User talk:Brian/Archive 7
admin code of conductEdit
Protection of WN:ALERTEdit
Hi Brian... is protection of this page really necessary? Things don't seem to be too heated, and anyway, I'm not sure that such protection is permitted under Wikinews:Protection policy... it's not an edit-war, it's just an argument. - Borofkin 01:47, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- It is unprotected...and was only protected for a minute. I think a cool off period was needed for a minute...No harm IMO. Jason Safoutin 01:49, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps you might shorten international's as well? Neutralizer 03:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Brian, I don't think it is a good idea to clear WN:ALERT when there are a number of open questions. In particular, I am still waiting for two administrators to give reasons for their blocks. As you are one of them, I am quite bewildered that you chose to erase the question instead of answering it. --vonbergm 21:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- Ooops, got the wrong Brian (in regard to my question). Still don't think that clearing the alerts was a good idea. --vonbergm 22:01, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
No big deal for me but I just felt bad for Intl.
- Brian,I am VERY glad you kept your admin. status. Thank you for that. Neutralizer 23:41, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
What's up eith the journowiki stuff?Edit
Hi, Maybe you can tell me what's with http://journowiki.org/index.php/Special:Listusers ?
Why are you there? Neutralizer 22:07, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi Brian - hope this comes out ok - new to this stuff :) I'm a Hurricanes supporter myself so glad with todays result - will be good for two NZ teams to battle it out and hopefully Hurricanes will come out on top! :)
Hi, Yes I am a Super 14 fan. I won't sign up for an account because I doubt I will make much other edits. By the way, I am a wikipedia : Hamedog. I created the 2006 Super 14 article there :). 18.104.22.168 12:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- BTW, I have a user account now - Hamedog 07:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Is it really necessary to do this 1 sec blocks and similar? I can only interpret your actions as you are a suporter of mrm whatever he do. Nobody is unaware of it now so you can stop it. international 04:13, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
This is a message to inform you that I have added every administrator to the Rfda section on WN:A. This is not personal and I feel as if the community, who did not have the option of voting for or against most of the administrators, should be able to choose who they want to be in charge. I also want to say that I value everyones work on this site and I know that everyone does their best. I hope that none of you will take this personally and I hope that all of us will continue to work together. Jason Safoutin 12:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
The Lord's nameEdit
Ah... we have admins blocking, users disputing it, RfdAs en-masse, people shouting "disruption" and "voter fraud," an Arbitration Committee, constant bias disputes, and you're worried about the vanity use of the Lord's name. No worries, I don't want to offend
you people so I changed it. —THIS IS MESSED OCKER (TALK) 04:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
- Brian, I think that you are right on this. Thanks for caring about other users. FellowWikiNews 15:07, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
I have opened a dispute resolution between us regarding your recent block of me. You can find it via the dispute resolution page, or directly at Wikinews:Dispute resolution/Brian New Zealand and Amgine. - Amgine | talk en.WN 05:53, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
against your 30min block of me is not so damn hard as I didnt know about it before it was ended. I am just frustrated that you didnt take my complain of mrm:s acting seriously. And It would have been much better if you just didnt do these blocks as it was demonstrative and somewhat childich. I hope, or more or less make my support vote whith the demand, that you take Eloquence advice and be carefull with blocks in future. If it was an rfda I guess I would vote abstain or dont vote at all. But as you ask for a reconfirmation I see it as an act of good administrators etics and a sign that you are taking critic under consideration. I think that make you a good administrator together whith the effort and time you spend here. international 17:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
hi, do we or can we have a category(or list) of vandal warnings and such template messages? it would make it easier for people to know which one to use when. (currently, i usually try various combinations of "vandal", "warn", "warning" in a template till i get something useful). or is there already help available on this that i've missed. Doldrums 06:03, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- it doesn't list the vandal warning templates - template:stop, template:vandal warning. Doldrums 06:57, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for changing it. FellowWikiNews 12:12, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
New Zealand Print EditionEdit
According to the Wikinews New Zealand Portal a print edition will be available soon. However this has been on the page for quite some time. What is happening in regards to this? I could help with creating a weekly digest?
Trust in WikipediaEdit
this is Cathy from Hong Kong working on a research about trust on Wikipedia. I wonder if you would kindly contact me at email@example.com? I'd like to chat with you about Wikipedia of your language. Would you kindly drop me your email or IM (Skype, MSN, AIM or ICQ)? It wouldn't take more than ten minutes, but it would help enormously for us to understand the overall trust-based social landscape of Wikipedia. Thank you!
Im little curious how you find the title "Israel attack Red Cross ambulances on rescue mission" utterly POV. It might be little pov but in light of Jacques Divol:s provided link  it is clear that Israel have its own interpretation of IRCR:s status. international 12:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Brian calling BrianEdit
I'm curious, I don't think it would take much to lay out your position on the Israel-Lebanon category, but I find that this has gone far smoother than I expected when I introduced the cat. I look at the contributions to the articles on the unfolding events and see both sides using the infobox. That infobox relies on the category, and whilst I can see that when things get towards the end of the current conflict there may be controversy over what goes in the cat, it isn't there now. People stick it on their stories to make it part of the wider commentary that the category provides. However I can see if someone decided to put a piece on the category page you could have a bit of wikiwar, but introducing another potential point of conflict does not seem to me justification for deleting the category. --Brian McNeil / talk 18:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
On the New Zealand portal it updates the timecode next to the article link everytime there is an update concerning page name or creating of discussion page. Is there an easy way to fix that so it doesn't happen? nzgabriel 05:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
NZ Portal "Redesign"Edit
Thanks for the Barnstar - I haven't quite finished with the changes so you might see a few more changes popping up here and there in the near future...! --R2b2 20:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough, I will respect your decision regarding country links - but I *hate* Oceania - no-one who lives here has even heard of it. - Borofkin 23:46, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Change images on protected articlesEdit
Hi, Brian New Zealand. I'd like to as a favour of you. Since the PNG version of the Australian Flag has been nominated for deletion, can you change the links on the Wikinews pages listed at  to the SVG version? The filename is exactly the same, with the .png replaced with a .svg. Thanks! 22.214.171.124 06:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
So this is where you're active!Edit
Don't forget to insert a few links to one of your other babies: http://newzealand.wikia.com/index.php?title=Special:Recentchanges&days=30&limit=300
Kia ora! --Robin Patterson 06:39, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Is Wellington airport article an original report?Edit
Nzgabriel has written some comments on the talk page of Wellington airport article. Have you discussed with him is that an original report? Could you detail it how is this an original one? Regards, Shyam (T/C) 06:50, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Re: Commas and NumbersEdit
Thanks for the clarification. I saw the comma and thought that it was not added for some reason. Should the comma not be removed since Wikinews is international? FellowWikiNews (W) 02:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
at least the condom wasn't a topping on the 'lust' pizza ;) Edbrown05 06:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
sorry, didn't see ur irc message (was busy with some other fireworks). took a shot at moving the news before the background in the article, see if it's any better for it. happy plotting! — Doldrums(talk) 10:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the trophy!Edit
I really appreciate it! -- Zanimum 21:14, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
mate... --elliot_k 15:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
|Merry Christmas, Brian/Archive 7! I have really enjoyed working with you this year, and I am honestly looking forward to another year just like it. Wikinews is a great community, and I am really excited to be a part of it. Again, Merry Christmas! Thunderhead|
|FellowWikiNews is whishing thou a Merry |
realised they had
and therefore DEMANDS you have yourself a Merry Christmas... NOW!
Failure to comply will result in going to jail with Santa. (Note: Santa is Satan spelt backwards)!
Christmas Story (Children Friendly):
Often depicted as an obese man wearing a tasteless red, ermine trimmed suit, Santa Claus is a self-employed Caucasian male who's been married to the same woman for several centuries. It appears likely that he is a churchgoer, insofar as he is a Catholic saint and a former bishop. It has to be assumed here that Claus was released from his vows, or else he would not have been married.
Frequent arguments have erupted over the political affiliation of Claus. Ten years ago, Dick Cheney inadvertently dealt a savage blow to the morale of the Republican Party when he misidentified the political affiliation of Santa Claus in his best-selling book, Parliament of Whores. "Santa Claus," he said, "is a Democrat." However it is perfectly obvious from his demographic profile alone that Santa is in fact a Republican.
This assessment is often rebutted by Democrats with Anne-McCaffery counter-analysis: Santa Claus has no children. High-achieving professionals without children trend Democratic. While the Clausian canon does not specifically address the issue of Santa's children, numerous extra-canonical sources suggest that Claus did, in fact, reproduce. Numerous Christmas TV movie specials alone support this point.
Santa is renowned for an aggressive adherence to a binary naughty/nice list, which suggests an impatience for nuanced moral positions that betrays his Republican preferences. Santa's mere willingness to define individuals along a naughty/nice axis demonstrates his indifference to the philosophical stance of, say, The New York Times. And note that no canonical or extra-canonical Clausian text indicates that Santa ever attended college or, God forbid, graduate school.
FellowWikiNews approves of this story.