• /Archive 1 < 6 November 2003
• /Archive 2 < 9 December 2003
• /Archive 3 < 21 January 2004
• /Archive 4 < 26 March 2004
• /Archive 5 < 1 July 2004

Please append new messages at the end

Living may be too strong a word for it, but back. 13:46, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi Viajero,

I was travelling and had limited Internet time when you posted your reply, so I never did give your lengthy and thoughtful message the full response it deserves, but I will now, especially as this issue is threatening to re-emerge on various articles.

I have indeed spent very little time in Latin America, though none at Cancun, but I have lived in some fairly cosmopolitan areas and have encountered the attitudes you allude to among those from that region. However, I very much question the value of the casual views of (as you put it) "cab drivers, campesinos, street vendors". It never ceases to amaze me that the same people who will mock and skewer Americans for supposedly being ignorant and for believing (as an example) the Saddam-9/11 connection will nevertheless take as gospel the "man on the street" impressions of common people in areas with high rates of illiteracy, media that is shoddy and often controlled, and heavily rural and isolated communities. Certainly, the notion that they have privileged insight into the "true" motives of US foreign policy or the secret machinations of US intelligence is absurd. Similarly, the complex and tricky details of the geo-political and world economic order are also not likely to be well understood by many (few Americans exhibit much understanding, and I assume the percentage worldwide is similarly low). Rather, I see such attitudes as rooted largely in much more base aspects of human nature: prejudice, resentment (of the well-off), scapegoating (of the powerful or of the easy target).

As for the "pundit" class, American commentators hate America; I don't expect foreign commentators to be more generous. (Yes, this is obviously a crude generalization, but you see what I'm saying.)

Now I don't doubt that those who want to validate their prejudices can find examples of American heavy-handedness to solace them, just as someone who (say) hated Chinese people could no doubt amass a book of newspaper clippings attesting Chinese misdeeds - but instances do not a pattern make. It is my own view that the US throws its weight around a hell of a lot less than it could, and less than its past counterparts with power did (although Bush has alas made this less so), but this is a cumulative impression from watching many trends and not easy to justify all at once. However, I find the notion that Latin America is "dirt poor" because of American scheming to be absurd (do you really believe this?). Again, I see prejudice and resentment and poor understanding of economics at work: people who are provided new job opportunities may notice less their own rising standard of living than the fact that the foreigners down the street they take orders from at work enjoy an even higher standard. All too human, sadly (at the risk of being totally cliched, one can compare Jews in Nazi Germany).

Of course, we are all aware of the US's high level of activity in Latin America over the past hundred years. Its portrayal as self-serving, callous, cruel, exploitative, and Machiavellian, however, is where I differ from other analysts. And yes the US may use economic pressure, because it can (but note "a hell of a lot less" above), but who doesn't? Japan plays games with its trade barriers, a few years ago Iraq cut off oil exports for a month to get at the US, and so on. In non-US cases no one questions the right of a sovereign nation to do such things. Do we not have the right to not give free money ("aid") to nations with leaders hostile to us?

Finally, your point about "the US prides itself as beacon of democracy, and as such, it doesn't look good for it to be seen toppling democratically-elected foreign governments" as reason for the lack of documentation, well, I think your own past posts contradict this reasoning. The quotes from Albright and Powell clearly show no qualms about unflinchingly expressing regret for these episodes, the same way people talk about segregation as the "bad old days". They show that at the highest level of the government there is a full willingness to state and admit past error - very American if I may say so. Nixon might cover for Kissinger, but do you seriously think Clinton would? I'm sure then documents would be buried, but I see no one with motive and ability to keep them buried now. So, I take the intelligence community at their word when they conclude the CIA "did not assist Pinochet to assume the Presidency" [1]. (The lame reply that the "CIA denies the CIA's guilt" overlooks the non-monolithic nature of such organizations.)

I hope this clarifies somewhat my position on these issues. VV[[]] 07:48, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. Also, thanks for directing me to the Che article. There are still some rough patchs. But I'll get to them, if you don't fix them before I do. 172 10:44, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I'll certainly vote delete, but the idea of the wrangling on the VFD seems like a painful ordeal. It may be worth the shot to try another strategy. I'd be very happy to start a new article on PLO-Hamas relations. With such an article in existence, we could just blank the collection of quotes at PLO and Hamas and redirect the page. 172 11:24, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

BTW, here's a pretty good NY Times in depth profile of Lula if you haven't seen it yet http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/27/magazine/27LULA.html?ex=1089518400&en=ab2fb803db615170&ei=5006&partner=ALTAVISTA1 172 11:27, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Well that's simply by virtue of the fact that the other side seemed (early on) to be underrepresented, and even excommunicated from the discussion. That may have been just a perception, but I cant honestly say that there is an overall anti-Palestinian bias on Wikipedia now, if only because it is more or less equitably offset. Of course, its not about numbers, and thats why its extremely important that you and all relevant parties choose tact and civility over reactionism. I know I dont have to remind you, but we all need to remind each other at times. -Stevertigo 19:02, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

From my talk page: Sorry for the delay. Okay, it's not really of use here to go back into the history with too much detail: Suffice it to say that you both represent poles in the spectrum, and that what you both produce will likely be prejudiced or otherwise considered by the other as biased.... contd. -Stevertigo 21:58, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

There's been a lot of upbeat news from Venezuela lately, so perhaps Hugo Chavez should be updated with the new economic data. In case you're interested, here's a Bloomberg article with a lot of useful, recent data [2] BTW, sorry for starting work on PLO and Hamas yet. The Russia articles have me quite distracted lately (and then there's [[Bretton Woods system still left for me to finished-- the work here just never ends!) 172 11:51, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Look, I dont have time for this. Do you agree with renaming it back? Yes? Fine, then this can all be done with, and I will actively support the NPOV consensus for including material within the article itself, and do so in a way that doesnt alienate Humus. Why is that important? For the sole reason that it opposes the exhausted, cabalist attitude that relies on more on reverts rather than expressing oneself convincingly to those other than the choir. Your journalistic skills are well known; but your ability to persuade is less so. Thanks. -Stevertigo 17:05, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi. I have replied to the abovementioned. Sorry for not replying earlier. Mandel 15:45, Jul 9, 2004 (UTC)

You might want to help watch 64.7.89.54, who has been inserting rightwing POV into articles, though many of his/her changes have been constructive. 172 20:35, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Greetings. I'm a new sysop, and I've been trying to resolve protection situations and long-standing feuds. (Yes, I'm naive.) On July 6 you protected Daniel Pipes due to a long-standing, low-level edit war. (This war had last manifested itself June 28.) It's been a fortnight; mind if I unprotect? Quadell (talk) 20:52, Jul 20, 2004 (UTC)

Hello again. I really need help. Dealing with Lir on New Imperialism is going to give me an ulcer. The changes are just getting worse and worse. I don't know what he wants, and I don't know how to get him to stop. 172 21:28, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I am sending the following message to multiple users I'd strongly appreciate it if fair-minded users responded to the latest string of baseless personal attacks on the mailing list ([3], [4], [5], [6]). Stan Shebs, Fred Bauder, and RickK started attacking me ferociously since it came up on the mailing list that one of the articles I'd written was featured, Russian constitutional crisis of 1993.

I know that I have made mistakes on Wikipedia; but those mistakes were not motivated by anything other than a passion to make Wikipedia into a serious, professional, quality encyclopedia, not a dumping ground for ungrammatical POV rubbish and fiction. This is making it harder and harder for me to be as efficacious as a user as I want to be. (The distorted impression of my work that these attacks engender are at the root of quite a large number of conflicts on Wikipedia.) That's why I feel that they should finally be thoroughly discredited. 172 05:52, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The Lance6wins arbitration case is open. Please place evidence at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Lance6wins/Evidence. --mav 10:40, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hello again! Welcome back! I just found out that you're back after seeing your username on requests for adminship. 172 15:33, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hi, you wrote an article about Thomas E. Watson and put an Institute for Historical Review link into the page without comment. The institute is strongly linked with holocaust denial and both simple and sophisticated lying. I have read the paper only once (today) but already I saw that it missed out the Frank case completely, which is quite important even your the Wikipedia biography. I'm wondering if it's really a good idea to reference it, in which case I plan to put some comments in about the level of inaccuracy of material from the institute, or should we delete the link? Mozzerati 14:22, 2004 Sep 11 (UTC)

Thanks for your support for my adminship. Jayjg 16:30, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I found it among orphan images and set in up at the entry. I think it's your personal photo. Would you give some copyright info about it?

Hi, In case you're un-aware, I thought you might be interested in the the edits going on at Opera Company of Boston. You also might want to look at Opera Boston and Boston Lyric Opera. Paul August 21:04, Sep 30, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your heads up about the Boston opera articles. I have reverted the changes, and removed the Boston Opera Company from Cleanup. This anon user clearly has an axe to grind; his/her contributions were highly unencyclopedic. Of course the articles could use some additional material, but that will have to wait until someone with a more balanced POV comes along. PS Whereabouts in Cambridge to you live? I was born and grew up there. -- Viajero 17:50, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You're welcome. Some of the content added to Opera Company of Boston seemed useful, but I don't know enough to be able to NPOV it. I live off of Sherman street next to Danehy Park, in North Cambridge. Where did you live? Paul August 21:11, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)

You've claimed "fair use" on the image "borrowed" from http://www.hannover.de ... I cannot see any basis for the fair use claim ... looks more like copyvio to me. I've listed it on Wikipedia:Copyright problems --Tagishsimon

Greetings. I've been going around Wikipedia, trying to add image copyright tags to images that don't have them. I stumbled upon Image:Oper Leipzig.jpg, which apparently isn't linked to from any pages. Do you still need this image? If so, could you add a copyright tag, so we'll know if it's fair use, public domain, or what? Thanks so much, – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 17:13, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)

Since you put your name down as a spanish to english traslator, i thought you might be interested in the new Spanish translation of the week collaboration project. This weeks collaboration is Género chico.

paz y amor, The bellman 05:16, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump#Great bit of vandalism probably needs your attention. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=The_Weavers&diff=4344920&oldid=3977137 refers. --Tagishsimon

I have drafted a proposal for a new voluntary association on Wikipedia (joining groups like the Wikipedia:The Business and Economics Forum and the Wikipedia:Harmonious editing club) to promote discussion of a sort of system of expert review on Wiki. Please take a look and add your ideas. 172 08:01, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I've noticed some of your recent edits. Welcome back! 172 23:48, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to...

1. ...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
2. ...all articles...

using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Wikipedia is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. So far over 90% of people who have responded have done this.

Nutshell: Wikipedia articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff. So we use their licenses too.

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

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

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

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

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} with {{MultiLicensePD}}. If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know at my talk page what you think. It's important to know, even if you choose to do anything so I don't keep asking. -- Ram-Man (| talk) 14:23, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

I would appreciate your feedback on comments I left in Talk:Mikhail_Khodorkovsky when you get a chance. Thanks! --Dejitarob 20:47, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I saw you inserted the "Category:Hungarian people" in the article Henry Kucera on 19 June 2004. I'd like to ask you what your source was for this information, and in what sense you think Kucera is Hungarian. – Thank you.

--Adam78 16:47, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi. Good to see that you're back... I have a small favor to ask. Could you take a look at Origins of the American Civil War. I'm barred from editing it for a day due to the 3RR, causing some neo-Confederate apologia to be left standing... Happy New Year! 172 13:25, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I just sent you an email through the Wiki email feature. 172 18:09, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yes, sadly, they survived the effort at deletion. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:35, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

Andrea Chénier is a italian language opera. Not french. Hi SγωΩηΣ ^tαlk 21:56, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)