User:Andylkl/Archive 02

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


This archive page covers approximately the dates between September 2005 and February 2006.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying the section you are replying to if necessary. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.)

Thank you. --Andylkl [ talk! | c ] 19:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your support[edit]

Hi Andylkl, just a quick note to thank you for your support on my RfA. I was pleased to see so much support, especially from people such as you who I do not know very well, if at all. Now that I am an administrator I will do my best to please the community’s expectations. Best regards, Sam Hocevar 17:28, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

for your contributions to Current events in Malaysia and Singapore. Hopefully, the balance of articles with be more even with continued support and contribution from you and your fellow countrymen. ;)--Huaiwei 12:13, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

You're welcomed! It was my pleasure. :D --Andylkl (talk) 14:15, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Dab pages[edit]

Well, one thing that the MoS says (unless it's been changed in the last week or so) is that primary links shouldn't be piped, and that other links shouldn't be used; when I saw that you'd piped the primary links and added secondary ones (and changed "is" to the generally deprecated "may refer to", I reverted. It's true that I didn't notice that you'd moved Innuendo (Malaysia) to Innuendo (band) — but then you'd only just done that, and the links had all worked fine when I'd created the page a month before. Still, I'm glad that it's worked out now.

Unsigned reply left by Mel Etitis on 21:34, 25 September 2005 (UTC) in response to this message.
Oops, sorry — I don't normally forget to sign. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:00, 26 September 2005 (UTC)


Hi, Thanks for your comment. On the opinion about KL's public transport being chaotic, i actually retained it from the previous version and just tidied it up abit.

Slleong 05:54, 30 September 2005 (UTC)


Thanks for the headsup and the revert of my revert. :) The lack of changelog and feedback from Haniff on the delete left me to assume vandalism; perhaps I was too triggerhappy? --MJ(|@|C) 19:54, 1 October 2005 (UTC).

OwenX's RfA[edit]

Thank you for your support on my RfA. Your trust in me is well appreciated. Owen× 22:33, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Lost revert[edit]

At Lost (TV series), you reverted my revert of possible vandalism saying that "it was wrong". I realise we have the assume good faith policy, but are you sure this information is accurate? I took time out to search for "Skyplanet 5" and I haven't found anything. Google shows no results for a direct search and a bunch of garbage for "Skyplanet" or "Sky planet". I tried to whittle the results down by adding "Lebanon", but I didn't find anything. Now add on the fact that the next edit by this user was complete vandalism -- "Dinesh Van Den Berg as Retarded comic artist who rips off LOTR (Season 8)"?

You sure? K1Bond007 15:59, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I suppose I could have been clearer. What I did was just revert back to Yamla. Oh well. Problem solved. :) K1Bond007 17:24, 12 October 2005 (UTC)


You sound like you are in pain...or having labour pains! :D [1]--Huaiwei 16:08, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

George Town or Georgetown[edit]

The following are self-explanatory:

Negeri Pulau Pinang mula dijajah oleh lnggeris yang diketuai oleh Captain Francis Light pada tahun 1786. Bahagian Pulau Pinang yang mula-mula dibangunkan ialah di Kawasan Tanjung di Georgetown yang dikenali dengan nama Tanjung Penaigre.
Tourist Information Centre
No. 10, Jalan Tun Syed Sheh, Barakbah
Penang 10200
In their writ action in the High Court the respondents seek the following :–
"11. (a) Suatu Deklarasi menyatakan bahawa tanah dan hereditamen yang dahulunya dikenali sebagai Lot No. 55(1), Mukim 13, Daerah Timur Laut, Pulau Pinang terkandung di dalam Geran No. 477 dan 1767 dan sekarang dikenali sebagai Lot No. 1396 terkandung dalam Geran (First Grade) No. 23631 berserta dengan sekeping Lot lagi yang dahulunya dikenali sebagai Lot No. 193 (2), Bandar Georgetown, Daerah Timur Laut, Pulau Pinang dan sekarang dikenali sebagai Lot No. 962, Seksyen 3, Bandar Georgetown terkandung dalam Geran (First Grade) No. 21582."
Pegawai Penyelidik Mahkamah Tinggi Georgetown Pulau Pinang Memangku Gred L52 (Bukan Dengan Tujuan Naik Pangkat). 1 Februari 2005 ...
A city with rich, colorful history, Georgetown is one of Malaysia's favourite... There is also a 24-hour ferry service linking Georgetown to Butterworth on ...
Jln Sultan Ahmad Shah, 10050 Georgetown, Pulau Pinang ...
No. 43, Ban Hin Lee Bank, Lbh Pantai, 10300 Georgetown, Pulau Pinang ...

(P/S: As regards to copyright infringement, I will write separately cos the issues are quite drawn out. Nevertheless, please feel free to revert any of my edits, even if I am right.) — PM Poon 17:51, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi Andylkl, you wrote: "Both spellings are widely used, I know. But it seems that George Town is preferred in authorative sources such as atlases and Encarta. Even the local municipal council uses both. I guess it's accepted as an alternative spelling, but the George Town article remains at its current title and that should also be reflected in any other links that link to it."
Seems like a departure from your earlier contention that "I'm pretty much sure that the capital of Penang is spelled George Town rather than Georgetown."
It has been a waste of my time to reply. Who is Encarta and all the other publishers of atlases anyway? Is Encarta infalliable, or does it have a sacrosanct right to change someone's name merely because it is a reputable company? If Encarta is more authoritative than the Government of Penang, its Tourist Information Centre, the Mahkamah Persekutuan Malaysia, Jabatan Peguam Negara Malaysia, BERNAMA (Malaysia's Official News Agency) and even the Yellow Pages, then let's follow Encarta.
You talk as if the title of an article is sacred and cannot be changed, and that there are no mechanisms in Wikipedia to "reflect it in any other links that link to it". I reserve my comments.
Seems like you have made up your mind to revert the article, so please do whatever makes you happy. — 19:49, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Penang Map[edit]

Hi Andylkl, your points raised in regards to the Penang map are as follows:

  1. Maps need to be consistent with other articles on Malaysian states.
  2. The current map isn't really informative.
  3. The map doesn't have copyright info.
  4. Deletion of links to images that have proper copyright info for use on Wikipedia may be considered to be edits made in bad faith.

Of the four points raised, the first point is very strong and valid. Honestly, I was not aware of the other State articles, and therefore did not see the big picture. In isolation, the map for the State of Penang seems odd as it is too near the edge. To me, it only make sense when viewed as a whole in relation to the other State articles.

I have since revert the map, and that should settle the matter. In any case, since you brought it up, I might as well share my views on the other points.

The current map isn't really informative[edit]

Whether the map is informative or not is subjective and depends on the context. This particular map shows Penang in relation to South East Asia and not just to Malaysia. Thus, while your map is very meaningful to Malaysians, it may not be so for those who do not know where Malaysia is, but are aware of where South East Asia is. Again, my map will not be meaningful to those who do not know where South East Asia is. Thus, your remark is quite self-opinionated.

The map doesn't have copyright info.[edit]

As a statement of fact, your statement is indisputable. But I did leave a link there, and while this used to be acceptable, I believe Wikipedia is thinking of changing its policy, perhaps due to recent developments in Google. I do hope that the people in charge of Wikipedia are not going to get intimidated and swing to the other extreme. In any case, Google is putting up a fight, and this should be the attitude of all progressive companies who believe in what they do, and are prepared to take calculated risks to explore new territories. Leaders come in many shapes. Some are aggressive and grow the company, while others play it safe, with safe consequences.

Copyrights, in practice as opposed to in law, are very complicated matters, involving both legal and non-legal issues. In the final analysis, the question is not whether one has infringed a copyright, but whether he will be sued for it. This is the pragmatist view, although purists and moralists will not agree.

I was involved in a copyright case in one of the companies that I worked for, and learned quite a bit therefrom. There is no hard and fast rule in practice, but when it comes to the strict interpretation of the law, of course there is but one answer: either there is an infringement or there is not. Yet the mind of senior management people are so different from that of, say, an executive or a clerk, who merely follow instructions and follow the law to the letter. Advances in all fields of endeavor are never made by following rules diligently, but by breaking them creatively.

The map that I had used was taken from investPenang, a website by the Penang government promoting the state to investors. I do not believe that it would sue for its use. On the contrary, it would be all too happy to say "yes", if only I were to ask, for the simple reason that their exposure is increased thereby, more so when Wikipedia is a creditable website. Even so, I must admit that they can sue if they want to, that is if they were to follow the law to the letter. For me to ask for copyright is simply not practical, as you know how government does things. It may take months, and they may not even reply. Moreover, I am not so hardworking, and if anyone should feel that it is inappropriate to include the map, please feel free to take it off.

Admittedly, Wikipedia would have been taken off long ago if anyone had taken legal action against them. The number of wholesale "cut and paste" articles are indeed appalling, but the very fact that no one has sued seems to tell its own story. It would take another long discourse to discuss this matter. My philosophy is: "To avoid car accidents, never be on the road. To avoid being an air crash victim, never ever fly in an aeroplane". In short, be pragmatic.

Edits in bad faith[edit]

Your contention is that deletion of links to images that have proper copyright info is bad. What if I put in an image taken by myself which is badly done, although the copyright is proper? My point is that this point seems moot.

In any case, all my edits are made in good faith. Should anyone feel that my edits are bad, I do not give two hoots if they remove it... and that's to put it very bluntly, although I should tone it down, LOL. No offence meant. — PM Poon 19:24, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Bad faith edits[edit]

Hi Andylkl, you mentioned that my edits "may be misinterpreted as being "bad faith", "vandalism" and et cetera by others, since deletion without reason does give the impression of bad faith edits."

The "Principles of Wikipedia etiquette" states:

"To assume good faith is a fundamental principle on any wiki, including Wikipedia. As we allow anyone to edit, it follows that we assume that most people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it. If this weren't true, a project like Wikipedia would be doomed from the beginning.... So, when you can reasonably assume that something is a well-intentioned error, correct it without just reverting it or labeling it as vandalism."

Wikipedia further states:

"If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it."

I have no control over how anyone would like to think. Moreover, if they think thus, they shouldn't be in Wikipedia at all, as is evident from the above quotes.

As to the "deletion" of the topographical map, it is my personal opinion while editing that the trade-off between information provided and space utilisation is not justified. Since you have mentioned about it, I measured it and found that 40% of space utilized does not provide any information. I further feel that topographical maps are not particularly useful in this kind of articles.

As regards the sunset scene, the proportion of the photograph seems rather odd. In any case, it did not provide any useful information, as one can also claim it to be any other island.

Of course, all these are personal opinions and judgement that I used in making my edit. Had I wanted to vandalize this article, I would have kept those that I have deleted and instead, delete the photograph on the "view of Georgetown"!!!

In any case, the pictures were never deleted. It's still in Wikipedia!!! — PM Poon 23:59, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Invitation to copyright debate[edit]

Hi Andylkl, thank you very much for your invitation to participate in the ongoing debate on copyright. I must regret to decline for the following reasons:

  • I have participated in forums and found that any debate where there are no judges is always futile. Each side clings on to its views, and almost invariably, the debate deteriorates into personality attacks.
  • Copyright laws vary from country to country, and in order to be safe for a cross-border media, one has to take the country with the tightest regulations — with dire consequences.
  • Even within the same country, experts' opinions differ. No two judges may agree with each other, as I have found to my amazement (and amusement)! All one has to do is to look at the number of High Court decisions overturned by a superior court on appeal.
  • All these aside, I must admit that I am not only plain lazy, but honestly, I am very selfish too. I am no Mother Theresa. Should I ever be invited to be an admin, I would definitely decline as I can't do justice to the position. I contribute only because I enjoy writing, and in the process, if Wikipedia benefits from my contribution, it is merely coincidental, LOL. You can thus understand why I do not really care what happens to my article after I have contributed or edited. To be sure, everyone has different ideas and ways of writing. The only thing I will want to know, however, is when someone tags my article as "NPOV" or "copyedit". The reason why I want to know is merely because I want to improve myself and avoid the same mistake.

Unlike popular perception, I found out that law is actually a very dynamic thing, with many grey areas that an intelligent lawyer can work on. And in many cases, the cost of pursuing an action outweighs the benefits... as in Wikipedia, where no money can be obtained, except for (court) costs. A wrong can become "right" under certain circumstances. Reader Digest, for example, has a feature article where they typically summarize new publications without asking for permission, and reportedly forward a cheque for USD$500 to the copyright holder. I understand that this is actually an infringement in law, but so far, everyone seems to be happy.

It is my personal opinion that instead of merely complying with copyright, Wikipedia, as a non-commercial organization, should look into ways to immune itself from copyright actions. This may be done by positioning itself in the market as THE website, such that not only will no one ever think of suing it, they will be too glad to have their articles included in it, with a link to their webpage.

(P/S: Honestly, I am very addicted to Wikipedia, but with all the controversies, I have planned to get out if I can, LOL.) — PM Poon 01:04, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your vote, and HDI discussion underway ...[edit]

Hello! I hope you're well. I'd like to thank you for participating in the vote earlier to include the HDI in the country infobox/template. Yay!

After a lengthy gestation, a discussion piece has been prepared to help give form to the vote. If you've a preference for how and where this information should appear in the infobox, I'd appreciate it if you head on over there and comment. :)

After a decision is arrived at, if at all, I'm also hopeful to prevail upon you to add the values (if you're willing and comfortable) for a handful of countries; the more people doing it, the less time it will take to implement the vote and realise the fruits of our collective labour.

Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks again for your co-operation! E Pluribus Anthony 04:08, 1 November 2005 (UTC)


Boss, because you made an edit in October 2005 in Malaysia and Singapore, I am now unable to update Current events in Malaysia and Singapore for the new month, as a move has to be made. I now have to wait for an admin to do it for me. If the new page has only one edit (ie, Slivester's creation of that page), the move would have been possible. I purposely left it as it is and didnt correct wat he did precisely because otherwise I wont be able to effect the move later.

In subsequent months, please avoid making more then one edit to the current month's page (ie. "Novemember 2004 in M and S" other then creating a redirect to the current page "Current events in M and S". I will now have to ask an admin to do the move for us. Arrggggghhh!!!! :D

Meanwhile, please avoid adding new contents to the page.--Huaiwei 08:01, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Reply from Johnsonooijunsheng[edit]

I am quite happy to help u to edit the information all about Malaysia and some info related to Melbourne. By the way, nice to meet u. My name is johnson. I am from Alor Star, Malaysia. I am now in exam period and will be spent my time at holiday to help u to edit the info.

Besides, can u tell me how to use this website, how to edit, how to manage talk page? because i am beginner and till new to Wikipedia.....Johnson 15:48, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Movie "Bounce"[edit]

I remember watching the trailer for it in the theater a year before it was released and having my jaw drop when I heard the music playing with it. I want to see the movie still (have never seen it myself), but that fact has remained with me since. :) --Martin Osterman 03:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I've been all over the net and can't find the trailer. Blame Apple for removing things from their site that are over five years old. LOL Good luck with exams! I have them coming up in a few short weeks myself. I really should get off here and get them taken care of. :) --Martin Osterman 12:16, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

FireFox RFA[edit]

Andylkl/Archive 02

Thanks for your support on my request for adminship.

The final outcome was (96/2/0), so I am now an administrator. If you ever have any queries about my actions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Again, thanks!

FireFox 18:55, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Welcome back![edit]

I see you're back. I hope your exams went well. x42bn6 Talk 01:13, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! It's not really over yet, but I can relax somewhat now. :P --Andylkl (talk) (contrib) 07:01, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

RfA thanks[edit]

I would like to thank you for your support of my recent successful RfA. If you have any further comments or feedback for me, my door's open - don't hesistate to drop a note on my talk page. Happy editing! Enochlau 11:29, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

NSLE's RFA[edit]


Hi Andy,

Thanks for your support vote on my RfA. I don't think I expected 70 supports, nor get just a single oppose. Thank you for your trust in me, and I hope to live up to it. If I can ever help with anything or if you have any comments about my actions as an admin, please let me know! Thank you once again! – NSLE (T+C+CVU) 09:51, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

BD2412's RfA[edit]

Thanks, Andylkl, for supporting my RfA - I'll do my best as an admin to help the reality of Wikipedia live up to the dream! BD2412 T 15:58, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Gold (disambiguation)[edit]

moved your comments and my response to Talk:Gold (disambiguation) Tedernst | talk 20:40, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Howcheng's RfA[edit]

Thank you for your support in my recent request for adminship. I was successfully promoted with a final tally of 74/0/0. I will endeavour not to let you down. Thanks again. howcheng {chat} 07:32, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

RfA thanks from Deathphoenix[edit]

Hi Andy,

I just wanted to thank you for supporting me in my RfA. To tell you the truth, I was surprised by all the support I've gotten. I never saw myself as more than an occasional Wiki-hobbyist.

My wife sends her curses, as Wikipedia will likely suck up more of my time. She jokingly (I think) said she was tempted to log on to Wikipedia just to vote Oppose and let everyone know that she didn't want her husband to be an admin.

I'll make sure your trust in me is founded. I'll wield the mop and bucket with pride! --Deathphoenix 15:14, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

MTV Generation[edit]

Hi, thank you for the support, but could you tell me how you edited the article. I just found out about this article on December 8 and then Piecraft left soon after. Since then, people threatened to delete it because there was no proof on it. So, I had to remove things in order to stop the threats. 12/30 r430nb

Yet another RFA thank-you[edit]

WikiThanks.png Greetings Andylkl,
I wish to offer my gratitude for supporting me on my recent nomination for adminship, which passed with the final tally of 65/4/3. If you would ever desire my assistance in anything, or wish to give me feedback on any actions I take, feel free to let me know. Cheers! Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 08:01, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Country[edit]

I see you tried to add an "other_languages" field to this infobox. Please don't do that. It was decided a long time ago that general language usage should be in the article, since that information can overwhelm the small infobox. It's also cause edit wars on many country pages. Because of that, it is best that the infobox should only show the official language(s) used by the government. -- Netoholic @ 17:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about this, though is it alright if a slightly adjusted template be used for a country? The only reason that I tried to add another section to the infobox was that there's currently a content dispute in the Malaysia article, and the extra section is sort of a compromise on my part, since we occasionally get other editors adding extra languages to the official language section when actually there's only one, might as well list it up under "other languages". Seems useful in this case though. :) Regards, Andylkl [ talk! | c ] 18:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC) (Note: Reply left on user's talk page.)
I recommend strongly that you hold to using the standard infobox, it is designed to be consistent across all the articles. Non-official languages should be dealt with in the article, not the infobox. -- Netoholic @ 18:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Hey, just noticed your edits to the infobox. Thanks! :D --Andylkl [ talk! | c ] 08:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC) (Note: Reply left on user's talk page.)

U2 (disambiguation)[edit]

I've replied on my talk page. Thanks/wangi 13:35, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Reunion Delete[edit]

Why did you delete the "keep" vote here? --JeremyStein 21:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I didn't realise that I was overwriting another person's comments. I didn't delete anything from the AfD page and I didn't see any edit conflicts while making my own edit. Anyhow, I added back the deleted anon vote already. :) --Andylkl [ talk! | c ] 06:32, 7 January 2006 (UTC) (Note: Reply left on user's talk page.)
Thanks. I was sure it was an accident, but I figured it would look better if you fixed it yourself. --JeremyStein 01:47, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

List of interesting or unusual place names[edit]

Following a deletion review, the page was relisted on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of interesting or unusual place names (2nd nomination). -- User:Docu

Despite the overwhelming support for keeping the list in article namespace, the above relisting was closed early. At Wikipedia:Deletion review#List of interesting or unusual place_names, the deletion is being reviewed once more (to restore the list from Wikipedia to article namespace (it's currently at Wikipedia:List of interesting or unusual place names). -- User:Docu