text:
User talk:Dreftymac

Preventative Block
Hello. Looking at the series of page creations, it looks like you were running either a script or an unauthorised bot. Hopefully this was a one-off accident, however, just in case I've blocked you for now. Once you've fixed whatever the problem is, just reply here and an admin will unblock you. Thanks Unusual? Quite TalkQu 20:44, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Please unblock me. The issue was a runaway browser plugin. It created some pages that I did not intend, as well as some pages that I did intend. I have requested deletes on the pages that should be deleted, the other ones should remain as those can be used as a starting point for further edits. Thanks a lot for helping out and my apologies for any inconvenience. Cheers. Dreftymac (talk) 17:21, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Additional details and issues:

 * * block ID is #21133.
 * * It appears that *all* of the page creations done on the date in question were deleted, although I requested only deletes on about five of them
 * * The additional items that were deleted were intended for use and continuing active edits
 * * I hereby request permission/instructions on how to restore the pages that were deleted
 * * I hereby request permission/instructions on how to re-create the pages if the previous request is not possible
 * * I hereby request information necessary to allow bulk-edit operations such as the ones I carried out from being erased

Dreftymac (talk) 18:21, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Can you request the page restore at the Reading Room please? I'm not clear why you would want 200+ randomly named pages with no content, so I think this should be discussed first. Thanks. Unusual? Quite TalkQu 19:48, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Alright, I will be happy to explain. I am also happy to consider alternative approaches, if necessary to prevent the appearance of superfluous and unwanted content. (I have posted | here.

 * On another issue, could you please identify what steps I need to take if I want to perform a bulk-edit operation and not have the bulk edit overridden as an action of an "unauthorized bot"? I have several hundred pages of content for this book and it would be pretty burdensome to cut-n-paste each individual page one at a time. Thanks in advance for any feedback. Dreftymac (talk) 22:49, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dreftymac


text:
User talk:Democrat~enwikibooks

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You should sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be an idea if you add this page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there.

Good luck! -- Herby talk thyme 12:21, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Democrat. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Democrat~enwikibooks that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:09, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 04:52, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Democrat~enwikibooks


text:
User talk:Macpunk

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You should sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be an idea if you add this page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there.

Good luck! -- Herby talk thyme 12:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Macpunk


text:
User talk:DarkPhoenix32

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You should sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be an idea if you add this page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there.

Good luck! -- Herby talk thyme 12:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:DarkPhoenix32


text:
User talk:TWODM256

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You should sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be an idea if you add this page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there.

Good luck! -- Herby talk thyme 13:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Recipe contributions
Working through some general "housekeeping" I noticed that while you have contributed a number of recipes many of them state a "source". Without clarification and licensing these probably constitute a copyright violation and as such cannot be left on Wikibooks. I hope you will login again before these get deleted to review the situation. Thanks -- Herby talk thyme 13:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * In practice these have now been deleted as copyright violations. Please feel free to contact me should you have any queries but could I ask you to be careful with any future contributions - thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 17:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:TWODM256


text:
User:Was a bee

main account is w:ja:user:was a bee

was a bee

title: User:Was a bee


text:
User talk:Cphilippe~enwikibooks

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You should sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be an idea if you add this page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there.

Good luck!Sundance Raphael 13:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Cphilippe. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Cphilippe~enwikibooks that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:04, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 04:49, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Cphilippe~enwikibooks


text:
User talk:Annamramesh

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You should sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be an idea if you add this page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there.

Good luck!--Sundance Raphael 13:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Annamramesh


text:
User talk:CooKeeN~enwikibooks

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You should sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be an idea if you add this page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there.

Good luck!--Sundance Raphael 13:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called CooKeeN. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name CooKeeN~enwikibooks that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:03, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 04:48, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:CooKeeN~enwikibooks


text:
Cookbook:Puréeing

Purée - where vegetables, fruit, or legumes are turned into a soft paste or thick liquid by one of the following tools:

 * Blender
 * Mortar and Pestle
 * Potato Masher
 * Potato Ricer
 * Sieve

title: Cookbook:Puréeing


text:
User talk:Nvrsrinivas

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You should sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be an idea if you add this page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there.

Good luck!--Sundance Raphael 13:32, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nvrsrinivas


text:
User talk:Was a bee

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You should sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be an idea if you add this page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there.

Good luck!--Sundance Raphael 13:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Was a bee


text:
User talk:Pavel Zubkov

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You should sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be an idea if you add this page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there.

Good luck!--Sundance Raphael 13:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pavel Zubkov


text:
User:Petercooper

Dr. Peter A. Cooper Department Chair of Computer Science Director, Center of Excellence in Digital Forensics Sam Houston State University Huntsville, TX 77341

email:  ichat: peter.cooper@mac.com tel: 936.294.1569 fax: 936.294.4312

title: User:Petercooper


text:
Horticulture/Lonicera

Honeysuckles (genus Lonicera; syn. Caprifolium Mill.) are arching shrubs or twining vines in the family Caprifoliaceae, native to the Northern Hemisphere. There are about 180 species of honeysuckle, with by far the greatest diversity in China, where over 100 species occur; by comparison, Europe and North America have only about 20 native species each. Widely known species include ../Lonicera periclymenum/ (European Honeysuckle), ../Lonicera japonica/ (Japanese Honeysuckle, White Honeysuckle, or Chinese Honeysuckle) and ../Lonicera sempervirens/ (Coral Honeysuckle, Trumpet Honeysuckle, or Woodbine Honeysuckle).

Generic Characteristics
The leaves are opposite, simple, and from 1–10 cm long; most are deciduous but some are evergreen. Many of the species have sweetly-scented, tubular flowers that produce a sweet, edible nectar. The fruit is a red, blue or black berry containing several seeds; in most species the berries are mildly poisonous, but a few (notably Lonicera caerulea) have edible berries.

Cultivation and uses
Lonicera xylosteum (Fly Honeysuckle) is a common homeopathic remedy, used for asthma, breathing difficulties and syphilis. Lonicera periclymenum (European honeysuckle) is an uncommon homeopathic remedy, used for irritability with violent outbursts.

Wood cuttings from the species Lonicera tartarica, native to Eurasia, are sold as cat toys. The wood contains nepetalactone, which is the active ingredient found in catnip. Many breeds of cats react to the scent of the wood and will paw, lick or rub against it.

../Lonicera japonica/ and ../Lonicera maackii/ (Amur Honeysuckle) are considered invasive species in the United States and in New Zealand. Honeysuckle can be controlled by cutting, flaming, or burning the plant to root level and repeating on two-week increments until nutrient reserves in the roots are depleted. Honeysuckle can also be controlled through annual applications of glyphosate, or through grubbing if high labor and soil destruction are not of concern.

Honeysuckles are also eaten by children, who remove the blossom by hand to suck at the sweet nectar in the center.

Another name for honeysuckle is woodbine; and eglantine is used in Milton's L'Allegro.

During Victorian times, teenage girls were forbidden to bring honeysuckle home because it was thought to induce erotic dreams.

Pests and Diseases
The plant is eaten by the larvae of some Lepidoptera species - see list of Lepidoptera which feed on Honeysuckles.

../Aphids/: ../Scale Insects/: ../Hoppers/: ../Whiteflies/: ../Mealybugs/: ../Bugs/: ../Beetles/: ../Caterpillars/: ../Sawflies/: ../Mites/:
 * Woolly Honeysuckle Aphid: ../Prociphilus xylostei/
 * Honeysuckle Witches Broom Aphid
 * Russian Aphid
 * Greedy Scale: ../Hemiberlesia rapax/
 * Oystershell Scale: ../Lepidosaphes ulmi/
 * San Jose Scale: ../Quadraspidiotus perniciosus/
 * Euonymus scale: ../Unaspis euonymi/
 * European Peach Scale
 * Hemispherical Scale
 * Planthopper: ../Anormensis septentrionalis/
 * Greenhouse Whitefly: ../Trialeurodes vaporariorum/
 * Long-tailed Mealybug: ../Pseudococcus longispinus/
 * Four-Lined Plant Bug: ../Poecilocapsus lineatus/
 * Flea Beetles
 * Boxelder Leafroller: ../Archips negundamus/
 * Oblique Banded Leaf Roller: ../Choristoneura rosaceana/
 * Fall Webworm: ../Hyphantria cunea/
 * Omnivorous Looper Caterpillars: ../Sabulodes aegrotata/, ../Sabulodes Caberata/
 * European Honeysuckle Leaf Roller
 * Genista Caterpillar
 * Hummingbird Clearwing Sphinx
 * Red Banded Leaf Roller
 * Snowberry Clearwing
 * Honeysuckle Sawfly: ../Zaraea inflata/
 * Clover Mite

title: Horticulture/Lonicera


text:
Talk:Remote Viewing/S03

Anyone understand what the book is trying to say, could someone improve it a little.

title: Talk:Remote Viewing/S03


text:
Wikibooks:Arbitration/Panic2k4 vs. SBJohnny/Defendant Reply

= Intro = I have been racking my brain to imagine a way to improve the general mood people have on this subject and also to modify any perception they have of me, and so this is an effort to avoid being boring and to provide you a swell read, this will not be the end of Wikibooks, this is not the beginning of the end of Wikibooks this is only part of the beginning of Wikibooks, you (fellow users), should take a step back and see that we are also creating history (in a very small scale) here, collaboration and cooperative developing is the future, this is indeed the beginning of the end of a world were International Corporations, Governments and other selfish and controlling entities decide what people should know about and in what format, we are now at the start of an era were content will be produced by the masses for the masses, but I hope that they hurry up the next phase were they will be ranking all this content because most of the stuff is really a waste of time.

An Arbitration, this stuff is serious, but people do give so much more importance to this simple problems than they merit, it is a minority indeed the ones that can have a dispute or resolve a conflict and keep their sense of humor intact... and so with all the respect possible and intended, I will now start my rebuttal of the accusations presented against me...

= The "problem" = We are here in this situation at present, well, because of me, even if some people do consider me "the problem", I must assure you I'm not, and will try to prove to you that the reality is not as it has been depicted to you or as you are perceiving it (no you are not entering the TwilightZone), I don't like conflicts nor actively seek them (I'm lead to believe that they do seek me, trough), but probably because I can't let a wrong deed pass or something that I don't think proper without a comment and I'm not here to socialize or make friends (yep, this is a bit of a social network but I really, really don't have the time or inclination to get into it) and so I have no problem agitating the water. I can pass also for being a bit crazy, but I assure you I'm not, I'm fully aware that I'm fighting a decision of an administrator that probably has many supporters and I'm fairly unknown or do have a bad reputation (I personally don't care but I can understand that as a problem, so I will grant you that I may be a bit crazy, but aren't we all), and this is why I'm taking the time to try to explain you a bit about me, since most of you have probably never exchanged a word with me (please don't start now, it is fine as it is), and when you do it is only to deal with "problems" I'm involved with (well in a few years people tend to step on a few toes if they are active), ok that's enough about me.

So the problem is (I will tell you now, just bare with me), after what I see as a bunch of misunderstandings, probably some abuse (not by me, well you did expect me to say that didn't you?) and because I DO have a bad reputation. I got blocked, well, not this one time but tree times now, at the last block I had no choice but to push the envelope further (I seem to do it a bit more than others and then get even more of a bad reputation, well we will see), but I can live with it, I'm not fighting only for my sake but to improve the infrastructure to all Wikibookians, heck I see myself as the "creator" of the "fork problem" (hmm well that didn't end well and the infrastructure in that respect is almost as bad or worse), so one more discussion if for the good of the community will not scare me, my only problem is the time consumption this kind of processes lead to, this kind of policy making and discussion is not why I chose to participate on the Wikibooks project, but, because I haven't just yet lost all my trust in the project and see that the biggest problem we have is the lack of interest of most users, on just getting involved.

Block log
 * 22:56, 3 January 2007 User:SBJohnny blocked "Panic2k4" with an expiry time of 2 weeks (same reason, different week.)
 * 23:04, 10 December 2006 User:SBJohnny blocked "Panic2k4" with an expiry time of 2 weeks (continued disruption, see user's talk page)
 * 22:43, 9 December 2006 User:SBJohnny blocked "Panic2k4" with an expiry time of 2 hours (trolling)

Please take note of the dates that they may be important to reconstruct the events, I will try to give them in all steps, but I will deal the subjects in order of relevance to me, not chronological and not in order to the actual discussion on the table

User:Whiteknight
I place my self at the mercy of this "court", because I have wronged and made huge mistakes (well probably not so many as they try to convince you but at least two and one was not that great) and so I must make reparations to the people I've so greatly "annoyed", first and foremost I will address the one I mostly wronged, and who I most respect of all persons that have taken the time to express their views, he in his magnanimousness (maybe he probably didn't noticed), decided to spare me from his wrath, he is User:Whiteknight, it was with real dread that I have read his fantastic report on the subject that have placed me on this situation and his words couldn't be more correct and ring with more truth, truly a fantastic report of the events and an example to be fallowed. (I must remark that some of the report doesn't deal directly with the issue under discussion, and the user doesn't seem to be doing any accusation, it is only a correct, complete and probably instructive report of the events, or at least the ones the user has taken notice, one that I will make use further on. I also take this chance, since the user commented on the first stage of the proceeding, and since it is my understanding and he seems to indicate so on some of his posts outside of the arbitration, I have broken some of his warnings, I request him to state what and where in the next step if he wishes and if they aren't addressed in Error 1 or Error 2, if he doesn't wish them on the log of the Arbitration and as I don't seem to have big problems talking to him, please leave them in my talk page, at least I will try to see what I could have done differently, txs)

Error 1
What made me fear so much his comments on the matter was that I indeed was rash in a comment I made to him, after he spent time sending me a warning (here) I was very rude on my reply as can be seen [here], for it I'm truly desolated and will presently take the chance to apologize, I was way way out of line, but as I said this was an error and I admit it, I take the chance to publicly correct it (had I made the same remark to SBJohnny I probably would have been blocked for yet another reason). My reply in this case is important as part of a sequence of events were I was becoming a bit out of control due to a interference from Darklama (he did got me going for a moment there), but this I will explain later on. (the issue is not related with the problem that brings us here, but should be noted for the record as part of a sequence of events, the post and consequent conversation was about a tag for deletion, VfD, I added to a page Darklama created on the book namespace consisting on a copy of content from several other pages, it was in my view a duplication of content inside the book namespace and could constitute a corruption of the contribution history since it was intended as a replacement on the book, he did not only added it to his new TOC but to the "main" TOC replacing the original pages, he later moved the page to his user space and that was probably what User:Whiteknight saw and motivated the first post)

Timeline 02:59, 8 December 2006 Whiteknight's post. 19:47, 8 December 2006 Panic's last edit of the related reply on the same day. 18:42, 10 December 2006 a late post by Panic about this matter to Whiteknight after the first block, and that explains a bit about the next user and the other error I committed.

User:James Dennett
I have nothing but respect for the user, I consider it a very welcomed contributor the the C++ Programming book, I recognize him as fellow author as he has for a long time contributed his own content and insights to the project, I even think that I was responsible for his participation (I may be wrong), due to some posts I made to the newsgroups related to the book topic asking for participation on the book, I recognize the users extensive and deep knowledge on the subject (I do know he has more knowledge and experience on the subject than I do), I see in him as in myself the willingness to invest effort in writing and editing, and to foster the evolution of that particular project.

It is with some pain that I have read the user comments and his views regarding myself, I never did engage the user in any other subject before this post [here], regarding his contributions to the book or in any other matter, and he has been contributing even before the "fork" (2004).

I take his comments very personally and think he was lead to those observations not only because he was unaware that other problems existed, and (as I was before I run into my first problems with Paddu) he didn't seem very interested in the social structure and wasn't actively engaged on Wikibooks as a whole, until now (if he was I didn't noticed), I've noticed that the user seemed to be unaware for example how to use templates or that he should signing his posts (as I was at the start, and I also didn't particularly care about understanding these nuances) or to avoid changing other users signed posts, this provided me with a feeling that the user was willing to participate on the content but didn't give much importance to the particulars (I have no problem with that), and I value his contributions very much. My feeling is that the users interpretation of my post were not probably one of an user with more experience on Wikibooks and he was, as I, a casualty of an attempt to fabricate an event and instrumentalized with intention by other parties in specific due to darklamas interference after my post, that was the only instance that I've stepped out of character and I'm very sorry in having been lured into a more hash debate on that same talk page (and committing Error 1). Because I could see the matter form the user point of view I took the first and even the second block without contesting their validity, and since then I have watched darklamas actions with much distrust.

The user also mentions another problem on another post I made, were I stated that he didn't have the time to correct the problem (It may have been my wrong interpretation of the post he made in his talk page) but I don't see that as a problem, he changed my statement as he felt was correct and I do think that he may be giving more importance to what I said that he should but I have no problem in having him correcting the post and can even empathize with him that because of his views of the events he took it as attempt of attack (it was not my intention, I was expressing my interpretation of his post not more no less), anyway I took in my hand the page changes the user made and corrected them as can be seen [here] and the user accepted the changes as can be seen [here] and after the first block  I asked apologies for any wrong doing to the user as can be seen [here]. (as a side note I would encourage readers to examine the history and the posts made to the users talk page).

Error 2
Taking in consideration the user knowledge of what was going on, I should have avoided engaging Darklama on the same page I was addressing the user and by doing that getting him involved and giving the user an impression that his contributions weren't of value or in error (on content), I still affirm that they were on format (but I will address them later with the user if he so wishes, they are not a factor on the problem nor do I have any dispute with the user, I think the perception of the problem the user has of events are valid and I tried to address them, but I think it is was based on lack of experience and I didn't break custom practice at Wikibooks as I will extend on the examination of block 1).

Timeline 05:47, 5 December 2006 James Dennett changes that generated Panic's post. 00:22, 8 December 2006 Panic's post that resulted on block 1. 03:57, 10 December 2006 Panic's apologies to James Dennett.

User:SBJohnny
Now that I have addressed the issues that I think were of an higher importance to me and should merit an extra attention I will address the issue that generated this proceeding. I must start by stating that in no way my participating in this process is intended to humiliate or degrade User:SBJohnny image in the community and not even is it meant to evaluate the user's performance in the past or in other subject, not even on the one that lead to me being blocked, the issue at hand only relates to the outcome or the "sentence", I don't see that as a reevaluation of his decision and is intended to address my rights to recur from that decision, since I and the user didn't agree on the outcome. Any other results will be up to the Arbiter and the Wikibooks community, I had annexed a request that was based on my interpretation of events, I don't think that even it should be taken in consideration in the outcome of the Arbitration, it is probably a subject that would have to be addressed in a broader discussion as such I will proceed to state facts and try to reply to the accusations and statements he did commit to this Arbitration.

I still can't understand how the user can make some affirmations if he doesn't have a conscious intention in provoking confusion on the readers (to say the least), but once more I will try to point out were his logic is flowed and why (this is not the first time I do so, I assure you I didn't lure him into that position, I have repeatedly stated and tried to show that some of his comments regarding me were not correct, alas, this will be the last time, but I really wish to understand his motivations).

Reading his comments one notices that he mentions the dispute between me and Darklama, that is correct as I and Darklama have been having been discussing Darklama's changes to the structure of the book since I posted my first messages on Darklama's talk page [here] (in 14 September 2006) (when the Darklama deleted some content on a few pages, and did start to reformat the book), but then User:SBJohnny states that Darklama wishes to make some changes and become involved in the book, well, to be honest he should have said that Darklama did made some changes and that I did not objected to his participation (he could even saved me some trouble by pointing out that I did not made any revert of Darklama's changes until just before block 3, but I see how that could be hard to manage since I'm a Wikibooks demon), my objections to Darklama's changes are stated on my talk page since I and Darklama were able to establish the bases for our dispute (and it was going more or less well, until block 2, but I'll deal with them by steps later), as can be seen on my talk page, this statements predate any involvement of User:SBJohnny, even the call for comments for the dispute and clearly show that since then the User:SBJohnny misrepresented my views and intentions, as an later example you can see [here] (there are many more, even in his previous comments), (I've tried to be politically correct and avoid calling it a plain lie, as I can't attest to the user's memory recall capabilities, and I wish not to be involved in personal attacks, heck, this here are probably the first words I write about his person).

User:SBJohnny seem to understand his involvement on the "dispute" as moderation (but it's clear he was not) and that a knowladge of the topic of the book was necessary (as it will be clear it wasn't). I admit to have called users (in this case 3 administrators) to comment on the problem, from all tree, User:SBJohnny was the more unfriendly on his comments (he clearly didn't agree with any of the points I was making, and that wasn't a requirement) but did came into the discussion with a clear premade idea about my defense for an abuse of the be bold policy (I will not get into it now as it is outside of the scope of the Arbitration), calling the defense I was making against the alterations as a "shot down" of any changes Darklama wanted/wants to make (that was clearly incorrect) more information on that can be seen [my talk page], one of the things that irked me was that after, he did clearly started an indirect personal attack to me stating and I quote "Follow this policy and you'll have no worries.", this is, as is correctly stated on the talk page of that policy "just a passive-aggressive proxy for personal attacks" and very unbecoming of any wikibooks user, let alone an administrator, and clearly wasn't intended to solve anything, only to shush me, (am I'm to agree with the last line of the policy, is this the kind of helping hand one wishes on Wikibooks?!?), more, as User:SBJohnny continues thinking he is "moderating" it becomes clear that he is intent on only providing protection and validity for the other party actions, and as he clearly states the help he provides is directed on "picking on me", this is sad and out of character for the user as I can't believe someone that acts in this way could be welcomed and granted administrative rights (I would like very much to comprehend what lead the user to treat me in that "special" way), that culminated in a fantastic post We're done talking now, (what did he expect after that), I had the right to revert the changes I hadn't agree with and that Darklama (with knowledge of that) performed during the strange block 2. Even if User:SBJohnny states that he asked the user not to do so, until now no action was done on my behalf, why am I so lucky to get such differentiated treatment ?!? (I don't think any answer from my questions will be provided during this arbitration, but I think only a blind person can't see that something very strange was happening, what aggravates me even more is that even if some or all of my points were incorrect a simple analysis of the actions Darklama performed was clearly an abuse of standard policies, any of the administrators that commented could have resolved and diffused the situation, geezz he starter moving and deleting content of the book, I really can't begin to comprehend how/why was this allowed, the restoration of disputed changes should occur even if talks are under way, if agreement if reached, reversion is always possible, by allowing changes to remain future contributors may be allowed to build upon contested pages/structures, this even considered common practice as can be seen [here] )

 * I did never became hostile except on Error 1 and Error 2 but never did break Wikibooks guidelines or policies, I may have been incorrect at most.
 * I don't "bite" newcomers. (but I'm generally well feed and have all the shots in order)
 * I don't like but did never avoided discussions related to the stated events.
 * I think that wikilawyering is only a trow-in almost as bad as the one used for personal attacks, I can even become offended by being called, addressed or compared to a lawyer :), but I do seem to have an understanding of the GFDL that User:SBJohnny and Darklama don't agree with.
 * What is the cover page
 * authors vs contributors
 * having Wikibooks generating print versions without the GFDL and/or the authors list
 * It should by now be clear that I do respect Wikibookinas, what I refuse to do is give special treatment to administrators or specific users.
 * I will not compromise on GFDL matters, the license is the core of what we do here and was the base for my participation on the project, I even have taken personal compromise in getting other authors to contribute content and that the license would be used. (I'm open to changing my interpretation if proven wrong or with valid arguments, and I don't use it to justify any user bashing or any evil deeds, but it seems the reverse is open game)
 * I'm not in a "battle" with the community. I do think we (the community) have a need for clear policies and guidelines and need to be more clear in specific points.
 * be bold
 * forks
 * voting and what consensus means (I don't particularly like how it is being used)
 * establishing specific bookcommunities

block 1
Since SBJohnny depict the 3rd block as a the result of a sequence of events and not on one specific charge I will address the other blocks. I have tried to explain to the other user the reasons of the post that lead to block 1, I will now show that it is a common practice and that the interpretation SBJohnny tried to extract from it is a bit overdone.

It is common practice if another editor doesn't "like" (he must have a more valid justification) any contribution, he is entitled to revert it (it is a corner stone of the be bold guideline, without it the guideline couldn't exist), in this particular case the user did several edits (very small, and during 3 distinct edits), consisting on changes of the meaning of phrases or just word replacement, I saw it (at the second edit) and noticed that they broke the logic of a single statement, I knew the user and did know who I was addressing (see comment to him above), for respect to him and his contributions I didn't revert (that would have been cleaner and would have avoided the exploitation of the event), and gave user the chance to explain the logic behind that change in a very simple way (and did not force him to do anything as is alleged), as I said somewhere else the "obligation" was simply to provide a feedback or not, like "call me in 3 minutes or I will call you back", it is common practice for programmers to ask for control of a structure before they commit changes to it, in projects with several contributors or even when programming and so again I state that there were problems with my actions.

If anyone is guilty of trolling on that matter is darklama it is clear that the intent was to cause disruption, in the form of posting a messages that are inflammatory, insulting, or off-topic, with the intent of provoking a reaction from others. (well, he succeeded, but not even his actions would be worth a block or interpreted as a violation of Wikibooks policies or guidelines)

block 2
On this one I'm as clueless as you are, I can't understand it, the only explanation to it is a reevaluation of block 1 but not on the reasons User:SBJohnny presented, he stated [here], fantastic, I did not cause any problems on this because Christmas was at the door and the community could be best served if I kept my mouth closed on this one.

The problem is bigger yet, this block resulted (probably on some offsite conversation, I'm now led to believe) since I was talking with another user (yup it was darklama) talk page, and explaining the problem of block 1, this violates my freedom of expression and even if your interpretation was correct, my point of view had the same value as yours, since I was talking to a third party on a private page, that is, by User:SBJohnny action any person that disagrees with any policy can't talk about it or express the wish for changes (not the problem here but the final result is that).

block 3
Well this one was tipping point, as it was now clear to me that User:SBJohnny was (I will not call it moderator since on Wikibooks that entails that some power of decision is given to him by the disputing parties) acting as mediator (a forced one at that), and his actions only seemed to be directed at me and was actively validating Darklama actions and even enforcing them and acting only on the the other users behalf and with a excellent timing at that, he did not engage me to clear any of the reasons he used to decide any of the previous block with me (action was taken on the spot and I don't think any of the 2 blocks were intended on stopping disruption of Wikibooks), after the post We're done talking now, I was left with no solution to the ever increasing problems I had and that were aggravated during block 2, and so my last resort was to as was my right revert the changes (my option is based on comment of other administrators and common practice), I only reverted part of the changes made during block 2 and it was my intention not to initiate a revert war (this were my first reverts during all this time) and I informed Darklama that I would do them also as a way to bring the user to the table again (we were doing more or less fine up to block 1 and his actions on block 2).

The user made mention to a warning he made that validated the block, I can't find or remember such warning, probably I suffered from the same problems Darklama experienced during his actions on block 2. (strangely enough only I got diagnosticated)

My actions in no way violated any guideline or policy and were minor, even if they didn't fallowed standard policy, compared to darklamas previous changes to the work.

(I don't provide more information as it is readily available on my talk page and most of the participants, even the Arbiter know this facts already, I only stated some more relevant events as to demonstrate and be clear that not all that was said on the accusation seems to agree with the way I see the events) Timeline 22:45, 9 December 2006 SBJohnny's post informing me of block 1. 23:11, 10 December 2006 SBJohnny's post informing me of block 2. 18:44, 28 December 2006 SBJohnny's post that clearly demonstrates dissemination of misinformation. 21:00, 28 December 2006 Panic's reply to another post with misinformation. (not related to the events on the table, but prove my point) 18:40, 3 January 2007 SBJohnny's post We're done talking now and my reply.

User:Darklama
I do think I can understand User:Darklama, I've also been a newcomer with even less knowledge about Wikibooks that he seems to have in such a small time(heck, he is an administrator and I even voted in support), at the time our roles were reverted in a similar situation (not in the particulars) I was the new user full of ideas and Paddu defended the existing structure but at least the solution we found did not cause any problem to both parties and ended the dispute. I have no personal problems with Darklama, only a divergence that is, for some time now, clearly stated and for what I can say, well defined in the evolution of the format of the book and some interpretations about more general legal matters, but since the second block, I have some suspicions about his behavior and the specific the way he has gone about "resolving" the problem, I will not address any of Darklama accusations, I did just that on the reply to SBJohnny, they are only an amplification for what SBJohnny wrote (or see it has the reverser, SBJohnny is a tuned down report of the same things, you pick what best suit you), a funny thing though, Darklama was the first to write in the Plaintiff Charges (well it's probably my paranoid side acting out), but since the event involving the other user (James Dennett) and going to the trouble of contacting Paddu, I think I can have some reasons to see some webbing and plotting, heck I even don't have a problem if they did talk about me being blocked or discussed how to proceed on IRC, I think that SBJohnny was pretty clear in his actions, how does User:Darklama puts it on is comments "I do not believe SBJohnny was taking sides", well, I let the readers decide on that one.

The user actions immediately after block 2 were abusive in relation the what we had agreed and against the "normal" way to resolve issues, as an example you can look how such edits are considered by actual policies [here], they were even more grave as the user was aware that I was opposed to the alterations and took advantage of the administrator actions (he his also an administrator), no action was taken against the user due to his alterations of the work.

As a solution to my divergences with Darklama I can only propose an Arbitration or a moderation (I like the first better because all things are stated more clearly, but it takes to long and his to formal, we can probably ask the moderation to address in a similar fashion), I'll be opened to a similar process if the users wishes, since I don't trust my self control to continue being civil in case of an escalation of events, I have done all I could.

Timeline 23:27, 14 September 2006(+- hours) Panic's first posts to Darklama.

User:Paddu
Ha, the third element of the axis of good in the fight against the evil empire... (it calls to my mind images of North Korea :)

Well I don't have anything in particular to say about Paddu comments, as I said before (couldn't find the post), I don't have any personal hill filling about Paddu and consider our dispute closed as the time of the "fork", my problems and probably Paddu's are more how the Wikibooks community let our dispute evolve at that time, we did try everything, the time to address that problem has passed and the user did stop to participate on Wikibooks and I can't be blamed for it as the other work remained there and the solution was not an imposition of anyones will, it was a mean to end the dispute and did just that, any way, I see his involvement as an irony of destiny, his situation was similar to the one I am on dealing with Darklama, I'm defending format as he was, but the time to discuss the problem as I said has passed I think none of us were truly satisfied with the outcome.

I take this chance to inform Paddu that I even took into my hands to defend his points of views for the original work and tried to show the administrator that forced the merge that your vision (objective) was not the same, not even the intended audience. I'm even sorry "my" version or "my" vision substituted "yours" in the end, on that regard you can still read all my argumentation of that time to avoid the merge. (Paddu had a more restricted approach to the evolution of the book, this is a bit more technical but I will only say that some of the things I added and are now part of the book were not wanted on the "version" Paddu defended, the structure is also was different, Paddu, wanted a hands-on approach a kind of FAQ with a step by step introduction to the language) my first contribution to Wikibooks and to the book can be seen [here].

The involvement of Paddu in this case is yet another example of the somber actions of Darklama, but I think in the long run it will probably backfire, he (Paddu) is a very picky (as he do have low level of threshold to changes), I remember him causing a stir because I was archiving post with 30 days in a full page. I can positivity say that if doesn't start calling "Broddy Murder" because Darklama moved his posts he will be very out of character :), If Darklama thinks I'm leading him to desperation because I don't like some of his changes, he surly would love to have met Paddu when I was in that similar situation, my solution was the "fork" and so I can understand in part Darklamas motivations. (Paddu's talk page may also provide some more information, take the chance to also check it's history)

A "funny" post of mine can still be seen on Paddu's talk page, if Paddu takes the time to read all this mess and understand what my divergence is with Darklama, he will be having a laugh about it all. (I don't remember if Paddu had a sense of humor but other people will may find it funny in relation with the problem, I do)

= Closing words = I think I have addressed all the problems but probably not all accusations made, as some don't even merit a response, I'm plainly evil and my motivation is the downfall of Wikibooks, I will savagely attack any who wish to participate on the project and if the events don't speak for themselves I don't think anything I may say will make you see them differently.

I wish that any of the parties of the accusation that think I didn't address any specific and "reasonable" accusation to state it on the next step of the Arbitration, I wish that if I stated something wrongly or made a bad assumption that they will clarify it, not only to me, but to any other reader, some of the events are particularly murky and others do seem to show bad intention, at least that is how I have become to see them, I truly think I have a good feel on how and why some events were presented and I'm even able to understand some of the view points that lead to some actions I don't think were proper (that was why I pushed this thing so far)

I did no personal attacks (if I did it was not my intentions and I tried to avoid doing them) and made clear where I was making interpretations and not stating facts so to prevent further confusion, regarding Darklama in particularly as I have stated before I have now a great level of mistrust as for SBJohnny, I can't piece it together the user seems to be one thing but his actions and some comments sometimes are very out of character or at least that is how I perceive it.

I did not try to evolve other users on this or related problems, I have only asked some users that were already partially aware of the problem to check this page, and I never talked to another Wikibookian outside of the Wikibooks structure (anything I have written so far on all subjects are public record).

People that write books, should have fun doing it... but this is not writing books, this is more like politics and I hate politicians.


text:
User talk:Oolong~enwikibooks

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You should sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be an idea if you add this page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there.

Good luck! -- Herby talk thyme 18:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Cookbook:Onigiri
Seeing what you are working on maybe take a look at this and contribute there? All recipes should be in the "Cookbook:" name space. If you need a hand ask around - regards -- Herby talk thyme 18:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll delete it - no problem - but please do continue to contribute and ask if I can help at all. Regards -- Herby  talk thyme 19:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Oolong. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Oolong~enwikibooks that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:34, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 05:19, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Oolong~enwikibooks


text:
ANSI C with Unix

=Introduction=

Intended Audience
This book is intended as a sophomore level university text book. The coverage of subject material assures that the reader has a working knowledge of higher level languages in general and is familiar with a reasonable modern program development environment. The purpose of the book is to introduce those already familiar with programming to a more system-oriented language that provides the programmer with a greater degree of freedom (and therefore responsibility).

Our undergraduate Computer Science curriculum requires that our students learn at least three high level languages. The first two semesters of the degree program use Java. The course for which this book is designed follows early in the sophomore year. This book assumes successful completion of those first two courses and as such this book does not need to focus too much on general program structure, flow control or syntax. Where structure, syntax and flow control are mentioned, the emphasis should be on how C differs from Java.

The rationale for developing this book is to provide students with a means to: contribute collaborate critique learn through explication and teaching

During the summer, we as a group will be in a position to decide if a) the book has value on its own and therefore should be more permanent b) has some components of merit that can be merged into existing wikibooks or c) should be discarded as an interesting but futile experiment. :-)

= The Bourne Shell Interface =

Navigating the Shell
Stub out. These might all be different pages

invoking the shell from common distributions variants between Unix/Linux directory navigation basic file management permission management basic text editing via emacs, vi/vim, joe etc.

Compiling A Single-Source "C" Program
The easiest case of compilation is when you have all your source code set in a single file. This removes any unnecessary steps of synchronizing several files or thinking too much. Lets assume there is a file named 'single_main.c' that we want to compile. We will do so using a command line similar to this:

Note that we assume the compiler is called "cc". If you're using a GNU compiler, you'll write 'gcc' instead. If you're using a Solaris system, you might use 'acc', and so on. Every compiler might show its messages (errors, warnings, etc.) differently, but in all cases, you'll get a file 'a.out' as a result, if the compilation completed successfully. Note that some older systems (e.g. SunOs) come with a C compiler that does not understand ANSI-C, but rather the older 'K&R' C style. In such a case, you'll need to use gcc (hopefully it is installed), or learn the differences between ANSI-C and K&R C (not recommended if you don't really have to), or move to a different system.

You might complain that 'a.out' is a too generic name (where does it come from anyway? - well, that's a historical name, due to the usage of something called "a.out format" for programs compiled on older Unix systems). Suppose that you want the resulting program to be called "single_main". In that case, you could use the following line to compile it:

However, this requires that the current directory be in our PATH (which is a variable telling our Unix shell where to look for programs we're trying to run). In many cases, this directory is not placed in our PATH. Aha! - we say. Then lets show this computer who is smarter, and thus we try:

This time we explicitly told our Unix shell that we want to run the program from the current directory. If we're lucky enough, this will suffice. However, yet one more obstacle could block our path - file permission flags.

When a file is created in the system, it is immediately given some access permission flags. These flags tell the system who should be given access to the file, and what kind of access will be given to them. Traditional Unix systems use 3 kinds of entities to which they grant (or deny) access: The user which owns the file, the group which owns the file, and everybody else. Each of these entities may be given access to read the file ('r'), write to the file ('w') and execute the file ('x'). Now, when the compiler created the program file for us, we became owners of the file. Normally, the compiler would make sure that we get all permissions to the file - read, write and execute. It might be, thought that something went wrong, and the permissions are set differently. In that case, we can set the permissions of the file properly (the owner of a file can normally change the permission flags of the file), using a command like this:

This means "the user ('u') should be given ('+') permissions read ('r'), write ('w') and execute ('x') to the file 'single_main'. Now we'll surely be able to run our program. Again, normally you'll have no problem running the file, but if you copy it to a different directory, or transfer it to a different computer over the network, it might loose its original permissions, and thus you'll need to set them properly, as shown above. Note too that you cannot just move the file to a different computer an expect it to run - it has to be a computer with a matching operating system (to understand the executable file format), and matching CPU architecture (to understand the machine-language code that the executable file contains).

Finally, the run-time environment has to match. For example, if we compiled the program on an operating system with one version of the standard C library, and we try to run it on a version with an incompatible standard C library, the program might crash, or complain that it cannot find the relevant C library. This is especially true for systems that evolve quickly (e.g. Linux with libc5 vs. Linux with libc6), so beware.

Creating Debug-Ready Code
Normally, when we write a program, we want to be able to debug it - that is, test it using a debugger that allows running it step by step, setting a break point before a given command is executed, looking at contents of variables during program execution, and so on. In order for the debugger to be able to relate between the executable program and the original source code, we need to tell the compiler to insert information to the resulting executable program that'll help the debugger. This information is called "debug information". In order to add that to our program, lets compile it differently:

The '-g' flag tells the compiler to use debug info, and is recognized by mostly any compiler out there. You will note that the resulting file is much larger than that created without usage of the '-g' flag. The difference in size is due to the debug information. We may still remove this debug information using the strip command, like this:

You'll note that the size of the file now is even smaller than if we didn't use the '-g' flag in the first place. This is because even a program compiled without the '-g' flag contains some symbol information (function names, for instance), that the strip command removes. You may want to read strip's manual page (man strip) to understand more about what this command does.

Creating Optimized Code
After we created a program and debugged it properly, we normally want it to compile into an efficient code, and the resulting file to be as small as possible. The compiler can help us by optimizing the code, either for speed (to run faster), or for space (to occupy a smaller space), or some combination of the two. The basic way to create an optimized program would be like this:

The '-O' flag tells the compiler to optimize the code. This also means the compilation will take longer, as the compiler tries to apply various optimization algorithms to the code. This optimization is supposed to be conservative, in that it ensures us the code will still perform the same functionality as it did when compiled without optimization (well, unless there are bugs in our compiler). Usually can define an optimization level by adding a number to the '-O' flag. The higher the number - the better optimized the resulting program will be, and the slower the compiler will complete the compilation. One should note that because optimization alters the code in various ways, as we increase the optimization level of the code, the chances are higher that an improper optimization will actually alter our code, as some of them tend to be non-conservative, or are simply rather complex, and contain bugs. For example, for a long time it was known that using a compilation level higher than 2 with gcc results in bugs in the executable program. After being warned, if we still want to use a different optimization level (lets say 4), we can do it this way:

And we're done with it. If you read your compiler's manual page, you'll soon notice that it supports an almost infinite number of command line options dealing with optimization. Using them properly requires thorough understanding of compilation theory and source code optimization theory, or you might damage your resulting code. A good compilation theory course (preferably based on "the Dragon Book" by Aho, Sethi and Ulman) could do you good.

Getting Extra Compiler Warnings
Normally the compiler only generates error messages about erroneous code that does not comply with the C standard, and warnings about things that usually tend to cause errors during runtime. However, we can usually instruct the compiler to give us even more warnings, which is useful to improve the quality of our source code, and to expose bugs that will really bug us later. With gcc, this is done using the '-W' flag. For example, to get the compiler to use all types of warnings it is familiar with, we'll use a command line like this:

This will first annoy us - we'll get all sorts of warnings that might seem irrelevant. However, it is better to eliminate the warnings than to eliminate the usage of this flag. Usually, this option will save us more time than it will cause us to waste, and if used consistently, we will get used to coding proper code without thinking too much about it. One should also note that some code that works on some architecture with one compiler, might break if we use a different compiler, or a different system, to compile the code on. When developing on the first system, we'll never see these bugs, but when moving the code to a different platform, the bug will suddenly appear. Also, in many cases we eventually will want to move the code to a new system, even if we had no such intentions initially.

Note that sometimes '-Wall' will give you too many errors, and then you could try to use some less verbose warning level. Read the compiler's manual to learn about the various '-W' options, and use those that would give you the greatest benefit. Initially they might sound too strange to make any sense, but if you are (or when you will become) a more experienced programmer, you will learn which could be of good use to you.

Compiling A Single-Source "C++" Program
Now that we saw how to compile C programs, the transition to C++ programs is rather simple. All we need to do is use a C++ compiler, in place of the C compiler we used so far. So, if our program source is in a file named 'single_main.cc' ('cc' to denote C++ code. Some programmers prefer a suffix of 'C' for C++ code), we will use a command such as the following:

Or on some systems you'll use "CC" instead of "g++" (for example, with Sun's compiler for Solaris), or "aCC" (HP's compiler), and so on. You would note that with C++ compilers there is less uniformity regarding command line options, partially because until recently the language was evolving and had no agreed standard. But still, at least with g++, you will use "-g" for debug information in the code, and "-O" for optimization.

Compiling A Multi-Source "C" Program
So you learned how to compile a single-source program properly (hopefully by now you played a little with the compiler and tried out a few examples of your own). Yet, sooner or later you'll see that having all the source in a single file is rather limiting, for several reasons: The solution to this would be to split the source code into multiple files, each containing a set of closely-related functions (or, in C++, all the source code for a single class).
 * As the file grows, compilation time tends to grow, and for each little change, the whole program has to be re-compiled.
 * It is very hard, if not impossible, that several people will work on the same project together in this manner.
 * Managing your code becomes harder. Backing out erroneous changes becomes nearly impossible.

There are two possible ways to compile a multi-source C program. The first is to use a single command line to compile all the files. Suppose that we have a program whose source is found in files "main.c", "a.c" and "b.c" (found in directory "multi-source" of this tutorial). We could compile it this way:

This will cause the compiler to compile each of the given files separately, and then link them all together to one executable file named "hello_world". Two comments about this program:
 * 1) If we define a function (or a variable) in one file, and try to access them from a second file, we need to declare them as external symbols in that second file. This is done using the C "extern" keyword.
 * 2) The order of presenting the source files on the command line may be altered. The compiler (actually, the linker) will know how to take the relevant code from each file into the final program, even if the first source file tries to use a function defined in the second or third source file.

The problem with this way of compilation is that even if we only make a change in one of the source files, all of them will be re-compiled when we run the compiler again.

In order to overcome this limitation, we could divide the compilation process into two phases - compiling, and linking. Lets first see how this is done, and then explain:

The first 3 commands have each taken one source file, and compiled it into something called "object file", with the same names, but with a ".o" suffix. It is the "-c" flag that tells the compiler only to create an object file, and not to generate a final executable file just yet. The object file contains the code for the source file in machine language, but with some unresolved symbols. For example, the "main.o" file refers to a symbol named "func_a", which is a function defined in file "a.c".

Surely we cannot run the code like that. Thus, after creating the 3 object files, we use the 4th command to link the 3 object files into one program. The linker (which is invoked by the compiler now) takes all the symbols from the 3 object files, and links them together - it makes sure that when "func_a" is invoked from the code in object file "main.o", the function code in object file "a.o" gets executed. Further more, the linker also links the standard C library into the program, in this case, to resolve the "printf" symbol properly.

To see why this complexity actually helps us, we should note that normally the link phase is much faster than the compilation phase. This is especially true when doing optimizations, since that step is done before linking. Now, lets assume we change the source file "a.c", and we want to re-compile the program. We'll only need now two commands:

In our small example, it's hard to notice the speed-up, but in a case of having few tens of files each containing a few hundred lines of source-code, the time saving is significant; not to mention even larger projects.

Getting a Deeper Understanding - Compilation Steps
Now that we've learned that compilation is not just a simple process, lets try to see what is the complete list of steps taken by the compiler in order to compile a C program. 1. Driver - what we invoked as "cc". This is actually the "engine", that drives the whole set of tools the compiler is made of. We invoke it, and it begins to invoke the other tools one by one, passing the output of each tool as an input to the next tool. 2. C Pre-Processor - normally called "cpp". It takes a C source file, and handles all the pre-processor definitions (#include files, #define macros, conditional source code inclusion with #ifdef, etc.) You can invoke it separately on your program, usually with a command like: Try this and see what the resulting code looks like. 3. The C Compiler - normally called "cc1". This is the actual compiler, that translates the input file into assembly language. As you saw, we used the "-c" flag to invoke it, along with the C Pre-Processor, (and possibly the optimizer too, read on), and the assembler. 4. Optimizer - sometimes comes as a separate module and sometimes as the found inside the compiler module. This one handles the optimization on a representation of the code that is language-neutral. This way, you can use the same optimizer for compilers of different programming languages. 5. Assembler - sometimes called "as". This takes the assembly code generated by the compiler, and translates it into machine language code kept in object files. With gcc, you could tell the driver to generated only the assembly code, by a command like: 6. Linker-Loader - This is the tool that takes all the object files (and C libraries), and links them together, to form one executable file, in a format the operating system supports. A Common format these days is known as "ELF". On SunOs systems, and other older systems, a format named "a.out" was used. This format defines the internal structure of the executable file - location of data segment, location of source code segment, location of debug information and so on. As you see, the compilation is split in to many different phases. Not all compiler employs exactly the same phases, and sometimes (e.g. for C++ compilers) the situation is even more complex. But the basic idea is quite similar - split the compiler into many different parts, to give the programmer more flexibility, and to allow the compiler developers to re-use as many modules as possible in different compilers for different languages (by replacing the preprocessor and compiler modules), or for different architectures (by replacing the assembly and linker-loader parts).

=C Program Structure and General Syntax=

C Program Structure
Stub out

need to include here  preprocessor directives particularly constants, header files #ifdef etc.  comments  main function with command line parameters  function prototypes  constant and variable declaration  autonomous code blocks <li> functions

Array Notation
=Pointers and Addressing=

The Relationship Between Pointers and Arrays
=Bit Manipulation=

The shift Operator
=I/O, Streams and Stream Management=

=Strings= =Structures, Unions and ADT’s=

Abstract Data Types (ADTs)
=Dynamic Data Structures=

=Inter Process Communication= =Database Connectivity=

=Contributors= Petercooper contributed the initial structure of the book. Raquibul Islam (Rana) contributed the Command Line Compilation with gcc of the book.

Programowanie w systemie UNIX/C

title: ANSI C with Unix


text:
Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/Transcendentalist Theology

Transcendentalist Theology
Non-notable philosophy/personal opinion of a single user here Kurt Kawohl who is pushing/spamming his POV. His related content has been previously deleted on various places for these same reasons: As another user stated correctly on one of these past deletions, this material Transcendentalist Theology is more like a personal essay and belongs on a personal website (which this user Kurt already has here) and not in an Encyclopedia. Its not surprising that Kurt is the only editor of this article and no one has edited it since he created it in August 2006. Also, the first paragraph of this article has a link to http://transcendentalists.org which is another personal website of Kurt. --Zddune 08:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * In Wikiquotes here: Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Transcendentalism Today
 * On Wikipedia here:
 * Wikipedia:Votes_for_undeletion/Universist_Movement
 * Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Transcendentalist_Theology

*Weak Keep - I am in general agreement with Dragontamer on this issue. As long as original research and NPOV guidelines are generally kept (I don't like to see things completely made up by an author amounting to essentially fiction) this isn't really that big of a deal. There are other theology Wikibooks that have a similar theme to this, although I would like to see perhaps a more complete outline (sample table of contents, etc.) that would happen with this book for it to go beyond the stub that currently exists. --Rob Horning 07:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC) I'm all for keeping shoots, but I'm greatly concerned about the prospects of this one. --Swift 15:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - what Zddune said, plus it would appear that Kurt used sock puppetry in the WP universist movement voting. Webaware 21:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Xania [[Image:Flag_of_Poland_2.svg|15px]]talk 13:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I see no issue publishing something about Transcenditionalist Theory here, as long as it fits policy (is NPOV and actually makes a book). It is entirely possible to write a Theology book with a NPOV, as long as Kurt is willing to take up the workload for that. I'm leaning towards keep right now, but there seems to be some bad faith going in here. I can easily see this material thrown out of wikiquotes. Wikipedia... maybe. I don't have access to the full article, so I'm not sure what it looked like. --Dragontamer 18:28, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Zddune. Tommciver 09:51, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. I'm very unsure about this one. I agree with Dragontamer and Rob Horning that as long as OR and NPOV policies are adhered to, then I have nothing against a wikibook. The past version didn't fulfill these requirements and the current one isn't anything near a book — at most a resemblance of an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia's Kkawohl stated: "My literary qualities are sorely wanting." Is this the same Kurt Kawohl that started this book? Are there any other potential contributors to this project. The founder of Transcendentalism Today, Org. is Kurt Kawohl. Are he and our contributor the one and the same? If so, is this really the proper person to contribute a wikibook on the subject? I think this may be the wrong type of original research.
 * Doing some futher digging around, I noticed that this file has been up for a VfD before, and deleted at least twice. The most recent deletion was due to an apparent copyright violation, although considering the author of some of those documents appears to have added the content, that may have been an improper deletion.  I've restored the full history of this page for the purpose of this discussion, although this (the restoration) shouldn't be interpreted as justification for keeping the content here on Wikibooks by itself.  Surprisingly, this was one of the very first Wikibook modules ever created back elsewhen.  Now to find the previous archived VfD discussion about this page.... --Rob Horning 18:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I've placed a message about the other pages this editor may well be involved in on their talk page following Swift's example -- Herby talk thyme 19:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Still more digging. VfD page history from the first delete shows no sign of a VfD discussion, and the same goes for the latter.
 * Also, I'm on the verge of changing to "Delete". I'm seeing less and less potential for something policy abiding coming from this. --Swift 06:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is the same Kurt Kawohl who started the book. I dont have any problem with any of the work as well, as long as it follows policy but unfortunately, Kurt is on an Internet Spam mission (see Google here) and WikiBooks is part of his spam. What he has done is write personal essays on Transcendentalism and related subjects and then spam it on the Internet in an attempt to make it famous and get it accepted by people. His other articles that he has just added to Wikibooks a few days ago may also need to be considered for deletion. They are:
 * Theology/Urantian theology - only a collection of external links to his website
 * Urantia United Foreword - This is a copyright violation. Here he writes himself: "Urantia United (Earth United) is in large part an edited, condensed version of the Urantia Book by Kurt Kawohl. " - He edited the Urantia Book according to his own beliefs and then placed it in an article.
 * After having his material deleted so many times before, he still doesnt care if he's violating policies and continues to spam the Internet including Wikibooks. --Zddune 20:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Delete -- Herby talk thyme 08:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Delete as clever self-promoting spam. Kellen T 14:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Delete - I'm changing my vote to delete. Going over the edit histories, and in particular the new content that this user seems to be adding to Wikibooks, it seems as though it is a sort of spam after a manner.  While he may be granting Wikibooks a license (I don't think the copyright issues are huge here as the author is granting permission), it still smacks strongly of original research.  I don't see any verifiability to any of this, in terms of outside sources of information that this Wikibooks is already copying verbatium.  We do accept philosohpical books like discussions of the Koran and the Bible, but those have nearly countless sources of information to draw upon if you want to do a serious study of those philosohpies.  And as I pointed out strongly on the Staff Lounge, Wikibooks is not a place to publish as a vanity press.  There are specific goals in mind for Wikibooks, and the publication of these books doesn't fit in even close to those goals.  I would like to see some counter justification, but I don't see it.  In terms of original research, I don't see how legitimately anybody else could possible be able to contribute to this (and the other books this user has added) in a meaningful way to extend the ideas that have been presented.  At best only minor edits, not a major reworking based on scholarly knowledge and external (to Wikibooks) sources of knowledge.  --Rob Horning 21:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)