User talk:EasyTarget

Dutch investment in motoring infrastructure

Hi

I think you placed this sentence on the segregated cycle facilities page in the evidence section as a counter point to the figures on cycling numbers during the period of operation of the Dutch bicycle master plan.

However, monetary investments in the road and public transport networks during the same period were many times that spent on cycle provisions in the same period, and car ownership did increase by 49% in the same period without a reduction in cycle use.

However, it seems clear that several (if not all?) prominent Dutch cities had active traffic restraint programs in place from the late 70s on. It seems to me that for the sentence above to stand as a counter point - then it must be shown that the investments in motoring infrastructure took place in urban areas for the purpose of facilitating and promoting motorised traffic in competition with other modes such as cycling. Otherwise the investments might just as easily have been for the opposite purpose of diverting motor traffic around, and excluding it from, urban areas - and hence promoting cycling. Apologies if this isn't your issue. --Sf 00:24, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

There is something to that point, but it is not the whole story. Not my fight really, I just live here (Amsterdam) and cycle 20+K per day, I cycle to work, all year round, I also own a car and a motorbike. And get a bit narked by monomaniac zealots, such as those who want to see conflict between cars and bikes everywhere. Remember that Holland has a huge rural hinterland that needs roads for everyday transport (busses use roads too.) Cities actively squeeze cars, but new motorways are also built (and are still being built) connecting cities, new railways too. The Dutch just like to use whatever is best for the journey they want to make.

In short, its unlike the way things are done in adversarial countries like the UK. The more I look from my new Dutch home at the UK, the more I realize you cannot take one experience and expect it to work for the other. For a start, the 12K cycle ride from my place to central Amsterdam has a nett elevation change of about 3 meters. To really make cycling to take off in the whole of the UK it would be best to start by bulldozing the whole place flat (please).

EasyTarget 17:59, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Your message

I think you will find, that I contribute with AOL, and if you were as self rightous as you proclaim, you would have known, that wikipedia has issues with AOL and Dynamic IP's, and that those edits were definately NOT made by myself. This is Zanusi 10:28, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Talk page version with my comments for Reference.

That may very well be true about you not making the edits!

But; cluestick time. Whoever did make them was logged in with YOUR ACCOUNT, not just your IP address. Your account is protected with a password and a cookie. Someone has got hold of the cookie at least.

The fact that AOL (and many other ISPs) reassign IP addresses is true, but has no bearing here because the edits are associated with your account, not your IP address. I'm an IT professional; this argument does not stand up to technical scrutiny.

Which probably means that your account has been compromised. Either by some sort of malware on your system, or someone has physical access to a machine where you log in (colleagues? family?, friends? nasty situation to be in, hope you can get control back before anything really nasty is done by them).

Note: I guess from your posts (specifically, the fact you connect via AOL) that this is your personal PC. But given who you work for, if it is your work PC I you should tell your IT department about this! They will want to clean the system, search it to see if any more dangerous things have been done, and reset all your passwords etc.

Good luck! EasyTarget 11:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I am still waiting for an apology - you called me "Hard of thinking", a "troll", and you also stated "I am glad he is out of office" - you don't even know me! And to top it all off you stated they "Kicked me out" - How dare you make personal assumptions and FYI - I left the job, because I moved away. This is Zanusi 12:44, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, well, the thing is...

...I'm not the user who's account was used to:

• Upload a doctored image insulting a crime victim.
• Replace the correct image on the victims page with the insulting one and modify the same page to replace the word shot with OWN3D.

And especially, I'm not a user who's userpage says they worked for SO19, the people who actually did the shooting..

On balance my opinion is that it is quite likely that you, or someone known to you, did this. But obviously I can't prove this anymore than you can prove the contrary, evidence is a bitch huh. A look at the IP logs for the edits might prove instructive.

A recurring thought I have when I watch the police and politicians reaction to this (and other issues) is how similar their behavior has become to the way criminals react.

• Total denial, deny everything until it is irrefutably proved.
• Total excuse making, muddy the waters, make excuse after excuse after excuse, even if they all contradict each other they'll always be someone stupid enough to believe you.
• If the evidence is overwhelming act contrite, whilst still spinning as many excuses as possible.
• Never say "sorry" without following it by "but.."
• But always demand unconditional apologies and submission from other people.
• Treat people you hurt with contempt, never drop the belief that somehow it's their fault, not yours.

I think it comes from having too many dealings with lawyers (criminals and police) or from actually being lawyers (politicians). Spin doctors use the same tricks, I'm not sure if they are leaders or followers in this fashion.

So.. I'm not apologizing. Whoever made those changes has earned my utter contempt, and I think what I said originally accurately reflects their motivations. If they hijacked your account in order to do it then that is matter for you to pursue, and an educational experience about IT security and internet anonymity too.

EasyTarget 19:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Fine, then I am going to report the personal attacks, and see to it that you are dealt with. This is Zanusi 09:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

FYI, Zanusi has been blocked. Neil ☎ 12:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Scince unblocked, and I am still bringing up the PAs. This is Zanusi 18:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Note; Zanusi is indefinitely blocked now. Probably just a troll account, or even an attempt to defame the police. If their user bio was correct, then taking further actions on their part could have had dire consequences anyway, and it it was a lie then they were just a liar. So probably the best result for both them and wikipedia. EasyTarget (talk) 18:26, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Tony Hawk

Thanks for removing the "It was invented by Tony Hawk" in the "@" article. I went to change it, and found that it was gone -- changed by you. Is this a common vandalism that I should be looking out for? Mitch (talk) 23:22, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

No Worries, it's the first time I've seen his name on "@" or any of the pages I have in my watchlist, but not the first Tony Hawk vandal/troll/prat comment I have seen. I guess it's his fanbase; slightly on the immature side. :-)

Having said that, he ROCKS on a skateboard! EasyTarget (talk) 15:57, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Amsterdam Metro

Thanks for your kind words. I was intending to get templates for the routes in, similar to the one at Amsterdam Centraal railway station#Amsterdam Metro, for the other stations. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 13:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I have created a to do list for the article, see Talk:Amsterdam Metro. – Ilse@ 10:07, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Jean Charles de Menezes

instead of Initially witness reports in the media incorrectly claimed that he was wearing bulky clothing and that he had vaulted the ticket barriers running from police.

how about Initially witnesses reported in the media that he was wearing bulky clothing and that he had vaulted the ticket barriers running from police, this later proved to be inaccurate.

to me, I feel concerned about the lead stating that people were trying to be misleading with their claims, I consider the above version while longer to be a little less leading.

Sennen goroshi (talk) 11:47, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Excessive citing

Dear EasyTarget -- there's a discussion about the problems of excessive cite requests going on at User talk:Antandrus. It'd be nice to have a non-music geek involved also. All the best, -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 03:46, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

U mad?

Nope. EasyTarget (talk) 10:42, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 19:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Atlassian Seraph

The article Atlassian Seraph has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lack of notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 17:59, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, EasyTarget. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, EasyTarget. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)