User talk:Xixtas/Archive

Leave me a comment.

OK - I will!

Clever!
If you put something on your talk page, no RC patroller can see you haven't been "welcomed". So I really hope you don't mind someone who has been around here far less time that you saying "Welcome". However the real reason for this was to say what a great lot of work you've done on Wikijunior - I get to see it on RC. Each time I look at pages there I think more Wikibookians could benefit from looking at how good pages should be. A pet of mine is getting alpha cat'ing right so I have done some work on Wikijunior pages in that respect and intend to do more when I get time - if I can help let me know. The proposed logo looks very good too - I've comment on the page about that. Regards -- Herby talk thyme 13:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Alpha Cat's on Wikijunior
Hi - just run thro a few more pages. It really is quite good for the boring search and replace type stuff so let me know if I can help at all. Equally if I do make mistakes please point them out - that way I learn - thanks and regards -- Herby talk thyme 19:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
I just wanted to say thanks for your support. It did mean quite a bit to me to have one or two people other than admins support me. If I can be of any assistance to you I will be happy to try and help (& I assure you I will do all I can to preserve the quality of the Wikijunior pages!). Regards -- Herby talk thyme 18:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Unstructured Wikijunior stubs
Further to my comment on the Medicine4kids page, I'd like to mention that you don't need to link to all Wikijunior pages from Wikijunior and Co. making them virtually invisible except when browsing. You could then clearly tag and categorize the Wikijunior stubs that don't have the right structure, or scope, or whatever.

Finally, I'd just like to make clear that I'm not rooting strongly for the page up for deletion. I have, however, recently seen users (unknowingly, I'm sure) disregarding policy. I've tried to put some effort into the policies and guidelines and think we need to start obeying these soon. I would be delighted to help you out setting something up for Wikijunior and make sure it fits well with current policy. --Swift 06:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Please
I'd prefer it if you were to stick around some. -- Herby talk thyme 16:01, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * PS if you want to email me anytime you are welcome - regards -- Herby talk thyme 07:59, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

VfD
I saw your comment on the Medicine4kids VfD discussion. I'm sorry that you feel so dejected by it, you are a valuable member in many of the VfD discussions, and it would be bad for the project to lose you in that.

For what it is worth, I agree that this page should be deleted, and I have cast my vote accordingly. User:Swift's objections not withstanding, the general community seems to agree that this page needs to be deleted.

I hope you feel better about this, I know sometimes we all just need to take a break and blow off some steam. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 17:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment below copied from Votes for deletion --Swift 20:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

"Comment I'll not be spending any of my time working on this book. I do not currently have the energy or enthusiasm to write and shepherd any kind of Wikijunior policy. I will stay out of VfD's in the future. --xixtas 15:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)"


 * Dear Xixtas, I perfectly understand that you have limited time and energy to spend on volunteer based projects such as Wikibooks. The comment above does show a little bit of frustration (also sensed by Whiteknight). I hope don't take discussions personally and don't tire too much from constructive critisism. The VfD is, in my opinion, a place to unearth all arguments and deceide based on community consensus within the project policies and guidelines.
 * If you choose that your time would be better spent than on VfDs, I wish you all the best, but would hate to thing that the atmosphere there was what put you off. Regards, --Swift 20:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you all for your concern. I just want to use my time where I can be most productive and do the most good for Wikijunior. It seems that that is probably in the realm of developing actual books rather than in backend discussions about policies that I really don't understand the nuances of. --xixtas 17:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Believe me - getting folk to dance on the head of a pin is not my idea of fun either. However loosing someone of your quality and experience would sadden me (yes you are on my watchlist!!).  Hope to keep seeing you around and to be able to help - regards -- Herby  talk thyme 17:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Good to hear you are sticking around and directing your efforts to the work you enjoy the most &mdash; certainly a good method to not wear yourself out. I hope you will keep at least an eye on the policy work that takes place. A special consideration with respect to Wikibooks is certainly an idea to keep in mind, but might not be something that will come up among the WB:PAG discussion regulars. Your experience and knowledge of the nuances of the Wikijunior project would be invaluable. If you ever see anything in policy that you think should be mended, I would greatly appreciate it if you would consider making a mention of it on the policy talk page (or mine, if you'd prefer) for later reference.
 * I got the impression from your VfD comment and your user page edit that you felt the community less than pleasing, and as I mentioned in my previous comment I'd hate that to be the case. Now, I may very well have completely misunderstood things (and I apologise if I have) but just in case, I'd like to urge you to feel free to take such issues to those you feel are misbehaving and give them a gentle nudge. Most people (including me) would be grateful for constructive critisism and happy to discuss how to improve the community interaction. --Swift 02:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: VfD
I want to note that I am not trying to suggest that any content be deleted that is being worked on and has a realistic chance of getting somewhere in terms of eventually becoming a book. All I was trying to point out was that books that are eternal stubs of one paragraph (roughly) and don't seem to show continued support in the future might be eventual candidates for deletion.

Still, the length of time that inactivity should be demonstrated on mere stubs ought to be very considerable, as six months or even a couple of years ought to go by first instead before content is deleted for this reason. Certainly not a matter of mere weeks.

This is not a commentary on the value of such a Wikibook project, as I think it is an entirely reasonable project that is worth spending time on, and something that the Wikibooks community ought to support in general. I do think that writing a "kids book" on medicine is something that can have practical value and is a subject that ought to be taught to children. --Rob Horning 19:22, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

me too
Is always welcome - sincerely thanks. 25 votes could take a bit of getting to - one of those rather strange rules. Regards -- Herby talk thyme 13:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikibooks Newsletter, Volume 1
(Wikibooks gazette home | Discuss | Bulletin board | Subscription list)

This is a short newsletter that is being distributed to all active wikibookians. You are getting this message because you are recognized as an established contributor to the project. This newsletter will be distributed on a regular basis to help share news, information, and tips. It comes from a bot account, User:The Staff. User:The Staff is currently operated by a team of wikibooks admins, the complete list of which is available on the user page of the bot. If you would like to not receive this newletter anymore, please remove your name from the list at Active wikibookians.

The work you do at Wikibooks is greatly appreciated. However there are plenty of other opportunities for you to get involved and help us to create a thriving Wikibooks community. We are sure that there are things we can do to help you and your understanding of Wikibooks and similarly there are certainly things you could do to help Wikibooks become a better place.

We would like to ask all wikibookians to add the Bulletin Board to your watchlists. The Bulletin Board is a fast and easy way for wikibookians to communicate important news and events to the entire community. If you have important news to share with the community, you can feel free to add your own entry to that page.

If you have general questions or comments about Wikibooks, you are welcome to post a message on The Staff Lounge, a free discussion area. Your input would also be welcomed in the Votes for Deletion and Requests for Adminship discussion pages. These pages are all active discussion areas that help to shape the Wikibooks community as a whole.

Sometimes it is easy to forget that the Wikibooks community is much larger and more diverse then the people who work in a single book, or on a single bookshelf. Hopefully, together we can all make Wikibooks a better place, and a more valuable educational resource.

The Staff 04:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Your user page
Take a look! All the best -- Herby talk thyme 13:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

dmoz etc
Thanks - very interesting info. Looking forward to the new contributions - I confess I hadn't particular spotted a drop in editing just that I think your considerable work goes unrecognised. I was a user of dmoz long before I found wikipedia. Under a previous name on wp I was a bit of a spam fighter. A favourite approach was "lets remove the current links and put in a relevant dmoz one" - the more they objected the more you knew they were spammers! There are a couple of pages here I am itching to deal with but I'm trying to be less grumpy . Should you ever get the urge I would be very happy to nominate you as an admin BTW, Wikijunior could use a regular admin (I know Rob is around as well) - I could bore you with the pros and cons but you know where I am. Regards -- Herby talk thyme 12:48, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Some wiki articles are dire. My favourite bad one here Blender 3D/Tutorial Links List.  I have no idea what use this is, I'm sure many of the links are likely to be dead and where would you start - I'll do it one day.
 * "privileges" (tho I would see them as mere tools - no idea what the fuss is about, some should be with competent editors anyway, anything is reversible). Deletion is the obvious one if only unwanted redirects and stuff.  I guess the odd newbie test as well maybe. If you get the urge ...!!
 * BTW Dylan works well for me too (Neil Young??) best -- Herby talk thyme 13:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Wishes!
Good ones for you and those you care about for 2007 - regards -- Herby talk thyme 17:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Naming stuff
Hi - Wikijunior What can you use maths for? - cos you are the expert!! Should this one be called "Wikijunior:What can you use maths for?" etc? I saw a new page the other day and queried it (got no response) and just noticed the whole book is so named. Thanks and regards -- Herby talk thyme 13:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ho hum - I really cannot explain this - fried brain - one of those days. I'd love a valid excuse - I haven't got one.  Thanks for the patient reply and I think a quasi WJ namespace makes sense.  Best wishes -- Herby  talk thyme 10:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration
One thing I want to mention privately to you is that I don't think you necessarily have to be an administrator in order to get involved with arbitration "cases". Frankly at this point, I think Panic is fighting an uphill battle and he knows it. This is not to say that SB Johnny necessarily was correct to have blocked Panic, even though he thinks he was completely in the best position to make that assumption. Unfortunately, I think it turned him into a belligerant party instead of being a mediator.

One thing I can use is some help doing a little legwork. This is apparently an issue that has gone over several months and has driven away a few people who may have made a bit of a positive difference to Wikibooks. While Johnny was inclined to do a user block, he didn't feel that he needed to revert the changes afterward done by Panic. That seems a bit curious to me and is something that I'm trying to get some background information about this whole mess.

If you can find some edits or very heated words that seem to be very much out of order in the C++ Programming Wikibooks, it would be appreciated. Things like the page move logs don't seem to give me enough information to base any significant decisions that Panic is really causing any substantial problems.

If/when we decide to create an arbitration committee, I don't believe your status as an administrator should have any bearing on wheither you are able to be a part of that committee or not. --Rob Horning 00:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Bot time
No problem at all. It will be tomorrow as I "keep" the bot at home - work might suffer otherwise (!) and equally (being of a suspicious nature) the less places I have software installed that I don't want the better (it uses .NET). Let me know if there is any other WJ cleanup/category work you want done - I'll probably run it for typos generally). Regards -- Herby  talk thyme
 * Did some cleaning but in the absence of instruction/prepared category didn't place categories on Bugs pages. If you wet one up and let me know I'll do it in one hit with pleasure - thanks and regards -- Herby  talk thyme 16:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikibooks talk:Arbitration/Panic2k4 vs. SBJohnny
Edits here - all valid & worthwhile comments in my opinion, thanks -- Herby talk thyme 18:03, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Animal Alphabet
I would like to applaud you for producing brilliant illustrations used in Animal Alphabet. Though I have one inquiry. Animal Alphabet was initially intended to be read by parents to their toddlers and Wikijunior states it makes books for the ages 8 - 11. I would like a consensus on where Animal Alphabet should be kept, either on Wikijunior (If the age range is changed) or Wikitoddler. Regards --Herraotic 22:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The fact that it hasn't moved from Wikijunior to Wikitoddler could be considered approriate consensus. User:Iamunknown 22:15, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Isn’t it correct that books with a similar intention be merged? In this case, two projects with different objectives are producing a similar book. This is why I’m proposing to Xixtas that one book be merged into another where it would be suitably kept. --Herraotic 22:23, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Some think that books containing similar content should automatically be merged. Others don't. I subscribe to the latter view. And that doesn't mean that I think that two similar books should never be merged, but I don't think that it should be assumed that because they have similar content they should be merged. (BTW Xixtas, sorry for starting a convo on your talk page that does not yet even involve you. I noticed the topic on recent changes and wanted to pop in. I know that some people get peeved when this sort of convo happens, and I don't intend to annoy you.) User:Iamunknown 22:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I have no problem with conversation here, but thank you for being so considerate. --xixtas 01:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I've kind of started to feel (after reading everything that I could about wikijunior here and on meta and in mailing list discussions etc.) that wikijunior doesn't even really exist as a project separate from wikibooks. It's really whatever _we_ (meaning the larger wikibooks community) want to make it at this point because no-one outside of wikibooks seems to give a hoot about it. Whatever it was originally supposed to be seems to have fallen by the wayside. I think if we want to put up books for toddlers or older kids and there are people here who want to write them, we can do that in wikijunior. There's no reason to put together a whole new namespace or pseudo-namespace for them.


 * I didn't know what wikitoddler was or that there was another animal alphabet book proposed when I started working on this one (more than a month ago) or when I started putting it up a week ago. I still don't know what wikitoddler is really. I guess I would have expected such a project to be at least mentioned on the talk page at wikijunior. All that said, I'm amenable to whatever the community wants to do with it. I'm not sure that merging the two books is a great idea, but I will let others decide as I'm too close to the situation. I built the book for my niece as a birthday gift and now I'm donating it to wikibooks.


 * BTW, where was the wikitoddler namespace discussed? I must have missed it. --xixtas 01:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I weren't aware of Wikijunior's current state and apologise for not contacting you as I irresponsibly only discussed Wikitoddler on IRC. Wikitoddler essentially originated from my presumption that Wikijunior's age scope could not be expanded and my unease with discussing the issue at Wikimedia Meta. As I see you to be a prominent editor at Wikijunior, I would like to discuss if the target age could be broadened. --Herraotic 18:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I have commented twice at the Animal Alphabet discussion. --Herraotic 21:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Bot run
OK - did one today -hopefully got it right. Do you want the "Category:Wikijunior The Natural World" on other pages as well as Bugs - let me know. -- Herby talk thyme 15:40, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Given my earlier dealings with you I thought I might have had a response to some queries I have placed on your page about bot use on Wikijunior. I do hope that I have not annoyed or offended you in any way - it is not in my nature to be at odds with others and I prefer people to be open with me. -- Herby  talk thyme 12:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Help requests
It exists - WB:AN But read everything thro properly now! Yes the request for help page (well signposted for folk) is a good idea including bot requests - I'll talk to Whiteknight about it, AFAIK we are the only legit active bots. Thanks for the thought -- Herby talk thyme 12:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Community
I'd love to hear your complaints about community decisions here over at my talk page. Unfortunately any objections you had to what the arbitration proceedings were becoming came a bit too late and I wish you voiced them before action was taken. As User:Darklama stated, admins are certainly not the entire community here, we just happen to be quite active and thus play large roles in decisions. That's not how it has to be though! I simply want to keep your faith in the administrative staff here, especially since you are not a sysop yet are a definite member of the Wikibooks community. So far you are the first user (besides the obviously involved parties) to express disapproval of the arbitration ending. I too had no part in it until the end and would like to hear a little about what others think of the process. Of course the action will not be undone but it's great to learn from this and avoid the need for such strong action in the future. Thanks. -within focus 00:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I certainly agree that the ending delivered was the inevitable. A quick response to your points:


 * 1) I personally had nothing to do with IRC and gathered all evidence over several weeks of the process beginning, continuing, and stagnating. I've used IRC twice in my entire time here, the second time being just yesterday after I made a decision and thought people might want to chat about it. Numerous user postings around the site evolved this opinion apart from two e-mails I received on the subject. All discussion to show the damage is available around the site and by how I rendered my decision. I could clearly see the discontent and sadness here.
 * 2) Uncivil behavior continued from the last block (and before of course) and throughout the attempt at arbitration. Panic rarely if ever acknowledged anything he did could even be slightly inappropriate and tried to soapbox himself around policy. He continued to attack basic facts and was essentially impossible to work with.
 * 3) Perhaps you see some of the actions of the "other side" as going unnoticed, but again I think it goes back to civility where Panic would not have stopped what he was doing without being forced through a block. Johnny tried to contain the situation to the best of his ability and it's amazing he's even continuing to edit here after all the abuse he's taken over trying to defend a book from Panic's page moves, reverts, and comments to new users.
 * 4) This was much, much more than a block appeal. This process was a full analysis of all previous actions and meant to be a final solution. Some users suggested that Panic be blocked infinitely due to his constant disrespect. I was somewhat brief with the write-up of my decision since I believed the reasons were quite well known from reading the past history of the arbitration process. Numerous rule-breaking instances occurred for several months previous to this action. I apologize if you were not as informed as I felt the community was with the previous arbitration steps. All the documentation for these blocks and the many offenses Panic committed are in the "plaintiff" remarks.
 * 5) Again, many of us did discuss this publicly and wanted an end. The arbitration process was not agreed to by the community in the first place and I saw the community eroding before me with the stagnated arbitration. I chose to act in order to hopefully keep several users from leaving here, even if it meant that one user needed to have some time off to reassess his attitude. The six-month block is meant to be a time of healing, both for the C++ book and for the users affected. This time period will also let users reflect on their past actions and better themselves for the future. Whiteknight also laid out some terms he wants all to abide by, including keeping conflict out of the C++ book and keeping Johnny and Panic separated for the rest of their work here at Wikibooks.


 * Not so short now that I've typed it, but I feel I've answered the issues appropriately enough. After this I plan on going back to business as usual here, welcoming back or trying to coerce back some of the users that have left here because of this and repair the damages all these arguments have created. -within focus 04:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Post-arbitration-decision "coaching"
Considering all the troubles that have come out of the final decision about Panic, I've decided to get involved again to see if there's a way of re-integrating him into the community. My approach will be to engage in calm dialog with him, as a "coach". You can see the beginning of this here. My intent is to get to a point where he makes it clear that he (1) understands the problem, (2) will try to avoid the problem in the future, (3) will make a commitment to not getting into trouble again, and (4) will understand that we will prevent him from causing further problems. I've made a more formal proposal of this on Matt's talk page, since he is de facto the current arbitrator, and therefore the person in charge.

I must ask you to stay out of this for now (especially during the first step), unless you feel that I'm being horribly unfair. Panic needs to focus on this first point, and having more than one person to talk to will (in my opinion) just spur him into playing us off one another. He needs to look at his own behavior in an objective way, and I'm going to do my best to help him in that task.

I should point out now that while step 4 might seem harsh and threatening, it's meant to be the opposite. If further blocks are performed, I'd like these to be "time outs", rather than punitive measures... little breaks where he is given time to rethink and explain. I know this guy a bit now, and I know he likes to see how far he can push any envelope. The point is to allow no games. I strongly suggest that his block be considered indefinite until he agrees to get along, and that he should not be threatened with an infinite block unless he really games this system.

This might be a wasted effort, but it's worth a shot. I'm asking for your support. -- SB_Johnny | talk 22:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Attacked
Could you please tell me where I mentioned that I was attacked? Perhaps a better word could have been used, but this was an addressable situation and then as soon as I performed an action people came out of nowhere. -within focus 13:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. I certainly am being attacked about supposedly being an inappropriate admin on the matter. Your dissatisfaction with the process is different from objections to the block, but if they mix together to you, then yes I feel that respect for me has been lowered and my reputation tarnished due to others' comments even when I felt there was plenty of time to discuss this issue before my actions. -within focus 14:23, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your "defense"
You have been an island of sanity in the whole discussion about Panic and what should be done.

In many ways I wish I had maintained a little more composure, but I also felt (perhaps improperly) threatend and personally attacked. I certainly was not happy with the final result of the arbitration, and felt that a more reasoned decision could have been made by somebody who didn't seem to have as much of an axe to grind.

What is awsome here is that we seem to have a fairly good diversity of administrators on Wikibooks, where the actions of one or even a group of them can be undone if somebody goes too far, as was done here. To me, this is an incredible milestone, and something that perhaps in another context would really be a cause for celebration. The Wiki concept really does work! I need to put more faith in that larger Wikibooks community than I have so far.

Wikibooks indeed has matured and turned into a very healthy project. There will be ups and downs over the next several months and years, and this whole episode will eventually (probably later than sooner) be forgotten and be left as a historical footnote. There are some exciting things that are happening here on Wikibooks, and I want to be a part of them. I also want to get back to what I came here for: To write some really cool textbooks that can transfer some of the knowledge I have and be useful to many other people. --Rob Horning 23:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

A Sea Change
archived from User Talk:Panic2k4 I have some questions for you. "Full fathom five thy father lies: Of his bones are coral made: Those are pearls that were his eyes: Nothing of him that doth fade But doth suffer a sea-change Into something rich and strange." -- William Shakespeare A man drowned in violent tempest has become beautiful in death. I wonder whether the sea has changed you.

"We cannot become what we need to be by remaining what we are." -- Max Dupree I believe it is necessary to find change within ourselves to accomplish great things.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." -- Attributed to Albert Einstein'' Past results in this situation have not been very good. I think that everyone wants different results in the future. Only you have the power to change the outcome here. Argument and disagreement are only healthy in moderate doses. Continuous argument damages all of our goals.

"Identity would seem to be the garment with which one covers the nakedness of the self, in which case, it is best that the garment be loose, a little like the robes of the desert, through which one's nakedness can always be felt, and, sometimes, discerned. This trust in one's nakedness is all that gives one the power to change one's robes." -- James Arthur Baldwin One can be true to oneself and still change. In fact, it is the presence of a strong self that makes the change possible.

So... My question for you is, how has the sea changed you? What will you do to move the situation forward? What garments will you wear? How will you begin to achieve different results than you have in the past? -- xixtas talk 04:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Lol, very cool, You will have to give me some time to get you a proper response on a similar level of excellency. :) --Panic 04:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Forget not yet the tried intent
 * Of such a truth as I have meant
 * My great travail so gladly spent
 * Forget not yet.


 * Forget not yet when first began
 * The weary life ye knew, since whan
 * The suit, the service, none tell can,
 * Forget not yet.


 * Forget not yet the great assays,
 * The cruel wrongs, the scornful ways,
 * The painful patience in denays
 * Forget not yet.


 * Forget not yet, forget not this,
 * How long ago hath been, and is,
 * The mind that never means amiss;
 * Forget not yet.


 * Forget not yet thine own approved,
 * The which so long hath thee so loved,
 * Whose steadfast faith yet never moved,
 * Forget not this. - Forget Not Yet a poem by Thomas Wyatt


 * Washed in the blood of the brave and the blooming,
 * Snatched from the altars of insolent foes,
 * Burning with star-fires, but never consuming,
 * Flash its broad ribbons of lily and rose.


 * Vainly the prophets of Baal would rend it,
 * Vainly his worshippers pray for its fall;
 * Thousands have died for it, millions defend it,
 * Emblem of justice and mercy to all;


 * Justice that reddens the sky with her terrors,
 * Mercy that comes with her white-handed train,
 * Soothing all passions, redeeming all errors,
 * Sheathing the sabre and breaking the chain.


 * Borne on the deluge of all usurpations,
 * Drifted our Ark o'er the desolate seas,
 * Bearing the rainbow of hope to the nations,
 * Torn from the storm-cloud and flung to the breeze!


 * God bless the Flag and its loyal defenders,
 * While its broad folds o'er the battle-field wave,
 * Till the dim star-wreath rekindle its splendors,
 * Washed from its stains in the blood of the brave! - God Save the Flag a poem by Oliver Wendell Holmes


 * after that I have to put in a national say here, I'll give a direct translation also.
 * "Mais depressa se apanha um mentiroso que um coucho."
 * Quickly do we catch a liar that a lame man.
 * (the idea is of speed and the injury is on the a leg couldn't remember a more direct translation..)
 * A non-direct translation is humm, "The truth will always came out..."


 * (Hope you like this... a rush improv. to trump you :) )
 * Justice, Reason and Fairness have no bounds, they need no Hero, time is the enemy, entropy the foe, martyrdom, a failed attempt to push things while you are alive, then death fallows, time passes, entropy sets and your are forgotten. .) --Panic 05:00, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * "battles are lost in the same spirit in which they are won." - Walt Whitman


 * "To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it." - G. K. Chesterton


 * Wikis by their very structure and nature have concentrated power into the hands of the majority, and few people want to spend their time fighting about abstractions. It is tiresome.


 * I am concerned here because with each day that passes, with each demonstration that you lack the desire to modify your behavior, with each declaration of your desire to fight and defend your position, Wikibookians seem to become become more comfortable with a Panic-less Wikibooks. I think that you have not considered the end-game here.


 * "The defensive power of a pinned piece is only imaginary." - Aron Nimzowitsch


 * -- xixtas talk 14:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Some battles are won because of the spirit in which they are fought. But any battle even if fought by the right reasons is only a failing of diplomacy and common sense. All battles/wars are ultimately avoidable.


 * To exercise your rights, to fight for what is right is an obligation, if no protest is stated in every instance "errors" are committed you will of be part of the destruction of freedom and an accomplice in the abuse.


 * Wikibooks shouldn't have the power concentrated on the hands of a majority, even if the core of the decision process can be seen as a dictatorship the "dictator" gave the population a very powerful way to reach decisions, only deviation from what was given us lets power groups form and have abusive relations regarding others. (see the above essay)


 * Xistas, I don't see any behavior that I need to change, I could have been more passive but that wouldn't solve anything, I see several actions as against and abusive of the set of policies that should rule us all (not some, or at times). The rest is on the arbitration logs. --Panic 17:05, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Alright. Let me know how that works out for you. -- xixtas talk 00:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Main page
I have started a discussion about this at Staff_lounge where it suggests Nearly_complete as a main page. RobinH 13:37, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Be civil
I will be working on the policy also, I have checked all your posts about the policy and looked to what links there, I do agree with some of your views did you already produced something that I could take a look at ? There seems to be an active dispute involving that policy, I will also look into it. txs for any input on that. --NoJonny 18:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

As a side remark, and in tandem with your early posts, did you take notice on the date the policy was adopted, it should be reflected on the policy text is there any accepted way on stating that info? txs again. --NoJonny 18:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Noahw
Alternate account of yours? -within focus 06:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Please be very careful, thank you -- Herby talk thyme 08:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Response to proposal to lift Panic's block
I am concerned about two things in particular as far as lifting the block:
 * 1) Panic's stance on editorial control of the C++ book. The contributions and changes made by other contributors in that book during Panic's block must be respected. There should be no reversion of what has been done and the status quo should be recognized as "the way things are now" not "the way things were before Panic was blocked." If Panic would like to change the way the book is now, there must be a broader consensus to change it. Ideally, revisions should build on the work done before, not tear it down. Panic must recognize that all contributors should have a voice in the book and that the differentiation he makes between authors and non-authors is not recognized by Wikibooks or Wikimedia. I am concerned that Panic's first action after being unblocked would be to return the C++ book to the way it was before the second block. That would not be fair to the other contributors or good for Wikibooks.
 * 2) Panic's lack of recognition of his own uncivil behavior. Soapboxing, being disruptive to make a point, imposing deadlines, failure to assume good faith, biting newbies, wikilawyering, taunting, using sockpuppets to evade a ban, trolling, not abiding by the terms of a remediation, aggressively refactoring talk pages, and misrepresenting others' statements are all uncivil behaviors. I believe, based on the communications I have read that Panic has engaged in each of these behaviors. Further, even though other Wikibookians (including myself) have also engaged in *some of* these same uncivil behaviors, Panic engages in these uncivil behaviors far more than any other Wikibookian. The fact that he still refuses to recognize any of his own behavior as uncivil is very troubling to me.
 * -- xixtas talk 16:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * To Xistas, Xistas it should be clear to you that I don't want and never did want sole control of the book, refactoring etc (please refer to it as allegations made by SB Jhonny and Darklama) or prove it as a fact, continue to repeat false accusations as if they were facts is damaging to me...
 * More rules, policy or even basic reason has gone out of the door long and the high point was the way the arbitration ended, that is not how things should be done, we shouldn't use votes by majority just to avoid similar actions, every other action I took was not and is not against policy or even good sense, you may consider it civil disobedience but in no way anyone was directly targeted by my actions, I'm not the reason we are in this situation, I was forced into it, consider it reactions, I took great care this time to be the most correct I could be. --Panic 17:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I do not believe you have been uncivil because Darklama and SBJohnny (and many others) allege it. I believe it is so because I have observed it. Removing my post just now so that people can only read your reply but not what I wrote (without going to more trouble) was uncivil. Though there is no rule against it and you are within your rights to do so on your talk page, it was still uncivil. Should you be blocked for it? of course not. But it's one more grain of sand in the weight of your growing body of incivility. I will moved copy my original comment and the responses to my talk  page so that those who wish to read it may do so without sifting through the hall of mirrors that is the history of this page. BTW, the nick has two exes and one ess. xiXtas. -- xixtas  talk 17:51, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I then agree with you all parties are to blame on the BECIVIL part at one point or another if you take it to such a high level, I think that is why the policy is not so well defined, it does indeed facilitate its abuse, interpretations may vary like the one you stated, I would agree if that was my intention (to prevent others reading your post), but I could also allege that it was bad faith of you to expect that from me :), I then say that I have god faith in you :) that it was not what you were implying but you see the mess we can get into if we take those as policies to extremes (it is my opinion that they should be made guidelines and exact and extreme situations of personal attack should be covered by specific policy, that would be much clearer (I stated so on those policies talk pages). (Sorry for mangling your user name) --Panic 18:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Why is it that you refuse to consider that those who believe that you are wrong have all arrived at that conclusion independently based on a first-person review of the history and the facts at hand. Permit me my own little analogy. Ground beef goes on sale at the store for half price. The store sells twice as much ground beef as they did the week before. Does this mean there is a conspiracy to buy ground beef? No. It means that each consumer independently evaluated the facts at hand and made a judgment. Some bought more ground beef, others bought ground beef when they wouldn't have before, still others prefer to avoid ground beef entirely. Some would have bought the ground beef if it had appeared fresher. The sum total of these independent judgments was that the store sold a lot more ground beef. That doesn't mean there is a conspiracy to buy ground beef. -- xixtas talk 18:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok lets address the problems one by one you make the accusation provide the fact and we examine the policy that covers it, we can begin from the start, but then to be fair we will also address the other actions against me and I provide the facts and we will also examine the policy that covers it, are you game ? (we can even start by Darklamas actions and my interaction with him, since I will have to address those points later this will also be useful) --Panic 18:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Right now I need to get back on billable time or I'm not going to be able to pay my mortgage. ;-) I'll think about your proposal in the meantime. I have a pretty busy weekend coming up with a camping trip Friday, Saturday and Sunday and a recital to attend Sunday night. This may not be the best time for me to start such an exercise. The question I have for you is what is to be gained? Will you look at what I say with an open mind and... if I demonstrate that your actions have been against the spirit of wiki, counter-productive, and uncivil will you accept that you should try to alter your behavior and agree to do so going forward? -- xixtas talk 18:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * :) Ok I understand. It would indeed be an exercise on how we see things and if it's really a problem with interpretation, I have been with a open mind since the start, I acknowledged several errors I committed and am open to acknowledge more and make any change to my behavior that would enable it to be so... But the analysis shouldn't be target only on my actions and you will act on policy and to the extend or your abilities to address all issues, those are the only requirements I make, if you agree and when you have the time please post the timeframe were you want to start (from the end or the beginning, I'll be hard pressed to defend my actions in reverse order but if taken into context I think there will be no problem) --Panic 18:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

WB:RFA
I have nominated you for adminship, you may feel free to either accept or decline the nomination as you see fit. You are both helpful and trustworthy without question, and I hope that you do accept it. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 00:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Pardon me, but...
If this last post [here] was directed to any remark I made you are incorrect, I have never stated it as such. I'm having an hard time correcting what were not my own words, perception is everything today, [I'm clear enough] and I have even gone to the the trouble of making it clearer. User talk:Panic2k4/Decision making and Community consensus on Wikibooks, if you were not addressing me it would be great if you could correct the statement or made it obvious to whom you were addressing just to avoid perpetuating the idea. Txs. --Panic 01:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Sysop
Due to your full support on WB:RFA, you are now a sysop. -within focus 13:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Congrats, xixtas! If you need help figuring out how the tools work, pop in on IRC! -- SB_Johnny | talk 14:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks guys! -- xixtas talk 16:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)