Exploding Boy

Joined 12 January 2004
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Exploding Boy (talk | contribs) at 19:17, 20 December 2004 ('''Notice'''). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Notice

I now have regular access to the internet, but only on certain days and at certain times. I try to log on regularly and to keep an eye on/contribute to articles that interest me, but it may take me longer to respond to posts. I will get to them, though, so post away. Exploding Boy 20:25, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)

Kanji for Ikuo Kayashi

I noticed it was removed from the Sarin gas article. Was it actually incorrect? Or was it removed for some other reason? WhisperToMe 05:16, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I removed it because it was the only one that had kanji, which made it stand out. It needs to be all or nothing. Exploding Boy 16:49, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)
In that case, I'll see if I can find the kanji for the others... WhisperToMe 23:12, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Google searches with some queries to see if there are lists with English and Japanese turn up nothing for me. It looks like only a native speaker can get the kanji himself/herself... WhisperToMe 23:19, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Re: Same-sex marriage article

Are you against platonic love? Please let me advertise it. thank you User: Asexual same sex marriage.

Wikipedia is not a vehicle for your advertising. Please heed the warnings that have been posted on your talk page. Exploding Boy 21:35, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

Asexual same-sex marriage

Yes, sorry about that. I will go and fix my comment. Spinboy 22:09, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sex in marriage

About your comment on User talk:Asexual same-sex marriage there is nothing in any modern marriage contract... that requires sexual activity to occur within the marriage to legitimise it

I was under the impression that marriages, in many countries and religious doctrines, required that marriages be consummated, otherwise they would be invalidated. While a marriage can go sexless for many years (and frequently do, in some unhappy marriages) I believed that connsumation was all but expected and required in some societies/cultures/religions. Am I completely off base with my understanding of this?

Irrigardless, I was attempting to explain that the article was more about the gay/lesbian/bi/etc marriage struggle, rather then about marriages of convieniance between roommates who happen to be of the same sex, which appeared to me to be what ASSM was talking about. Just so I'm not misunderstood. Arcuras 23:08, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

Not as far as I know, at least not in modern times. But essentially I agree with what you're saying. PS: "irrigardless" is not a word -- it's "regardless." Sorry. Pet peeve of mine :) Exploding Boy 00:20, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)
Ahh, alrighty then... makes some sense nowadays, concidering how hard it would be to verify/ensure every marriage was connsumated. Thanks! As for "irrigardless"... English major here, we have a habit of making up words just because we can... like, "Disnification". See? Fun! =P Arcuras 00:55, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

Robert the bruce

He's agreed to go through mediation with me. Here's hoping it works. Theresa Knott (The snott rake) 22:17, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Good luck. I notice that agreement came only after I listed him for comment. I'd like to see him temporarily blocked for his violation of the 3RR on Foreskin restoration, however. His edit summary clearly shows that he's well aware of the rule and chose to violate it anyway. I would do it my self, but as I'm involved... Exploding Boy 22:22, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

Could you please format Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Robert the Bruce correctly? When filing an RFC you really need to follow the template, due to the whole 48 hour thing. I know it's already been certified, but it should still be in the right format. Rhobite 03:39, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

Seems to have been done. Exploding Boy 16:51, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

RFC pages on VfD

Should RFC pages be placed on VfD to be deleted? I'm considering removing Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Slrubenstein, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jwrosenzweig and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/John Kenney from WP:VFD. Each of them was listed by CheeseDreams. Your comments on whether I should do this would be appreciated. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:38, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Seems reasonable to me. What's the normal procedure for deleting such pages though? Say if the 48 rule isn't met or if the RFC ends? Exploding Boy 16:51, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

Have you seen this homophobic user talk page vandalism - [1], [2] (warning - this is an extremely large (but rather repetative) edit of over 1MB in length - some browsers, and computers, may have significant problems viewing it), and [3]
Nasse/Piglet is the only person to have referred to me as "cheesycake". I suspect that Nasse is using these sock puppets. Note that User:Baffinisland has only 1 edit - the vandalism. Is there any way to have Nasse's IP address checked? CheeseDreams 19:45, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Hi. I'm sorry, but I just don't have the time or regular enough access to the internet to deal with all of this right at the moment. Please ask someone else, and good luck. Exploding Boy 19:59, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public ___domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. 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. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are 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 what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

It sounds fine to me, but I'll have to deal with it a little later as I'm extremely busy at the moment. I'll get around to it though; when I do I'll leave you a message. Exploding Boy 20:00, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

Request

Hi, Neutrality and I are engaged in an edit war. He has also contributed to a request for arbitration (and RfC) against me. He has just blocked me.

Please note that the block occurred just after I had discovered a new RfAr against myself, and was starting to provide rebuttals to it.

I consider this an abuse of his adminship.

Could you look into this action, and consider whether un-blocking me is appropriate? CheeseDreams 23:14, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Advertising

And you can't be the emperor of China. The position is taken.

I respect your opinion, but please remain civil and add the appropriate "your Majesty". :-D JRM 13:58, 2004 Dec 11 (UTC)

Sock puppets

Hi, could you possibly take a look at this and see whether you think these are sock puppets? If so, could you consider banning them for vandalism (and the use of sock puppets), so that, by use of the autoblocking, it becomes possible to work out who they really are?

[4] (note the phrase "cheesecake"), [5] (warning - this is an extremely large (but rather repetative) edit of over 1MB in length - some browsers, and computers, may have significant problems viewing it)

[14]

CheeseDreams 15:29, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Protection Request

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_circumcision <-- Jakew and Robert are goign on an editing spree again - they're taking whatever material they don't agree with and biasing the article in their POV. I'm growing tired of this. Revasser 15:16, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

  • I'll be watching this with interest. BTW Revasser any reason why you think EB is the one to act to protect your POV? - Robert the Bruce 15:23, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Can you do something about 65.125.117.182

65.125.117.182 is still a problem. Can he be blocked? --Samuel Wantman 23:25, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Bias and Harassment

Your threats on the user page of JakeW refer.

  • This is an interesting threat and it appears that you want to continue with what you attempted to recruit Dan Blackham into a while ago. You need to check the definition of vandalism for starters. Then I have just checked the user pages of DanP and Revasser who have been at the centre of the revert orgy and both it appears violated the 3RR yet you have made no comment there. I would suggest that if you continue with this harassment there will be no alternative other than to put you up on a RfC to start a process leading to your admin powers been revoked. Your behaviour is a disgrace to Wikipedia. - Robert the Bruce 03:36, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Notice

Please note that my usual sporadic access to the internet will be further reduced over the next short while. While I may occasionally be able to check this page and my watchlist, please assume, when leaving me messages here or anywhere on Wikipedia, that I will not be able to read or respond until early January. Users seeking assistance should check Wikipedia: list of administrators and contact another admin. Exploding Boy 19:13, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)