This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
With reference to your voidance of amendments I made to Anthony Chenevix-Trench's biography.
You initially state I am writing about a living person, Anthony Chenevix-Trench. He is long dead. I accept that the comment that Richard Ingrams and Paul Foot harboured unremitting antagonism to ACT refers to a living person, Ingrams, and as such is not suitable and as such should be deleted. However, I have written testimony from Ingrams' biographer, addressed to me, which would substantiate such an assertion.
But what justification can there be for removing all the other references, which contrary to what you say, are sourced? I may have referenced them in the wrong format, but they are referenced. The four letters quoted, with names, for instance, were extracts printed in the Guardian on 4th September 1996. I quoted a letter I had written to the Daily Telegraph on 3rd September 1996, and referred to a Peterborough article of 31st August 1996.
I believe the current Wikipedia biography of Chenevix-Trench, as reinstated by you, is grossly one-sided and unfair, viz the four letters I quoted from the Guardian which put the other side of the coin. I believe I am well-placed to comment on this as much of the publicity against CT put out by Private Eye and Paul Foot ( and Richard Ingrams, but we can leave him out of it ) cited alleged mistreatment CT had meted out to me personally. However, there was no substance to their allegations at all and I never had any problems with CT. He was always fair and decent to me and I liked him.
To fail to put the other side of the case, and there clearly was one, and to quote almost exclusively salcious allegations against CT - allegations which were largely fed by Foot and Private Eye - is unprofessional and unworthy. Given the history Foot and Private Eye wrongly attributed to me, and which I have disputed on the record, I believe I am entitled to make edits to the current biography and to have them respected.
Hume shawcross ( talk) 20:24, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. I understand your point about Ingrams. A few points: Paul Foot and Richard Ingrams launched thir initial attack on ACT in Private Eye by citing his alleged treatment of me. This was repeated in other publications over the years, not least in by Foot in the London Review of Books and the Guardian when he published a riposte to a favourable biography of ACT 'The Land of Lost Content'. My alleged mistreatment by ACT was a hook on which Foot ( and Ingrams ) hung their story about ACT. However, there was no truth to their allegations about me. I never had any problems with ACT and in fact I liked him. I am not trying to become part of the Wikipedia story, as you imply, nor am I seeking publicity. Rather, I see the completely incorrect story about me, which was put out by Foot as part of his life-long campaign against ACT, as an example of how ACT was, at least in some instances, unfairly maligned.
I quoted the favourable letters from the Guardian story - which the Guardian quoted to show that there was another side to the story - to illustrate that many people viewed ACT positively. The controversy about him was stoked and kept burning by Foot and Ingrams. It has thus passed into the ACT folklore but it has to be seen in the context of Foot and Ingrams' very successful campaign against him. He was a remarkable man, may indeed have had his faults, but it is unbalanced and unfair to have his Wikipedia entry dominated by the allegations against him without stating the backgorund to the allegations and that he was viewed favourably by others. My own experience shows that the demonisation of ACT was not always based on fact. I would appreciate working with you to try to put some persepctive into his entry.
Hume shawcross ( talk) 13:25, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. I will keep checking. I have not read The Land of Lost Content but I expect it would provide a useful balance. Hume shawcross ( talk) 14:57, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, Demiurge, for your concern about my name being displayed. It is my real name. I am not seeking publicity but as I was named repeatedly ( and falsely ) by both Foot and Ingrams as having been one of ACT alleged victims, and in that context was a hook on which they hung their original Private Eye story, I am happy to be quoted, on the ACT talk page or elsewhere, that there is no substance at all to the allegation. I see one of the contributors to the ACT talk page, Emeraude 16/7/2007, states that the Private Eye stories "were certainly verifiable". In as far they cited me, and this was repeated by Foot in the London Review of Books after the publication of Land of Lost Content, and in the Guardian, and quoted in the Daily Telegraph, these allegations were false. I had no problems with ACT, and wrote to the Telegraph to set the record straight. Based on this experience, it makes one wonder how much of the other rather sensationalist allegations were also embroidered. I note in your recent comment on the ACT talk page headed Neutrality, that you also consider the present bio to over-emphasise the negative. Amazon quotes a review by Martin Baird of A Keen Wind Blows: Fettes Story, which states of Fettes' headmasters that "ACT in particular was an outstanding but ultimately tragic figure". At the moment the bio does not reflect much of his positive side. 58.8.12.35 ( talk) 13:50, 5 December 2012 (UTC) I failed to log in for the above message of 5th December. I have bought a copy of The Land of Lost Content. Is there any way I can send it to you for your reference in editing? hume shawcross ( talk) 02:57, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
What was wrong with this post you reverted? There is a dispute as to weather the Palestinian territories comprise the West Bank and Gaza Strip, or whether is a vague and dubious term (that's my understanding of the dispute anyway). Do you think I could have worded the post more neutrally or something? Emmette Hernandez Coleman ( talk) 23:33, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi again! I wanted to ask you where can I talk to an administrator? thank you :) ( Slurpy121 ( talk) 03:30, 31 December 2012 (UTC))
Guild of Copy Editors
2012 Annual Report
The GOCE has wrapped up another successful year of operations! Our 2012 Annual Report is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the
January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by
EdwardsBot (
talk) 00:21, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
|
Regarding a t-shirt nomination :) Jalexander-- WMF 02:43, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
~~~ — is wishing you a Happy New Year! Welcome the 2025. Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2025 with good health and your wishes come true! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2025 go well for you.
Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{
subst:
User:Pratyya Ghosh/Happy New Year}} to their talk page with a Happy New Year message.
Thank you for your advice at my talk page about reviewing at AFC. But there was a problem for me last week. A family problem. But I did editing at Wikipedia for my love to wikipedia. But everybody told I made mistakes last week. and I'm really sorry for my mistakes. And I promise, in the future I won't made mistakes like this. Thank you for your advice.-- Pratyya (have a chat?) 04:53, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I made a comment, but got reverted. I am not nocal whatever it is. Could you please re-post my comment? Thanks. 71.202.122.82 ( talk) 17:50, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
This Baby Code Monkey is very careful! He only gaves away his age and a little info on what he is like! He knows not to gave away information about were he lives! A Wiggin13 ( talk) 00:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
This user is a friend of Andrew Wiggin |
E-mail sent. -- Avi ( talk) 03:13, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
As far as my part in this saga goes, I jumped in only to ask Avi to show A Wiggins the rules that he was stating in his opening paragraph. With retrospect, I probably should have checked those rules, but I trusted Avi enough to support him. The rest, you know about. -- Skamecrazy123 ( talk) 03:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | ||
Thanks for helping resolve that argument! A Wiggin13 ( talk) 06:40, 2 January 2013 (UTC) |
Hello Demiurge1000,
thank you for your reply to my post. I've been away on holiday, apologies for the delay thus.
It was not my attention to suggest that the fake persona on facebook would be a problem for us. Rather, I am suggesting that 1 natural person, an agent, could control half a dozen socks without wikipedia realizing it, and could even control multiple admin accounts.
Since wikipedia is widely trusted, and a lot of people look to wikipedia if they want a balanced view on anything, it is a price worth conquering ... the corruption of wikipedia for corporate needs.
PR-firms and intelligence agencies must be targetting wikipedia for their covert activities on information biasing. What point would there be in a multimillion PR campaign if wikipedia shows it's not truthful at all?
How can we defend wikipedia from this?
Info-sabotage would likely involve both insertion of biased information on the one hand and also deletion of 'unwanted' information on the other hand. Wikipedia has so many editing rules, that wikilawyering in combination with the control of multiple accounts could scare off 'honest' contributers easily. How savvy are we at wikipedia to fence off such attacks ? Mick2 ( talk) 17:39, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that you declined a CSD for copyright at Davut Kavranoğlu. I disagree with your reasoning and I have listed the article as a possible copyright violation at Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2013 January 5. Although it is not a complete word for word copyright violation, the edited version only slightly modifies the copyrighted text. This is also prohibited under copyright law, and it would be better for an admin or OTRS clerk to make the call. Regards, GregJackP Boomer! 23:57, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Greed (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Canary ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:46, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
I think you should read the Anticyclone and Cyclone and make sure it does cover the stuff in Anticyclonic rotation and Cyclonic rotation before we redirect them. Jason Rees ( talk) 16:24, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
At http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2012_Delhi_gang_rape_case#What_needs_to_be_done_to_the_article, you said "BBC News, which is generally more reliable than the Mirror, is also reporting the person being very specifically not a boyfriend nor fiance." What are some links to the BBC News items about this, please? Thanks, David F ( talk) 19:46, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi, and sorry for not getting back to you sooner (I've been busy with school). I didn't yet have any plans for formal tests and such, so no, you would not be duplicating work by making some. I would, however, be willing to collaborate in making or grading them, if you wish. CtP ( t • c) 20:28, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for reminding me about WP:CONSENT. I hadn't thought about it in quite some time. Mkdw talk 21:52, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
A comment by you in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2012_Delhi_gang_rape_case#Victim.27s_name mentioned me. NPOV impartial tone calls for avoiding personal comments. David F ( talk) 02:58, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks kicking off the review of Template:Did you know nominations/Political development in modern Gibraltar. FYI, Template:Did you know nominations/Grand Casemates Gates needs another review following (yet more) objections - you may wish to have a look at that one too. Prioryman ( talk) 08:57, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
If you can add anything to this list it would be appreciated. I think we need to talk about a central repository for this splintered discussion. Perhaps a notice in Signpost? -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 14:18, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey, Thanks a lot for all of the help on Greed, its infinitely better because of your contributions. I've just added my last contributions in terms of new content and was going to submit it for a Peer Review specifically for FA status, unless you have a better suggestion. -- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 02:17, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Look at the history of Moja domovina. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 16:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
My only concern with Philippe is he said I was being ridiculous and offensive and had made a leap of bad faith. I asked two questions on Jimbo's talk page:
I see from the discussion at Commons AN that the file has been saved on our Florida server and is viewable at will by staff, oversighters and stewards. How many people does that represent? Does the complainant know the image has been saved on our server and is still being viewed? Is there any reason to save this image on our server? On its face, this seems very wrong. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 08:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
- That question was asked, I didn't see any response beyond the 'omg its deleted stop questioning us already'. If its been deleted due to a legal issue, it needs to be gone completely. Not viewable by anyone. If its been deleted out of process because someone thinks there is an issue, well there are questions that should be answered. More importantly though - it was on there for 2 years and survived a deletion discussion! Great that it has now been deleted, there are lots of people who would like to know exactly how and why so the method can be applied to other suspect material on there. Only in death does duty end ( talk) 09:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
- There is a knee-jerk reaction by a cadre on Commons that any thing with a hint of nudity, or sexuality MUST BE KEPT no matter what. They are supplying a bungy rope to ensure that Western Civilisation is protected from sliding down that slippery slope back into the days of the Inquisition. John lilburne ( talk) 09:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
- Exactly. And they're entrenched at Commons and have the buttons... Carrite ( talk) 17:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
- Umm. Are some these people who obsessively save porn on Commons able to view that "deleted" image? I'd still like to see a list of people who have free access to the image. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 17:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
- Without speaking to this specific case, in general, images that are problematic are oversighted and not deleted from the servers. There's a very good reason for that: law enforcement advised us to do so, so that the image remains in place for their investigation, should they need it. After a certain amount of time, we have it quietly removed. Let's not go casting about breathless lines about people obsessively saving porn unless we know the whole story, okay? Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation ( talk) 09:43, 15 January 2013 (UTC) (Edit summary:"Don't be ridiculous)
Philippe knows how indenting works on Wikipedia talk pages. He was addressing me. The claim that people were obsessively saving porn was made by John lilburne and Carrite; I was addressing my second question to them. Is Philippe saying there is not a cadre on Commons that believes that anything with a hint of nudity or sexuality MUST BE KEPT no matter what? If he does, he should take that up with Carrite and John. The link in my first question says, Correct. As a steward I can still see the content and I understand why it's suppressed. Trijnsteltalk 19:56, 12 January 2013 (UTC) My second question was straightforward, not ridiculous. I never encounter "stewards" on Wikipedia, and don't know what they do. Since this person, Trijnsteltalk, had just said they could access the file, a file that had been "deleted", it was reasonable to ask who else could access the file, and whether any of the abovementioned porn savers were among their number.
Philippe, in his "apology" on his talk page, said my "leap to bad faith (in suggesting that there was a group of people harboring illegal material on the wiki, and that the WMF would allow that)" was offensive.
There is no leap of bad faith or anything offensive in my questions. I had a perfectly justifiable concern, and I raised it. From what he says on his talk page, it is clear there is a group of people harboring illegal material on the servers (on advice from the police or prosecutors) and his claim that my assumption to that effect is offensive is baffling.
Philippe has offended me. His "ridiculous" comment and his "leap of bad faith" and "offensive" epithets were unfair. He doesn't see it that way. I would very much appreciate it if you and everybody else would drop this, not respond. This is between Philippe and me. He should apologise. He hasn't. It's over. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 00:57, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors
January 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter
We are halfway through our January backlog elimination drive. The mid-drive newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the
January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by
EdwardsBot (
talk) 00:26, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
|
for 'fnix'ing my brackets. Hate it when I do that and forget to use preview. I hope the editor who presumably tried to fix it actually responds. I did ask him to after warning him. Dougweller ( talk) 14:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Demiurge1000, what's the status of the above article's copy-edit? I'm asking because it's booked out to you at the GOCE Request page and your last edit to it was on the 5th of January. Should the request be archived? Cheers, Baffle gab1978 ( talk) 03:33, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. gwickwire talk edits 00:57, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Kindly conform your edit at Om Prakash Chautala. You have identified it as vandalism..-- Sachinvenga ( talk) 07:10, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Trashy Bags logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — ξ xplicit 01:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I have to say that I'm pretty disappointed and hurt that you chose to deliberately misquote me in an attempt to create drama here. It really speaks poorly of you. :-( -- MZMcBride ( talk) 01:43, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 06:24, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 14:01, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Demiurge1000. I wrote you a message at WP:REFUND#Trashy Bags. I wonder if you could please reply there? Kind regards, -- Unforgettableid ( talk) 18:33, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Un ban me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.196.208.254 ( talk) 22:47, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for stepping up and answering some of my mail when I wasn't feeling well lately. Much appreciated. Danger High voltage! 18:49, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Here we go with the American strangulation of wikipedia. Only the facts you want hey? Can't wait until your dollar sinks because I can't stand you.
And by the way, the talk functions are crap. They're overly complicated and confusing. As are the edit and edit summary facilities. Please improve them. It's just a jumble of text at present. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Z07x10 ( talk • contribs) 22:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your timely "man-urgement" input, Demi. Why isn't that Australian strangulation (by Dr Carlo Kopp?), I wonder? And I didn't realise that one could make the dollar sink just by not standing you. Any idea what this editor means about the "crap talk functions?" If the vandalism warnings posted on their Talk Page appear to this editor as simply "a jumble of text", that might explain a lot. I belatedly assunmed GF, but they don't seem to be editing in a particularly collaborative manner, do they? Regards. Martinevans123 ( talk) 12:45, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Demiurge:
Thank you for your comments. I have rewritten my two postings, removed all the subjective evaluations, and neutered my objections. My first draft was influenced by the style of comments I had found on the TALK page, and I thought I was writing in the same uninhibited spirit. Do note that the Talk page is much more loaded with subjective evaluations and reactions than my new version.
I concur with your hypothesis of "good faith", but it is not enough. Competence and scholarship are also valued criteria. I have dealt all my life only with the top experts in their field, and it is an education to encounter writers who are well below that level of knowledge.
If I had used the Licona comparison or similar in any of my papers at Harvard, I would have been laughed out of his office by my supervisor. I am sure the same would have happened at Oxford or Cambridge. Anyway thanks. This is a different world. Very few top scholars accept to make an input in a Wikipedia article. Nonetheless some articles are first-class. But others are unsatisfactory. This Licona analogy would not be even accepted by our tabloid "New York Post" (or so I hope!). -- ROO BOOKAROO ( talk) 08:19, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Demiurge, I have a question. Bear with me a bit, because I'm still new to CE Guild process. I've noticed that you're working on The Matrix article, and sometimes you leave things off, and I can't tell whether you're done. I assume that it is the standard procedure that when you're done, you'll inform the editors working on the article? Is that correct? Anthonydraco ( talk) 15:02, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Matrix, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Evil genius ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:47, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey, I have no idea who Philippe is or what he does or what list you're talking about. In any case, as I've said somewhere, I'm scaling back my commitment to wikipedia to staying with that RFC/U until a resolution appears. Then I'm done. Right now, I'm going to take my daughter to the park, and then I might read a book and she has a book she wants to read too. If there's something you want me to do, e-mail me: "[email protected]" and I'll get to it next time I can be arsed to visit this place. In other news, I didn't see your notice at the top asking for no talkbacks, so I'm replacing that with this. ˜ danjel [ talk | contribs ] 02:06, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
The Cleanup Barnstar | ||
This barnstar is awarded to Demiurge1000 for copy editing articles totalling over 12,000 words in the GOCE January copy edit drive. Thank you very much for participating! Dianna ( talk) 22:05, 2 February 2013 (UTC) |
Leaderboard Award—5K articles—5th Place (tied) | ||
This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Demiurge1000 for copy editing one article of 5,000 words or more during the GOCE January copy edit drive. Your contributions are much appreciated! Dianna ( talk) 22:05, 2 February 2013 (UTC) |
Hi there! I understand you are knowledgable on DYK nominations. Can you have a look at Women in Turkish politics and help me/us/WP to make a DYK out of it? Thanks in advance and all the best. -- E4024 ( talk) 17:14, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up about the CCI, i'll check it out shortly. Retrolord ( talk) 10:29, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
The Helping Hand Barnstar | ||
Demiurge, you always help me when I need or ask of it. I appreciate you putting in the time to work with me and answer my noobish and very random questions. You definitely deserve this Helping Hand Barnstar for all the assistance and feedback you provide. Thank you very much, — dain- talk 01:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC) |
Sorry, they wuz all out of barnstars!
Drmies (
talk) 17:46, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure how WP:BLP applies to a dead girl. I would kindly request that you undo your edit. Eminence2012 ( talk) 21:13, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Starship9000 ( talk) 01:13, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Can you please please tell me where in any policy it says users may not change their wording after someone has replied? Because if that's not in policy, you're violating REFACTOR. Thanks. gwickwire talk edits 14:36, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for you help in IRC today. I really do want to be more involved and be able to create and publish articles. Is there a mentoring or training program like there is in vandalism? What would you recommend? I am just too intimidated to get started. Thanks! Jab843 ( talk) 04:38, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
Thanks for your help today! You deserve a star! Jab843 ( talk) 04:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC) |
a primary source would be the report itself or the blog post by wmf and wmuk. the source i provided is secondary. didn't you click the link? 174.141.213.40 ( talk) 00:38, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
I would've appreciated if you'd added a note about removing my hatting, or at least notified me. {{ Archive top}}s and {{ Hat}}s have always been something of a gray area, TPO-wise, but I'm of the strong opinion that if a closure note has anything other than a purely routine note in it, the reopening editor should either link to the diff of the closure, or include the full text that accompanied it. I don't think "foolish" is a very fair word to use, especially when both threads were complete bullshit. If you actually feel like taking a stand for either ideology espoused there, then by all means do, but otherwise I can't see what purpose it served to un-hat them - Jayron32 has re-hatted the latter, and the former remains unanswered because, as I correctly guessed, no editor has any interest in dignifying it with a response, yourself included, it seems. Additionally, while I'd stop short of calling it POINTy, it seems at the very least imprudent to unhat me twice after I hatted a recent fight you got into with another user. — PinkAmpers & (Je vous invite à me parler) 12:41, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestion! Cmckain14 ( talk) 00:39, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
A few months ago, you participated in a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Did you know about Gibraltar-related DYKs on the Main Page. I am proposing that the temporary restrictions on such DYKs, which were imposed in September 2012, should be lifted and have set out a case for doing so at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs. If you have a view on this, please comment at that page. Prioryman ( talk) 21:47, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey Demiurge, like I mentioned that one day, I'm working on adding references to the Norman conquest of southern Italy article since there weren't very many, so I started working on it in my userspace. With me going over a few sources I changed some of the content after reading them (and citing what I found in them). I just wanted to get your eyes on it in my userspace before I put it "live" incase we want to talk about some of the changes and such. Anywho, I look forward to any feedback/response you might have. If you wouldn't mind using the userspace talk page for your response/feedback that would be appreciated since I'll ask for a few others opinions as well. Thanks again, cheers, — - dain- talk 01:57, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Demiurge1000 - thanks for your note. I'm clearly new to wikipedia, so I would love to better understand how you would have written those updates. You mentioned that the updates were promotional - on the oscilloscope page, I definitely can see removing the mention of the brand of oscilloscope (although it is factual in nature), but slow update rate *is* an inherent drawback of digital oscilloscopes. Why would we try to hide that on a wikipedia page? For the RS232 page, there was no mention of any brand of oscilloscopes - how could that be considered promotional? It was the same context as the information above it in the development tools section, just about a different (and very common) development tool. What would you suggest? TIA. Richpike ( talk) 14:48, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Very helpful! I thought it was beneficial to provide sources, but I see your point about the sources needing to be more indepedent. Thanks for the insights. I'll try again - thanks for the fast response. Richpike ( talk) 15:43, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Hmm. I've never read nor edited the Binge drinking article. I'm not sure I can be much help. Alcoholism and addiction are their own special area that mixes mental health with internal medicine. Legitimus ( talk) 01:44, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors February 2013 events newsletter
We are preparing to start our February requests blitz and March backlog elimination drive. The February 2013 newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the
February blitz and
March drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by
EdwardsBot (
talk) 22:54, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
|
Hello, Demi. I would like to ask why you have removed the {{ not done}} template I placed when closing a request. Yes, I am not an administrator nor would I normally be handling requests for permissions but that is an area that I or another ACC admin is required to comment. If you wish for me not to use a template that an admin would place hours later, then so be it but I find that highly unnecessary. :) -- Cheers, Ril ey 19:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Many thanks Demiurge1000, I appreciate your input. A great deal of info has been erased by this user who seems preoccupied with belittling the Tim Gustard page. The person who created did so in a rather flowery manner and was obviously an admirer and perhaps also not reliable. If you require any further information or wish to improve this article or indeed feel it is time to delete it, please contact me, Tim Gustard on [email protected] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.15.212 ( talk) 14:35, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your positive contribution to the discussion on my talk page. I appreciate it. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:05, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello Demiurge1000, you reverted my adjustments in the article Land reclamation.
An article about Land reclamation without mentioning the extensive Dutch history with the subject is a huge omission. I assume you don't disagree with that. If so, I would like to hear before I make the adjustments in the coming days.
You reverted all the adjustments all at once, because of too close paraphrasing the source. But only parts of it is paraphrased.
In the coming days I will put back paragraph by paragraph, rephrasing text and adding additional sources, since the article needs some more resources. If you still think parts of it are too close paraphrased, you can only revert the relevant parts. -- Watisfictie ( talk) 13:31, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Demiurge1000, thankyou for your comment you left on my talk page. You are right the photo was taken on the sea front of clacton on sea, although its not the best quality, i believe its one of the only on commons that show a complete rainbow so close, in your opinion do you think its worth a go at featured picture? Best regards -- Danesman ( talk) 12:04, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
...seen a nomination by a low trusted user of a community? I just want to know what nomination was made by the user with low trust in the community, who is the nominator and who is the candidate. I need a link please. C mach 7 01:32, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Little confused to as why my contribution of our Irish Music Festival Sligo Live was not accepted into wikipedia. There are many other Irish festivals listed. Kind regards, ( Dan.young3000 ( talk) 11:26, 21 February 2013 (UTC))
This is rouge Bantha 21 young that I posted my lego Star Wars post with information from LEGO STAR WARS.com.
And my name is supposed to be spelled like that.
Cheers,
Rougebantha21 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rouge bantha 21 ( talk • contribs) 02:27, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 13:03, 23 February 2013 (UTC)