![]() | 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. |
Hi Fæ. Just wishing you all the best for 2015. -- Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 17:10, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Fæ, just a quick FYI that a motion has been proposed on the amendment request you filed. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 00:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
In response to the amendment request you filed the Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
The Fæ case is amended to add Remedy 2.1 as follows: "Notwithstanding remedy 2, Fæ is permitted to operate bot accounts, edits from which are only to be made in accordance with Bot Approvals Group approved tasks, or an authorised trial of one."
For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 11:31, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
I suspect everything will be fine, but don't want BAG running in to a collision with ARBCOM, asked for a clarification here: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Clarification_request:_F.C3.A6.2FR2.1_Bot_Edits. This serves as your "notice", I suggest you just link your other user statement to the BRFA that already has a reasonable statement on it. Best regards, — xaosflux Talk 14:40, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Fæ, just a message to let you know that a motion has been proposed the clarification request regarding you. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 03:11, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
This is a courtesy notice to inform you that I have closed and archived the clarification request you filed. The following motion has been enacted:
Despite the restrictions on his editing images related to sexuality, Fæ may operate the Commons fair use upload bot if the Bot Approvals Group approves it.
The bot may upload sexuality images that would, if Fæ himself had uploaded them to the English Wikipedia, breach Fæ's restriction, only if the upload is requested by a third party.
The bot shall maintain a log of: the images it uploads; the names of the articles on the English Wikipedia where the images appear at the time of upload; and the username of the Commons editor requesting the transfer to the English Wikipedia.
For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 01:23, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, you once commented at Category_talk:Roman_empresses, currently there's a related discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_March_11#Category:Roman_empresses. Cheers Brandmeister talk 12:09, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
I have replied to your questions. Did you see my question? Mr Muffler ( talk) 21:22, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Fæ, I'm astonished by your recent behaviour, to the point of disgust. Now, I'll reply to the previous section in a moment (since you pinged me), but more pressing is your statement at RfAR. The language you use, in comparison to the acts you describe is absolutely unacceptable. Going further and suggesting without evidence that Chase Me or any other member of WMUK staff has used privileged information inappropriately is completely unacceptable. So I'm going to give you a standard "put up or shut up". Either provide evidence that such actions have been going on, or retract the accusation. If you do not do either of those, I will not hesitate to block you for disruption. WormTT( talk) 11:32, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Fae. You made a comment on this page which was kind of upsetting ('anti gay'). Perhaps I could explain the context. I had been discussing the idea of a stable version of Wikipedia articles with user:Anthonyhcole. Anthony can verify this, and you can actually see the button as developed here. The idea is that once the stable version of the article is developed, you can (i) click the button to go it, and (ii) also diff the current version of the article to the stable version, in case of any useful improvements that could be incorporated into a new stable version. Because I was then banned from en.wikipedia, I developed this at Commons. I had no idea it was not allowed there. To test the concept, I included some imaginary vandalism of the "X is gay" schoolkid kind you typically see on Wikimedia sites. It had not even entered my mind that the name I used was the same as another user: rather, I had in mind a typical American schoolboy vandal. That was all. The idea that this was some kind of homophobic remark is absurd. Quite the opposite. With hindsight it was a stupid thing to do, given the possibility of misinterpretation, and because of the user name, which honestly had not occurred to me.
Regarding use of commons, if you look back on my edit history, you see a lot of useful stuff before the en ban, but it was difficult to do much while banned from en. I would like to continue that at some point. For example, I would like to load images from my collection of incunabula, such as this one.
So please accept my apologies for being stupid, and please accept my assurance that no slur was intended, either in general or against any specific user. Absolutely none was intended. Peter Damian ( talk) 10:51, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
What I see is that:
If you wish to pursue this, then you should be raising an unblock request on Commons. I see no value in you making a case here unless the outcome you are seeking is to cause me grief, or to give your off-wiki chums more material to continue their years long campaign of abuse and defamatory allegations. -- Fæ ( talk) 10:08, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
You were recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sockpuppet investigation block. Given the legal, privacy and BLP implications of holding the case in public the Committee has decided to run the case completely in camera, to that effect there will be no public evidence submission or workshop. Editors with direct knowledge of the events and related evidence are requested to email their to arbcom-en-blists.wikimedia.org by May 7, 2015 which is when evidence submission will close. For a guide to the arbitration process, see
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee,
Callanecc (
talk •
contribs •
logs) 07:01, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
I saw your response to me, but am replying here as it has been archived by one of the clerks. I understand that you are concerned about the decision to hold the case in camera. However, we have decided to do so, and I feel I explained rather clearly why. As such, please make further comments on the case by email, as everyone else is doing. GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:40, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 17, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, -- L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) 00:49, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Because of the unusual number of participants with interaction bans in the Lightbreather arbitration case, the consensus of the Arbitration Committee is that:
1. All i-bans and associated restrictions are suspended for participation on the /Evidence page. This suspension extends solely and exclusively to the /Evidence page but some tolerance will be given on the /Evidence talk page to link to material on the /Evidence page.
2. For simplicity, and for the purposes of this case only, one-way i-bans are regarded as two-way i-bans.
3. Threaded interactions of any description between participants are prohibited on both the /Evidence and the /Evidence talk pages.
4. Similar arrangements apply to /Workshop page and the /Workshop talk page.
The original announcement can be found here. For the Arbitration Committee, -- L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 12:44, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Someone has marked Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Commons fair use upload bot 3 as needing your input. Please visit that page to reply to the requests. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:09, 30 May 2015 (UTC) To opt out of these notifications, place {{bots|optout=operatorassistanceneeded}} anywhere on this page.
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!
Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!
If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.
Thanks, and happy editing!
Hi, Fae! :) --- Another Believer ( Talk) 06:14, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Fæ Hi. I would like to ask your help. Also going to ask Andreas. I was concerned that, after the ArbCom ruling Chase Me did not take down prose and boxes proclaiming he was an Administrator. I started a thread on his talk page and, whilst some people disagreed the changes were eventually made.
However, on looking again I notice that he still has his previous "I stand by everything" interview linked. This is a clear WP:BLP violation as the facts asserted in the interview have now obviously been found inaccurate by ArbCom - amongst others. There is a clear WP:NPOV problem as he does not link even to later articles by the Guardian correcting facts. It is clearly an attempt to WP:RGW and the controversy associated is clearly putting him in breach of WP:POINT.
I think someone should ask him to change it but do not want to be the one to start the thread on his talk page as I started the last one. I also want to secure a consensus. I think someone should start a thread there explaining the above - perhaps suggest a further ANI hearing if he does not comply. What do you think? Can you help? Vordrak ( talk) 19:56, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank for !voting at my recent
RfA. You voted Support so you get a whopping three cookies, fresh from the oven! |
As someone who knows more about UK image licencing and copyright can you give me any help with answering the queries in the image review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bristol/archive1?— Rod talk 08:53, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello! I'm running a survey to identify the best way to notify Wikimedians about upcoming UK wikimeets (informal, in-person social meetings of Wikimedians), and to see if we can improve UK wikimeets to make them accessible and attractive to more editors and readers. All questions are optional, and it will take about 10 minutes to complete. Please fill it in at:
Thanks! Mike Peel ( talk) 18:12, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Season's Greetings | |
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Shepherds (Poussin) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod ( talk) 10:26, 22 December 2015 (UTC) |
![]() |
Season's Greetings | |
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Kings (Gerard David, London) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod ( talk) 10:26, 22 December 2015 (UTC) |