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.
Tut tut. Have you been a naughty girl SandyG? Never catch me at ANI, except that time when ... oh and there was that other time ... and I'd forgotten about ...:-) --MalleusFatuorum 13:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
I think I should set up a subpage so Rd232 can harass me:) Does anyone wonder why Mark Weisbrot, who most people have never heard of, is suddenly so important to so many pro-Chavez editors? Following all of their edits is giving me some clues to what this is about ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:03, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi Sandy, I'm having some issues understanding a few things. Have you got a moment to comment on the following?
I haven't got an issue with what's being said (I don't know anything about Venezuela at all I'm afraid), I'm just trying to work out what the sentence is trying to say! - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 13:11, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Tbsdy, I looked at the second, and your proposal is fine. On the first, that article has been subjected to tendentious editing, and I don't have time to weigh in there. I'm sure that article is a mess, like others affected. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:51, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Sandy, may I add a script to your monobook.js that will allow you to tell if someone is an administrator or not just by viewing their userpage? NW(Talk) 17:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
If you don't mind, I would appreciate that ... I've got to check out of my hotel. Thanks for doing that ... I'm usually a very busy editor, and I certainly missed that x 2. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:37, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Done :) Cheers, NW(Talk) 17:58, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you; I won't have time to properly look at it and really thank you until I resurface. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
I looked and it works great! Thanks again, NW; now I've no excuse for my ... ummm ... incompetence. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:24, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the reverts, but isn't it more fun to keep the crazy posts around so others can enjoy them:) Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:24, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
It's worth it to remove a mere "You suck!", but when it's really over the top, then it's a keeper. Like a snapshot of someone very angry and unbalanced, to keep in your pocket forever. --Moni3 (talk) 00:47, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
I always like the projective factor in angry posts, but I don't think I want them in my pocket. Besides, I like to let the misimpressions stand ... they come in handy ... and sure beat the time a friend described the real me to all of UseNet:-( Stuck in the airport by a snowstorm ... damn, it's cold here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
And now Laser, too ... I could have come home to so much fun! Engvar my face:) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Are you offended that I closed the discussion? It was taking on the appearance of an ad hoc conduct RfC on you, complete with subheaders for involved and uninvolved editors' opinions. It seemed like the respectful decision in light of your long service to the project, but if you'd rather snark in reply then by all means conduct your disputes there as long as you'd like. Excuse the interference; it was intended kindly. Durova412 02:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Not so much offended, since Rd232 shouldn't be waging his campaign against me at ANI anyway, but I believe you knew that I was bothered years ago when I announced I'd be busy with my family for a few hours, and the thread was shut down. Since that thread was about me, it seems strange for it to be shut down just when I announced I'd be away for a while. I appreciate your good intent, but I owed an apology to JN, which deserved the wider audience where the incident was raised. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:24, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
I've just gone through security and re-logged on to see that you unarchived the thread; that wasn't necessary. I merely wanted to apologize to JN (and I don't think collapsing should be used in place of archive top and bottom, since they hide the whole thread, and what Rd232 did there should be open and available for all to see). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:26, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
It looked like a thread that had been misfiled from the start. Sometimes people go to ANI when dispute resolution is needed instead; the community rarely acts upon that type of complaint so the problem usually worsens as the participants become frustrated. In general, the best thing to do is refer it elsewhere when people start digging trenches and lobbing verbal grenades. I did not intuit any hidden meaning behind your posts and certainly didn't intend to prevent you from making amends. This may have been one of the exceptions and I apologize for any difficulty that created. Durova412 03:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
No difficulty, no apology needed ... Rd232 has been to about every noticeboard on Wiki ranting about me ... we should set up a special Rd232 rant noticeboard:) We also haven't gotten to the bottom yet of the potential coordinated meatpuppetry, or Rd232's strange statements/concerns about Mark Weisbrot appearing to be an unregistered agent of a foreign government. Beyond trying to figure out why or how Rd232 came up with that notion, I'm too tired to think about it right now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:29, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
"Rd232 has been to about every noticeboard on Wiki ranting about me " - not that's you Sandy. Every bloody time at content-related dispute resolution you "ranted" (not an entirely unfair characterisation, though I wouldn't choose the word) about me (and often JRSP too). I'm more than than happy to provide diffs showing that; this would be a start. I have consistently sought to use DR for its intended purpose; and you have consistently sought to derail that purpose, and use it as a platform to attack me. This reached the point at WP:RSN (also due to another editor attacking as well, but Sandy did her share) that I had to start a separate thread to try to get back to an actual content discussion. Rd232talk 08:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
"Mark Weisbrot appearing to be an unregistered agent of a foreign government" - I said no such thing; and I object to you pretending that you do not fully understand the implications of your sustained attempt to link CEPR with VIO. Venezuela Information Officeis a registered agent of a foreign government (well, was, I think they're defunct), and linking someone with them is clearly intended to discredit that someone. Given the tenuousness of the links and the gravity of the insinuation, an editor of your experience cannot possibly pretend that you do not know *exactly* what you are doing - which is to seek to discredit anyone writing about Venezuela in a way you don't like. Rd232talk 08:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Rd232, whenever you decide whether you are or are not retiring, and can come to my talk page to discuss with me without attacking me, we can have a dialogue. If you continue to assume bad faith and lodge blatant personal attacks on me everywhere you post, dialogue is unlikely to be productive. The choice is yours; I'm all ears, but I am not going to engage your personal attacks or assumptions of bad faith, just to have you say you're retiring mid-discussion. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
And there we are: whenever you cannot deal with straightforward issues you either make personal attacks, claim attacks on you, or just walk away. You are - very slowly - succeeding in giving me the motivation to take you to arbcom. please desist from doing so, as I can ill afford the time involved. Rd232talk 19:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Re-iterating: when you are calm, willing to start a dialogue where you will refrain from personal attacks or disappearing into retirement, do come back here and talk to me, not at me. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:22, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Another ANI
I bring your attention to my recent post at ANI - Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Motion_to_close. Our choices at this point seem to be the Thunderdome-style drama of an arbcom case (you seem to be preparing for that), or burying the hatchet - chalking up past problems to some kind of miscommunication in order to regain mutual AGF. I realise I we have diametrically opposed views on Venezuela; but we ought nonetheless to be able to get along if we focussed sufficiently on content and worked hard enough to bring in many more editors via content dispute resolution. Anyway, it's up to you. Rd232talk 15:14, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Rd232, I am encouraged to see two posts from you that include no personal attacks on me, and do hope that this means a line can be drawn in the sand and we can move forward more productively. (No, I'd not like to see an ArbCom case, which would be immensely difficult and time-consuming, but have found that I need to defend myself against the sustained attacks on multiple fronts by building a clear history, including work that needs to be done on these articles-- you might note that documentation came in handy when I had to address outrageously unfounded claims from The Four Dueces at AN/I, and considering this situation is too complex and drawn out for uninvolved observers to follow.) However, I find one aspect of your ANI post confusing/troubling, and recognize that I may be misreading or misinterpreting (particularly in light of JN's good observations about what it has been like for me to deal with these sustained attacks while I have so much else going on IRL and on Wiki). Rather than drag all of ANI through my questions to you, I suggest resolving my concern/confusion about one aspect of your post to ANI here-- is that acceptable to you? I appreciate that you have now posted to me without attacks, and hope this is a sign of better collaboration ahead for us. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:02, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Well, clearly we also disagree on who attacked who more (and probably who attacked who first). As I said, the choice is between an arbcom case trying to settle that, or letting bygones be bygones and focussing on content. I'm glad you find the idea of an arb case as unappealing as I do. Whatever your outstanding questions or concerns are, ask away. Rd232talk 23:00, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Rd, I'm not ignoring you, just have been really zapped by IRL issues, and way behind here. I must read FAC today and tomorrow, and may not get back to you until tomorrow or even Monday, because of IRL stuff. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:00, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Rd, let's put this chapter behind, try to "reset", and move forward constructively. We certainly have differing opinions about what happened here, but moving forward now is more helpful than re-examining the past. My questions became moot when the CU was denied, and I have confidence in the neutrality of the checkusers. If they didn't find my evidence sufficient, I accept that, and extend my apologies to you for any discomfort the SPI caused for you. (I would extend the same to Off2riorob, but he's made it clear that I'm not welcome on his talk page.) I am troubled, though, by some of your statements made at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Scalabrineformvp, after the clerk asked that we no longer comment there, preventing me from responding. Coordinated meatpuppetry was found, and that is the same as sockpuppetry for these purposes.
Eva Golinger popped up just as I had time to respond to you here, and I hope that using a rapidly-developing new article to show Venezuelan editors how to edit effectively, and where they run afoul of policy and guideline, will be constructive. I'd rather teach them to fish there than doing the fishing for them, but I hope you see how my edit count is so often inflated, simply by cleanup, and not use WP:EDITCOUNTITIS against me in the future:)
Separately, you have made some statements in all of this about my beliefs re Chavez which are incorrect. He is not a "dictator"; he was elected, due to arrogance by complacent and negligent Venezuelans, who have no one to blame but themselves (if I have any contempt, it's for them), with the help of some corruption in the electoral processes (subject to controversy, and depending on who you believe, but the controversy is real and valid, reliably sourced, and shouldn't be downplayed), furthered by Carter's naivete about the control of the electoral processes and exclusion of other voter oversight orgs, and again furthered by the Carmona debacle, yet another example of Venezuelan arrogance. Reliable sources clearly demonstrate the damage to representative democracy that has resulted in Venezuela through Chavez's consolidation of power and abuse of human rights. In summary; my contempt, if you detect any, is not for Chavez, but for complacent, arrogant Venezuelans whose behavior resulted in his election, who won't do their own work in recovering full democracy, and seem happy to leave the Wiki work to me, a solas, and as to the real world work, well, they expect the gringos to "mandar las marinas" (and Clinton sure isn't going to do that, nor should American boys shed blood where Venezuelans won't). Those are my beliefs, and they are backed by reliable sources, combined with my views on Venezuelan complacency, corruption and comfort, aided by Carter, Chavez and Castro (the six C's of the degradation of democracy in Venezuela). In the meantime, the rich get richer, and the poor and middle classes suffer. I know plenty in all classes. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:25, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
OK, reset button pushed... now.
On the SPI, (a) I read the clerk note as requesting no further evidence/discussion; my note was update/followup/implied request for action. (b) the elision of the initial sockpuppetry claim into "meatpuppetry", which I've addressed repeatedly, annoyed/annoys me. The edit histories of those accounts do not tally with meatpuppetry as described in WP:MEAT. Of course a slight danger remains, but now that it's all in the open (and two of the accounts were using real names anyway), and they seemingly know not to edit the relevant articles, the danger is much defused.
On your beliefs - OK, noted. I hope you'll do me the courtesy of accepting that my beliefs have not been accurately represented by my edit history; and in particular, the fact that I've used Venezuelanalysis as a source doesn't mean I'm "pro-Chavez" as you no doubt understand the term - for reasons that should be clear from it being widely used as a source in academic works and reading lists. To be clear, that I've often used it as a source certainly doesn't mean I think it should be the only source on a given topic; obviously no article should rely on a single source; but as you note, few are interested in really working substantively on Venezuela, so WP:WIP applies quite strongly. (It's a pity that so much of the activity there is seems to revolve around issues and sources which are not properly encyclopedic; too much "let's make Chavez look bad" and not enough "what should this Venezuela-related encyclopedia article look like.)
Much more generally, much of what relatively little I've actually achieved on Venezuela articles (so much more talking than doing) is presenting a bit more background about how messy the situation is, and how messy the situation was before 1998. Far too much of the discourse involves a selectivity premised on a 1998 "fall from grace" in which Chavez takes on an a quasi-Luciferian appearance. I do think that by and large at least the Venezuelan Chavistas have a clearer "warts and all" picture than members of the opposition, who seem too much to believe its own press. I could give some very concrete examples from my experience from both camps (I've better contacts to the latter:) ), but for privacy reasons I won't. Rd232talk 18:51, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Excuse me butting in ... but are you talking about the Venezuelan recall referendum, 2004? As it happens, I've just read the Carter Center and Weisbrot papers on that controversy, as well as a little bit from Hausmann, and in the far distant future, when you have spare time again:), I'd love to debate the evidence with you. (I do have some basic skills in mathematical statistics, and I thought Weisbrot and the Carter Centre had it right.) --JN466 17:21, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes, Carter's role in that, and the absence of other oversight. You've got to read more than naive, justifying-his-actions Carter (I know what Carter said when he got his tail outta there, but that's not an RS:), partisan Weisbrot, and semi-partisan Hausmann. That one's going to be tough, JN, and there is so much to do, I'm not sure it's the best place to focus effort. There just aren't enough hours in the day ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:39, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Is there a forum on Wiki that deals with the ways different browsers read images and spacing and such? I'm having some issues with Internet Explorer reading a large white space in List of invasive species in the Everglades when the two large images appear stacked such as in this version. Another user shifted one of the images to another section because he says it looks disrupted. (See that version here.) I have looked at the version with stacked images in Firefox and IE and cannot notice a difference. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 18:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
I have a big, ongoing problem with image display on IE, and went to WP:VP/T a month or so about that; they weren't able to resolve it. You can try searching VP:T for my old post about image display problems. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:53, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Why do you not use Firefox? I began using to escape pop-ups, but got so used to it I cannot seem to transition back to anything else. Thanks for the link, though. --Moni3 (talk) 19:42, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
I'll try that next (in all my spare time:) Thanks! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:48, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
I checked three articles that were giving me problems, and it does seem fixed. Does that mean I don't have to install Firefox now? :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:53, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
You are only postponing the inevitable, Sandy... Waltham, The Duke of 23:52, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Did I dream of a conversation recently where a script was revealed or developed that colors all ref text, or text between <ref></ref> tags? If someone knows about this script, can you direct me to it? If I dreamt it, can someone develop it? --Moni3 (talk) 18:31, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Someone did mention something like that, but also, see my monobook for a script that allows you to edit only refs while in edit mode on an article. I use that when I'm only cleaning up citations, not editing text, which means I can't use it to verify text, because it only shows what's between ref tags. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:34, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Yeh, I looked at your monobook while you weren't looking ... and copied some of the scripts into mine, but it's not doing what I think it should be doing. I'm trying to copy edit an article that uses cite templates, and they only make everything difficult to read in edit mode. --Moni3 (talk) 18:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
OK, then you're looking for something else that was mentioned in some of the SlimVirgin conversations, either on WT:FAC, or in those that got moved to WT:WIAFA. Hopefully, a TPS will know. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
That's WikEd that color-codes. I couldn't edit without it. Awadewit (talk) 19:10, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Awesome, Awadewit. Gah! I have to get used to all this colored text now. Thanks! --Moni3 (talk) 19:16, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
YM, I will get to this, promise, but perhaps not til Monday or so. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:02, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
I am under the impression that many of this page's TPSs are interested in this template, so perhaps a notification here about this is not a bad idea. The lack of comments is rather disheartening. Waltham, The Duke of 08:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Duke (where have you been all my life?) ... I'll read through that as soon as I have time. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:03, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi Sandy, I'm Hunter Kahn. I had a question about the rule that an editor can only have one FAC out at a time. Currently, I have an FAC out and under review. There is another article that I have worked on with another nominator in the past, and when it is listed, we would both be co-nominators. If two people are listed as nominators, could we list that article on FAC, despite my having one out already? Or would that FAC with two co-nominators count as the one FAC allowed for both of us? Thanks! — HunterKahn 16:18, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
I must admit that I haven't had time to see where that discussion at WT:FAC ended; perhaps others can weigh in? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:02, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
OK, I'll bring it over there. Thanks! — HunterKahn 17:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! (No need to ping me when I'm reading FAC, I watchlist them as I make notes:) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:12, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
In that case, I'm sorry for the unnecessary ping (doing another now to make up for it). Thanks for the attention to detail there, even if I disagreed with your suggestions, and for promoting it. Ucucha 23:47, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Sandy,
Hello you deleted my edit on aspergers. Can you at least send it back to me so I don't have to rewrite it and I will look at the the guidelines and tailor my article to those, conversely I will submit it to you prior to posting. I am a writer I do not want to waste time writing when it wont be posted.
Sincerely,
Dawn —Preceding unsigned comment added by HFAgirl (talk • contribs) 00:53, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
I'll respond on your talk page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:54, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
've moved the material you wrote for discussion to Talk:Asperger syndrome#Removed edits; if you click there, you can discuss your edits. First, it might be helpful to read WP:TALK about how to participate in talk page discussions. Add your comments below the text already there, indenting them by adding a colon first, and please be sure to sign your entries by adding four tildes (Dawn 01:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)) at the end of your post. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:03, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Sandy,
Gosh it is nice to have someone to guide me. I have Aspergers obviously:), however a lot of times I have difficulty following or reading through directions like four tildes? This is ironic given that I have no problem reading a dissertation in the field of neurobiology lol. So if you can give me some of your patients, I would be so grateful, can I add to the page on Aspergers Syndrome under my own section? I had much difficulty with comprehension of the rules. I am a very extreme left brain thinker and things have to be explained to be like this;
1.
2.
3.
It is rather irritating to most however I am very intelligent and well educated in the area of Aspergers. I felt there needed to be a section with some explanation, I can remove that I have aspergers however I genuinely feel that would take away from what I have to say I can polish up post with more science and as you saw my footnote. I hope you can help me.
Sincerely,
DawnDawn 01:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Is that write with the signs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by HFAgirl (talk • contribs) 01:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello SandyGeorgia, I'm just dropping by to ask why Tillson Harrison was archived from WP:FAC. All issues raised had been resolved except one, and I had not had time to react to it before the nomination was archived. Thanks, ArcticNight 04:13, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
I've been watching your slow but certain battles against partisan editors (probably on a certain government payroll) and take my hat off. I am new, and learning, but will not let them bully me or use rules they later don't apply when they create propaganda for the government in question. Eva is an interesting case study of how an article like this will develop. Two editors in particular will, no doubt, come to her defense and make any edit that approaches the truth a slow but impossible battle.MarturetCR (talk) 05:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Si ella es "la novia de Venezuela" quien soy yo? Chopped liver, I guess:) I did only the minimum to bring it beyond deletion, but it needs work. And when you add unsourced words like "propaganda" to an article, they will be deleted (Wiki is based on verifiability, not truth). If you want your edits to stick, read and learn policy, edit neutrally and impeccably, with content reliably sourced. Also, I don't want my talk page to become Chavez Central, nor do I want negative statements about other editors lodged on my talk page; much work is needed, and it can best be done by using Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Venezuela. Venezuelans need to learn policy here, and start doing their own work; I can't do it all, and the only reason every Venezuelan article on Wiki is POV is because Venezuelans are gozando de la vida buena, mientras yo trabajo a solas. Oh, and even though no Wiki articles discuss the truth about political persecution in Venezuela, if that's your real name, I suggest you seriously exercise WP:RTV and come up with a new username:) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:59, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
I read Voui's battle to have an article about human rights violations in Venezuela seem like the one on Mexico, Brazil, Colombia--you know: with *actual* information as opposed to how great the laws are. You may well understand that speaking out and up can lead to dire consequences. I don't think I will use RTV yet. I have distant cousins but the rest of us are far enough away that the government there couldn't touch us unless the country I am in changes dramatically. :-) CRMMarturetCR (talk) 13:36, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
OK, well, as long as you're clear on the risks you're taking here. Chavez does have a good finger on the internet, and I happen to like some of your relatives:) And I certainly hope you're not editing from CANTV or a Venezuelan IP, as those are not secure. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:48, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't know how to do references properly yet. thanks for cleaning all of that up for me. I have been reading for hours and trying to follow all the wiki rules on verifiability, sources, and so on. it has been very educational. but I fail to make the entries organized. so, star for you! :-) MarturetCR (talk) 13:32, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
I edit in very small pieces, doing things intentionally one step at a time, so that you can learn from my edits (my detractors, who haven't read WP:EDITCOUNTITIS, often use that information incorrectly:). For example, footnotes go after punctuation (except for dashes). If you step back through my edits, you may learn some editing technique; the faster you can learn policy and guidelines, the more effective you'll be. The citations all need to be cleaned up and formatted, but I didn't spend time on that because I haven't examined the sources yet. When I do that, you will be able to follow my edits to learn how to format sources. Marturet, you really should avoid disparaging Rd232 (the Golinger article has taken what little editing time I have today, so I haven't responded to him yet, but Rd232 and I are *both* trying to reset a collegial relationship, so you might consider altering the section heading and your post on the talk page); that won't advance your goals:) Your article talk page sections should be studiously neutral, focused on content, not disparaging other editors. Not all editors are on the Chavez payroll; many editors may have never been to Venezuela, have little contact with the poor or middle classes other than those touted by the propaganda machine, or don't know how the poor and middle classes have suffered under Chavez or how the wealthy have gotten so much wealthier while a whole new class of corrupt Boliburguesía was created while resources are drained from the poor. Some people are simply ideologically oriented towards Chavez's stated goals, and unable to recognize that those goals have not been realized. And seriously, I don't want to see your relatives thrown in jail for jaywalking on Paseo Las Mercedes; have you considered changing your username as I suggested above? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:10, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
English sounds just fine when spoken with a gaelac brogue, thank you very much
Yomangani should be blocked for sloth, is my openion
Growin' old is fine for me so far, except for that one grey hair on my eyebrow
Your talk page is so busy you need a delegate
I will stay awake until 2am tonight for an email reply, after that I will be most upset, and will sit in the dark weeping and eating brandy flavoured ice-cream. Ceoilsláinte 17:21, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
2. OK, you win; didn't see the movie, don't plan to, don't like Richard Gere, Jennifer Lopez, or Susan Sarandon, but at least men know how to apologize in Hollywood:) I'll e-mail my return song. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:09, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
7. You call me a girl, you won't get your song before 2 am. Only my girls can call me a girl. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:07, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
2. I can imagine Helen Mirren non pulssed by Richard Gere's wavey hair and cheesy, €1M simle. Jennifer Lopez is equally unatractive.
7. Oh, I have a bunch of other euphemisms. Ceoilsláinte 01:15, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
2. I failed to send you a link about Helen Mirren being "the thinking man's sex symbol".
7. Obviously, you're a thinking man.
8. If no one joins my Yo-man the Sloth image caption contest, I'm going to pick up my toys and stomp home. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:24, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
8. Nobody loves a stomper.
2. Helen Mirren = sex symbol. I had that one down already- Prime suspect 4? gosh, even my cooking and knitting teacher, Mr Dunne, figured that out. Ceoilsláinte 01:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
8. Oh, well; I'm already home, and I've got no toys, so I can't stomp home with them.
2. No he didn't. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:43, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
2. The former Mrs Dunne would hold the same view as you to this day. But IMO it was a once off moment of clarity; after which it was all about Richard Gere, big hair, and more Richard Gere. I lost touch around 95. Ceoilsláinte 02:18, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
2a. Richard Gere is not the "thinking woman's sex symbol". If you like Jennifer Lopez, I can introduce you to my girls. If you like Susan Sarandon, God help ye. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:22, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
2b: Ah, I'm fine any happy as I am without Sarandon and that Lopez chick, thanks all the same. Really nice of you to offer - Gosh! - but pass. I'm sure I will not have this choice IRL, but in an abstract internety way - no way. Ceoilsláinte 02:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
2c. How unfortunate that Facebook is for girls. Would Shankbone switch sides for my girls? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:36, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
2dd. Funny you should ask. I am a scientist, and I categorically state, on my reputation and on the reputation of my son's son, and based on my scientific know-how and certified whatnot - yes, actually us men folk, certainly, would. Ceoilsláinte 02:48, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
You're not tricking me with that DD business. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:58, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Section 8, subsection m, paragraph 152, line 1,549: If you stomp home, make sure your toys have fresh batteries. Otherwise, going home would be useless. --Moni3 (talk) 20:29, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Image caption contest for the adorably rugged one
Once he tires of gazing at his reflection and budding grapes, perhaps Yoman will again tend to his scattered flock. Ceoilsláinte 01:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Don't I look hot in my Don Juan mask with these long pale fingernails? My apologies for my absence, but I won't be able to write rigorous Riggrfied ridiculous articles until I've finished chomping leaves and visited the hair salon for a touch-up of my greys. Yours, Yo-man. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:11, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Aw, I just love this tree! --MalleusFatuorum 02:16, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm wondering if there might be an issue with the Gray Mouse Lemur FAC. The reason I ask is that I've noticed and read about the increase in archiving lately due to a decrease in the number of reviewers. I have four supports so far, and all issues have been addressed. I don't mean to sound impatient. I just don't want it to get held up (or worse... archived) over an issue I'm not aware of and might be able to help resolve. And by the way... what amount of support is required to pass? In the past, Ring-tailed Lemur passed with four supports and Ruffed lemur passed with two. –VisionHolder « talk » 20:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
LOL! Almost the same instant I ask, the article gets promoted. That's almost classic. –VisionHolder « talk » 20:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Ruffed Lemur has three. You had me worried; I was afraid Wehwalt was gonna come after us:) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Oops! I miscounted. Anyway, I'll tuck my lemur tail between my legs for now and go hide in a tree. I've probably caused enough trouble today. ...But not until after I submit a small, but very thorough article for FA (under the banner of WP:VSFA). Don't worry... it's more than 800 words long and may help reduce the backlog by preventing me from submitting anything larger for a little while. –VisionHolder « talk » 20:58, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.