Well, I'll take a look at the Frisian history article. And I think there could be something on Frisian cuisine. Such as traditional frisian suger bread and cookies (dumkes), etc. Thanks for informing me. -The Bold Guy- (talk) 10:34, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be some project going on selecting wikipedia articles for DVD release. Some articles, as can be seen on the Frisian wiki project are selected, envolving Frisian-related subjects. Those should get some extra attention. Also, I noticed an article of enormous importance, namely the one on Grutte Pier, has not been selected by the project. It should be nominated for selection and we might, as a project, ask for a personal selection (within bounderies of 7 articles as we are given by SelectionBot). For instance, I think that Greate Pier is of more importance to Frisian history than is Tershelling. -The Bold Guy- (talk) 09:30, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
You have to go through the correct nominating procedure, and it will be reviewed by the panel as to whether or not it is to be included. Just adding the tag to the article is not enough. Grutte Pier would be our most edited article. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Correction, Grutte Pier is our most edited article. Because the man is of such huge importance to Frisian history. After years of being somewhat of a province, he led the Frisians to major victories for the first time since the crusades, maybe even earlier, since king Radbod. He made the Frisian people proud once again. He is of a much greater importance than other selected articles for the Frisian wikiProject. What else does it needs to earm a nomination? -The Bold Guy- (talk) 09:03, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The automated process included how many incoming links there were and how much it was viewed. It certainly deserves a nomination, you just have to use the correct procedure! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No I didn't miss the comment, but I am most terribly busy and cannot do much wiki-wise anyway, except for brainless aditing like expunging the horrid "Hapsburg" spelling.
But to answer your question: I must decline. As I said I am terribly busy. Also, you are either very polite or you totally overestimate my knowledge about the Frisians. The recent articles I edited I did with next to no knowledge about the specific situation and hence it was mostly re-organising stuff. My knowledge was only of a general kind, enough to know that the peasant rebellion and the preceding civil war are not topical to Friso-Hollandic wars. Cheers, Str1977(talk)18:44, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just a friendly note, you might want to be careful about sending out all those talk page messages, it could be confused with talk-page spamming. Instead of inviting random users, you might consider just those who have edited articles within the scope of your new Wikiproject.
Sorry, I was thinking: the more members the better. You see, we are in urgent need of members. To set up a portal, to cope with widespread vandalism and to make our project much more professional and efficient. Do you know a way to get like, 40 members in total? -The Bold Guy- (talk) 18:17, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I meant to write you and got distracted. Wasn't trying to be rude. I think you got the wrong SkyWriter -- you may have meant Skywriter. I'm not familiar with Frisia in any way. SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 18:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Bûter, brea en griene tsiis: wa't dat net sizze ken, is gjin oprjochte Frys!"
—I recognize the "Butter, bread, and green cheese" part, but I don't know Frisian; what does the rest say? The Jade Knight (talk) 06:19, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see you have been promoting Grutte Pier's picture. Can you get your hands on some more old pictures of frisian rulers or historical figures to put up here? Some of the Stadtholders should have images. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:19, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, you accidentally placed your nominated GA article in the middle of the list, it should have gone on the bottom. I moved it for you though, everything is good. Good luck --Banime (talk) 23:45, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it's kind of normal depending on the category, although still slow. I've been working on reviewing some others in the History section and the oldest ones were still a few weeks like the ones there are. I'm more worried about the 3 September one, that one is getting pretty old. Oh well, I'll keep reviewing articles, maybe I'll get to yours before someone gets to mine, haha. Mainly its just a waiting game. --Banime (talk) 14:19, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will be pleased to do this. It may be a day or two before my detailed review is ready, because I seem, temporarily, to be inundated. The article looks interesting. Brianboulton (talk) 15:14, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, and I thought I should bring the discussion here, in response to your offer (did I get that right?) to help with Version 0.7. Yes, we need lots of help - "the harvest is great, but the workers are few". What areas interest you the most? We mostly need help in reviewing articles manually for the selection, as I did with Donia. If you are willing to help with that, you should read the FAQs and sign up for the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Review Team.
BTW, re Dorus Rijkers, I notice too that Grace Darling also failed to make it in, despite her being from the UK (in fact, from the area where I grew up - I visited Bamburgh just in May). Although the scale of her rescue was smaller, the idea of a young woman heroine like this captivated the nation at the time, and she became an early Victorian media celebrity for many years. But the limited size of this release makes it hard to include figures like these.
If Grace Darling did not make it, nor should mr. Rijkers. Thanks for your patience. I would like to help, so I'll join in and start reviewing after having read stuff. I'll review the first few articles this evening, probably. -The Bold Guy- (talk) 15:28, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FAMILIES OF THE WORLD (Collection)
This user seeks adoption by an experienced editor. (Users offering adoption)
The Families of the World Collection, records from sunrise to sunset, hour by hour the small events that shape daily lives of Humanity through the one experience common to almost everyone: the family. In 1983 world traveler, author, photographer, philosopher and speaker Hélène Tremblay gave herself the mission of presenting Humanity to Humanity so that every one on earth would know with whom they shared the planet. To achieve this she lived with families which represents the condition of living of the majority in 116 countries. No other person has known Humanity so intimately. Her experience is unique.
Book have been published in Canada, USA, Australia and France by Farrar Straus & Giroux, Camden House & Les Editions Robert Laffont. This project and great human adventure has received support from agencies such as UNICEF, UNFPA, WFP UNESCO and CIDA , and companies such as the Body Shop International.
FAMILIES OF THE WORLD (Company)
The Families of the World Company works in the fields of creation of content, communication, production, publishing and multimedia
Vision: Presenting Humanity to Humanity by being present in all households with The Families of the World Collection.
Contribution By making information accessible to all, The Families of the World Company seeks to : • Promote the development of a world consciousness; • Facilitate the awakening of a peaceful and responsible world citizen; • Participate in the survival and renewal of humankind and its environment. And awakens in each individual in contact with our products: • the pleasure of discovering our common human heritage, and • a desire to join, interact and share life with the citizens of the world.
Okay. First: add at least one source (better two) to the article. Then: do you want this to be requested or do you want to create the article yourself. If you want to: you've got my blessing. You know how you create an article? -The Bold Guy- (talk) 07:11, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A friendly reminder from the Adopt-a-User project =)
Hey there -The Bold Guy-! This is a friendly reminder to update your status at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area/Adopters whenever it is appropriate in order to provide new users with the most up-to-date information on available adopters. Also please note that we will be removing adopters who have not edited in 60 days. If you become active again (and we hope you do!) please feel free to re-add yourself. Cheers!
I took off the hat note for Pier Gerlofs Donia because he already has a picture, quote and reference one page scroll down in the article. People who type "Friesland" will not really be wanting the Pier Gerlofs Donia article, they will just be happy to be introduced to him in the Friesland article. Did you have a look at Magnus Forteman? He is also a Frisian hero. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:18, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take a look at him. Magnus means great so, there are only two Frisians with a name meaning great. I'll see to it the article gets my attention. Thanks for reminding me! -The Bold Guy- (talk) 05:10, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but I haven't the least idea of how to check whether an article meets the required criteria (ie: I'm not as experienced with the encyclopedia as I let on). Excellent article though, tell me how the review goes. Thanks for considering me though, perhaps I've gained some recognition. UniversalBread (talk) 01:18, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Thanks in any case. I was just looking for a user who seemed to be professional and so I looked at you talk page and I thought: that guy is a real pro. I'll let you know then, take care! -The Bold Guy- (talk) 05:10, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for writing on my talk page. My problem is, that I am Eastfrisian (means: Germany), I only saw a few Counts of Ostfriesland (Category). Your main goal is the area of Frisian (Netherlands). I can't read (and speak) Frisian even it is something than my language (Plattdeutsch - you can find me on the nds wp, too). So I guess, that I can't help you really. Best wishes for your project. Eastfrisian (talk) 12:09, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that you just have to put (in Dutch) {{languageicon|nl}} or (in West Frisian)code: fry promoted to code: fy; tags inside the ref, I have never done it myself yet! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:01, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly unfree Image:Drawings of a Savoia-Marchetti SM.93.jpg
You have been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of a banned or blocked user. Blocked or banned users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; if you are banned, all edits under this account may be reverted.
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
I have nothing to do with all of this! I have been making nothing but constructive edits over the last few weeks! I have just referenced an article completelt and have nothing to do with Kermanshahi, Last king of Frisia or Angela from the Blue. I do not see why I am banned because I have done nothing wrong! Never! Why do you bann me? How can my Ip adress possibley be the same as the one of the accounts you banned aswell? I have nothing to do with this! Nothing! I have done absolutely nothing wrong. I know I have been blocked for over 6 months but the block was expired and I began editing again in a good way! I have nothing to do with any other users. My IP may be the same as the IP of others but it cannot be the same as the IP on Kermanshahi and Last king of Frisia. I ask for a IP check linking me to them and if there is no link between accounts I ask for me to be unbanned. I have nothing to do with the mistakes other people make. I know I have made my own mistakes but I have nothing to do with sockpuppetry. Ask other wikipedians if I have been a valuable contributor to the wiki-project I co-founded and they will all say I am. Just do! I have been banned before and it expired and right now I am banned without having done anything wrong. I know you are making a horrible mistake here. Please unblock me and check my IP adress and the ones of the other people you say are my sockpuppets. You will see they do not match. -The Bold Guy- (talk) 12:58, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
I never was the confirmed sockpuppet of anyone. I was just a user who made some mistakes, had some bad luck and got banned. Not indefenitely, but for 5 months and now I am back and do nothing but valueable contributions. I have never done any vandalism again since my block has expired. I have made nothing but valueble contributions and that is the truth and nothing but the truth. Now all of a sudden, when I logged in, I turned out to be banned. Why on earth am I banned when I haven't done anything wrong? On what grounds, exactly, am I banned? Whose IP adresses I match? Because if I happen to match IP adresses of users banned long ago, then all has been settled already for wikipedia gave me editing rights again. I have not misused them. I have not made multiple accounts. I only have one, this one, and with it I do nothing but valueable contributions to wikipedia. You go and watch my edits and tell me what is wrong with them! Nothing at all! I never spoke to Last king of Frisia or Kermanshahi in my life and by my knowledge they are interely different persons. I am not trying to get anyone into trouble and all I want is to get out of this shit once and for all! You see, I have been banned before and I am back. I would never make the same mistake again, trust me on this. And if you don't, then give me some evidence pronto! -The Bold Guy- (talk) 13:12, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
PS: no matter if my IP adress matches the one of Angela from the Blue, I am not the same person at all. Nor do I have anything to do with Last king of Frisia and Kermanshahi. I have been banned temporarily, and that bann expired. I came back with the best of intentions, did not do anything wrong, made nothing but good contributions and all of a sudden, I found myself banned again! -The Bold Guy- (talk) 13:14, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Another point of interest:
You banned the Last king of Frisia for vandalising regarding an article I have been recently interested in. That is not true, Cirt, for I have been interested in that particular article for months already and long before the other user ever joined in. Also, you should check out the guy's IP adress, you'll see mine and his don't match, same goes for Kermanshahi I presume. You'll probably see either: his IP has been active longer, or less long then mine. For the rest of it: the whole thing is based on coincedences and thin air and I have been stripped of my editing rights with no good reason and thus do not have the ability to contact other users and inform them of this outrageous mistake. Just this morning, I talked to Graeme Bartlett for example, a user with whom I work closely on a wikiproject I co-founded. I do good work. I created several articles and contribute to them.-The Bold Guy- (talk) 13:28, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
Fisherqueen, they might have said "confirmed" but I do not know on which it was based other then IP adress. Furthermore, I wonder: why on earth did I get unbanned again after the unfortunate events some 6 months ago? I have been blocked temporarily, and then it expired, and I started editing in a good way again. Now tell me: what have I done, under my account or IP adress, recently (meaning: since I got unblocked again) that makes me deserve a bann? You tell me! It is all based on coincedences and loose ends tied together by Cirt. I have done nothing wrong, I swear! Just look at my edits and you will see this is the truth. I have done nothing but good to this online encyclopedia recently. One article to which I have major contributions, is currently a nominee for GA! Can you imagine my suprise to log in and find myself banned?! Fisherqueen: have you been watching my edits and have you read all that I wrote? Honestly: based on my edits, do I seem like a vandal of any kind? On don't think so! -The Bold Guy- (talk) 14:05, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Yes, I know that you don't know what specific data it's based on. I don't, either. Checkusers don't tell us the exact data, because then, sockpuppets would be able to avoid making the same mistakes again. I know that they use technical data that go beyond simple ip, though. We choose trusted editors with technical expertise to get the checkuser power, and then we trust their conclusions. You haven't been accused of vandalism, but of block evasion; don't worry, you weren't blocked for being a vandal. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs)14:20, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean with "block evasion"? That I evaded my block in some way and got away with something bad I did by a mistake of the admin who banned me? I cannot imagine what. You see, there is such a thing as a shared IP-adress. Besides: if you do not know the details, how on earth can you fail my request for unblock? And something else: if you people do not tell me on which evidence I am blocked, you could just aswell be making things up! What good is it for wikipedia to bann a user who makes good and constructive edits and nothing but that. And then: I was still busy improving an article put on hold for GA when I got banned: if it fails, it is your fault. Explain to me: how is that helping wikipedia? Please, be reasonable here! I have been active for over a year already (with a unlucky and unvoluntary wikibreak inbetween) and have never vandalised anything on purposed. I always work with an edits summary, always inform on talk pages of the articles I edit about the additions I have made and I properly source whatever I change or put in articles. I have made some small mistakes when I first came here a newbie, but other then that, I have proved to be a model user. Again I am asking: what good is it to wikipedia to bann me? -The Bold Guy- (talk) 15:00, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They are saying that you are evading your block on your other account (Angela from the Blue (talk·contribs)), and as such are not allowed to edit. As for the evidence, only a few very trusted individuals are allowed access to Checkuser, because it allows the user to access information otherwise private. When one of them states that you are another user, then that is acted upon. At this point, your only recourse is going to be to either e-mail the checkuser or arbcom for an appeal. However, since you have engaged in votestacking and vandalism with several socks, I highly doubt you will get anywhere with it. Templarion (talk) 19:22, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am not evading any block. I got banned by user Chriskl02 and that was a bann for 6 months by the reason: "multiple accounts". Well, in september 13 or something like that, my block expired. I began editing again, completely harmless and constructively. I always use edit summaries. I always reference edits and I inform of my changes on talk pages. I was taking the article on Pier Gerlofs Donia for GAN and was busy on improving it (referencing statements, prose, etc). Several users helped me do it. At this point, it has been on hold for a week already. I was about to work on it again, a finishing touch, when I logged in. Then I turned out to be banned again. Why, Templarion, is this some kind of sick joke? Banning someone temporarily for something you say he has done, then let him edit a little while in a good way, then suddenly banning him again (this time indefinetely) on practically the same grounds on which you banned the user for 6 months (not indefinetely) earlier. It looks awfully much like what happened to the lead character in "1984"... Big Brother is watching you. He'll (they'll...) bann you whenever they want to. -The Bold Guy- (talk) 19:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you enable email for yourself then I can send a message to you. You can still email me if you need to. For your block situation you may have to prove joint use of the computer by other users, like the last king of Frisia who is almost certainly 193.172.170.26. Could this character be in the same school as you? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:40, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It could be something like that, Graeme Bartlett. But I am not quite sure. On the other hand, I can hardly believe this person is actually editing from my IP adress. Actually, I am 100% true this is not the case. You see, looking at 193.172.170.26.'s contribs, you'll notice he has been editing since 2006 while I joined in as late as july 2008. Oh, btw: I have e-mailed you and several users via the option: e-mail this user and I have mailed you. You should have a mail from me now! If you do not, something is not working here. Will you perhaps ask some people to join in the wikiProject Friesland instead of me to "take my place", that way at least someone will look after my articles. Because if I remain blocked I am very dissapointed in the wikipedia community. After all, I have done nothing but good since my last, unfortunate bann expired, weeks ago now. And you know that: just take a look at my edits and you will see I cannot possibley be Kermanshahi or the Last king of Frisia. I make constructive, referenced edits, I worked hard on an article to get it to meet the standards for GAN, and while I was still busy improving that, I got banned. You tell User:Cirt that, or whoever is envolved. I cannot tell anyone more. I can only use my talk page and my e-mail seems to be broken. -The Bold Guy- (talk) 04:48, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi TBG I am trying to understand how administrators think that you are the same as the trouble makers. Is your talk page the only place you can edit, or can you talk on other pages too? Actually you first edited 29 August 2007. I did receive your email but I was hoping to send to you via the "E-mail this user" link. Nearly all of the bold guy edits have been good, just a few overexcited posts on occasion. The other IP 86.89.146.118 where Angela from the Blue came from is also a possible trouble source. If you log off does your IP show as one of these? Perhaps you people from Friesland are using a common proxy. Anyway you can email me your proposed article and if it looks good I will stick it on. Let me know how you would like to be credited and that GFDL applies. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:35, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The IP adress from which I edit is 86.89.146.118 but I am not completely sure with whom I share this IP. Can you perhaps try to inform some administrators of my innocense (or at least of the fact that I have never done anything wrong then to be over excited from time to time)? I am not sure we share a common proxy. It could be a regional thing, or village or anything like that. If you could e-mail me back it would be great. You say you got my e-mail, right? I also e-mailed some administrators (including Cirt, who blocked me). I noticed User:Chrislk02 is telling him how Kermanshahi could have never been a sock. Perhaps you should inform him about me while I cannot. You see: I can only edit my talk page. Will you take care of the Pier Gerlofs Donia article? Will you inform user:Dana boomer of the fact I got banned so that my reviewer knows I won't be editing the article? Thanks in advanche, -The Bold Guy- (talk) 06:11, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
People, just take a look at my contribs! You will see I make nothing but constructive edits! Ask User:Graeme Bartlett with whom I have been working on many articles! Ask Chrislk02 why he banned me 6 months, earlier, and whether he supports my block when looking at my latest edits! Just be reasonable here! I haven't done anything wrong, and I just saw Kermanshahi got unbanned! Ever heard of shared IP adresses? For God's sake, that is the only reason I joined in in the first place! I came here to edit wikipedia, not to cause any trouble and look what happens: I get banned! At least have the decency to restore my user page. -The Bold Guy- (talk) 15:07, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
WikiProject Piracy is currently undergoing some updates and changes, and we are trying to find out who is still active in the project. You are currently listed as a participant on the list of participants, and we would like for you to update your status. Please move your name to the section that best describes your activity in the project:
Active - still active and interested within the scope of the WikiProject.
Semi-Active - still active on Wikipedia, but not as active in regards to the WikiProject.
Former Members - a catch-all classification for those editors who are not active on Wikipedia, those that are still on Wikipedia, but no longer part of this WikiProject, or those that have otherwise not moved their names to another classification yet.
