you'd note that I actually added that section responding to somebody's pointing it out as something that ought to be added. So that's two folks with an interest in the topic and some knowledge of it who feel it is relevant, on the off chance that that that might make a difference to your illustrious opinion.Gzuckier 03:21, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

4.228.102.139's contributions

Hi Harro5, since I noticed you've been talking to 4.228.102.139 about his recent contributions to the Harvard University article, I thought you might want to see how it was handled in the MIT article. See my comments on the MIT talk page and 4.228.102.139's talk page. --Umofomia 10:34, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you, but actually, do you think you can post your opinion of the current situation on the MIT talk page? 4.228.102.139 doesn't seem too happy with my solution and said to contact you about it. Thanks! --Umofomia 12:12, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi Harro5. As far as "conventional format" goes, every Australian politician article currently has that style, as does Pope Benedict XVI, among many others. The reasons I prefer that style is simply to indicate, in brackets and italics, that "incumbent" is an editorial comment, and isn't actually a part of the succession. Slac speak up! 23:55, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Help

Hello Harro5, is there something that can be done about User: Gzuckier?

• He blew off your edit of April 24 at the page Yale University despite acknowledging twice that he had read the MIT page, and yet added no justification or argument to the discussion regarding his reversions.
• His flippant comments at Talk:Yale_University and on the history page indicate an attitude of not wanting to discuss the issue in a serious manner.
• He has now violated the Wikipedia:Three_revert_rule.

thank you

For my part, I have written a chunk of text that tries to integrate the material better so as to indicate why it is of specific import to Yale. Gzuckier 16:37, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Bush article

Thanks for your kind words, but most of the information I added to the George W. Bush article was in it previously. It was simply deleted, without discussion, by one of the people who can't stand to see anything negative about Bush. JamesMLane 08:30, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

George Burdi

"aka" and "born" do not mean the same thing. In fact, George Eric Hawthorne was a pseudonym. 70.50.112.188 02:34, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

It's not vandalism. See Grade 13. 70.50.112.188 02:45, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Small penis humiliation

(And don't blame me for the title!) You stuck a speedy tag on this silliness; somebody removed it; I've now stuck a VfD tag on it. You may wish to vote. (No need to reply!) -- Hoary 08:15, 2005 May 8 (UTC)

Cfd

Harro, I noticed you added the cfr tag to Category:Directors of Central Intelligence but didn't list it for deletion at WP:CFD. Just wanted to let you know that you need to do both in order to nominate a category for deletion. --Kbdank71 17:46, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

learn to spe,l and mind your own business

first learn to spell Mr grammar graduate. Dont edit my posts...and this is a free service that anyone can edit. As such, I will add and edit as much as I wish. Dont like it go to hell

Sincerely Princefigs

• If anyone can decifer that comment, credit to them. Maybe I should call in someone from Polish Wiki...Harro5 02:16, May 14, 2005 (UTC)
• its not hard, you elistist bastard

Asterisk

Yes, the asterisked articles are indeed those that have appeared on the main page. -- Emsworth 13:28, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Ya :-)

Indeed it does mean that! I don't know very much Mandarin as I only got so far and had to leave the course :( - Ta bu shi da yu 13:40, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Merges

Both pages should now be redirected to the Walla Walla College article. It is generally a good idea to then add a note to the talk page so that anyone looking for the history and discussion of those sections will know where to look. - SimonP 22:12, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

SD

Out of curioucity, why do you keep adding things tagged by other people to the WP:SD page. I know that is says that it's optional, but no one really does it (and those who do add ones that they personally tagged). You're just making more work for yourself. Most sysops, or at least I, just check the category and not the page anyways. BrokenSegue 02:13, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

*Blush*

Shush, or you'll make my head swell! Incidently, you need to shift that up the page and resign it :-) I appreciate your support though! Ta bu shi da yu 07:25, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Re: speedies

You're welcome; I am happy to help out. Wikipedia is a complex place, and I'm still learning too! You appear to be quite well-versed in Wikipedia business, but if you have any other questions, feel free to ask me. — Knowledge Seeker দ 08:07, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

"Layla" peer review

Thank you very much for your comments; I've employed most of them (and I'm doing what I can with the writing; it's hard to walk the line between eloquence and POV.) I still can't believe I left blank URLs there; bit of a rookie mistake:) (Minor thing: The Manual of Style said songs do go in quotes.) I've never actually seen Goodfellas, just heard about it from people on IMDb message boards, so I'll have to see if I can find someone else who knows about it. Anyway, you've been a great help, and I look forward to seeing "Layla" featured one day. Deltabeignet 23:32, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

FAC

I really think you should read a few more featured articles to get a better idea of what it takes to make one. Peer review is recommended and should be left for at least a week (its really supposed to be a month) to give other editors a chance to read it an comment on it. No one has connented on the Poe yet and there there appears to still be things that need to be done, I'll elaborate on the peer review page.--nixie 06:48, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

• Be patient :) I've made some notes on the Poe peer review page, literature isn't really my area but the strcutre of featured article is generally similar within a topic, James Joyce is probably a really good example for you you to use as a model for improving Poe--nixie 07:03, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

I looked over the Poe page and tried to do some things to help. For example, I lengthened the lead a bit, and I did some copy editing of the sentences. However, the problems I saw required research that I haven't done in a long while. For example, what was the age of Poe's cousin when he married her? This is important for his later criticism, when he says that the corpse of a beautiful young girl is the most sublime object in the world. Also, even though it was not a huge scandal, the marriage was, nevertheless, shameful to some degree. Another thing that needs to be in to bolster the article from the mundane to the Featured, in my opinion, is coverage of Poe's literary aims, and for that we must turn to his criticism. Poe as a poet is also under-represented. We may only read his prose, but he himself thought his poetry was the significant thing. Some of his poetry was very highly praised, as well, and by that I do not mean "The Raven." I believe Annabel Lee was the one that was considered among the finest of the age by contemporaries. Also, I, personally, would try to provide a small context of Romanticism to place him in so that readers can see him participating in a European literary movement in America. Because the New England poets and authors set up their own self-proclaimed schools, when people study American literature they miss the fact that there was an American Romanticism, largely taking place in the mid-Atlantic and southern states, where Walter Scott was venerated and Wordsworth recited with daily labors. Poe, I think, is well situated among these thinkers. I'm happy to point out deficits, but I'm not really that able to supply them at this point. I can and will be happy to proof read and copy edit at any time, but I'm not an Americanist (just an American who's a British Literature specialist). Geogre 03:36, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Howdy! I did get your message on the Poe article--I've got some other things going on right now, but at least for the time being I can give you some things to think about (or ignore). i. I'd echo what Geogre said above about needing more discussion of Poe's aims, successes and failures as a writer, as a critic, and as an editor. It's a tough job, which may be why it hasn't been done yet. ii. You might want to consider breaking up the "Legacy and lore" section into two: Poe's literary legacy (serious) and the "lore," pop culture and low-end adaptations (more trivial). There's lots of good info in that section, but it needs a complete overhaul, because it's grown by casual accretion over time. iii. Poe's death and associated material is perhaps disproportionately large--maybe it can be compressed a bit, but maybe Poe's life has to be made more detailed to balance it out. I remember when I was doing editing on the article I made heavy use of Kenneth Silverman's biography, which I recommend highly. iv. Perhaps the Griswold section could be toned down as some people have said, but maybe not. I'm probably not the right person to ask because my hatred of Rufus Griswold is deep and implacable.

I think this definitely should be brought up to Featured Article quality--but I do suspect that the timetable you have in mind might be a bit brisk, juding by the rapidity of the FACs and the requests for comment. He's such an important and misunderstood figure in world literature that he's worth taking a long time over.

Anyway, it's easy to sit here and hold forth on what other people should do. I may revisit Poe in the near future, but it probably won't be for a couple weeks. PRiis 06:24, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Christopher Gray

Hi Harro5! I have taken off your {{delete}}-tag on Christopher Gray and placed it on VfD because I don't think an outright deletion is in order even though the article is woefully stubby. Sjakkalle 08:12, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Edit counts

I have a little Perl script that requests the user contribution pages for each namespace and counts up the contributions. It has at least one known bug (it can't count past 5000).

I try not to make too much use of it because it is does create some stress on the servers. Kelly Martin 00:32, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

CGS featured article

Have a look at Stuyvesant High School and note that it too failed to reach "featured article" status. I'm not saying CGS can't be a featured article, but you should be realistic about the chances, as well as knowing where similar efforts have fallen short. Good luck. I've put CGS on my watch list, and will visit from time to time. --Unfocused 07:58, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

• I've taken a look, and feel the article requires substantial condensing to be featured. HTH. Radiant_* 08:22, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Punkas

I've completely redone the Punkas article. I hope you have the time to check it. It may not be as much a candidate for deletion as it previously was. Tx.--McDogm 20:26, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Caulfield Grammar School

Raul654, who is basically in charge of WP:FAC, has decided that the Caulfield Grammar School nomination is not going to pass. We usually don't note that on the FAC page, but we use the {{facfailed}} template to show it on the talk page of the article. When those objections have been met the article can be re-nominated as usual. violet/riga (t) 09:02, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

uwe kils

hallo Harro - my students exercised as oceanographers, taking code from my space preparing for a German demonstration project on virtual university, the idea of Erik Moeller (user:eloquence) of the Wikiversity for online e-teaching and e-research and I offered my cooperation as teacher and my interactive virtual microscope for a course in Meeresbiologie and Biologie der Antarktis - for that project it is important to have reproducible credentials for the teachers. We also plan to move educational content from expensive university servers to the free project (in Germany we don't even have tuition in the University) - help us - or not - I really don't care if I am sysop or not, I have that all behind me - we try to help the NeXT generation - keep up with your fine work, I hope you get your featured article (Iwould help you) best greetings Uwe Kils PS we are searching for cooperators with real names

My mistake

forgot to do that sorry. Will try and remember next time. 578 (Yes?) 23:23, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Old Talk

I delete it, since it's 90% junk. It's still findable in the History if anyone really wants to read it. Go Dees. Adam 02:19, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

School discussion

Hi there! I've summarized the lengthy Wikipedia:Schools discussion and listed the statements that got approval from most people. I believe it's been a constructive page, and WikiProject Schools has benefitted from the revitalization. Anyway please take a look at it and write on the talk page if you found this acceptable. Also I'd appreciate some help in keeping any future VfD discussions on this matter from getting out of hand (I'm not entirely sure how, but we could set a good example by casting concise votes referring to /Arguments). Yours, Radiant_* 10:59, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for voting

Before the voting on European English ended a replacement was written, which is being subjected to a new round of voting. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/European English. 66.167.137.130 09:30, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Hello

I know you're a very smart boy. I can see that from your comments. I suggest you research some on George Bush and add NPOV facts as you find them. Otherwise, your "contributions" in the talk pages seem more like they are geared solely to stirring the pot, rather than being constructive. Anyway, I hope you have a nice day.--MONGO 07:35, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

reducing vfd load

Hi Harro5,

I want to ask you to take a look at a proposal I've written at User:MarSch/deleteproposal, since I hope you will like it. (You have expressed support for a similar proposal.) I need some more feedback on it before throwing it to the wolves. Thanks --MarSch 14:39, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Terrorism laws

I wrote that article as part of the long conflict I had with the mad LaRouche people last year. I haven't tried tp update it and I haven't kept up with the issue. I'm not sure what purpose the article now serves. Perhaps it should be abolished, or incorporated into a larger article about Australia and terrorism or something. Adam 06:53, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Bonfire society

Hi

I found this {{db|non-sensical article on a group of worshippers of a [[Guy Fawkes|British murderer]].}} posted by you on the above article and, from politeness, wanted to explain why I removed it:

1. Bonfire societies are real, they exist and are worth an article.
2. They do not worship Guy Fawkes, but celebrate the discovery of the Gunpowder plot.
3. Even if they did worship GF, the statement that his is a murderer is POV.
4. Even if they did and he was, they would still merit an article.

Hope this makes it clear that I did not just over-ride your speedy tag for thr fun of it, but because I felt that there were good reasons to retain the article. I would also respectfully ask that you are careful not to allow your own POV to guide you when adding the speedy tags to pages in future. Filiocht | Blarneyman 13:11, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Bonfire society

No problem; I've over-hastily deleted speedy tagged articles before, so am now ultra-cautious. Filiocht | Blarneyman 07:26, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)