Well, me too. I was sort-of hoping that someone would take it over and save me the effort of trying to organise it. Perhaps that was unrealistic :-<. I'll get back to it in a little while William M. Connolley ( talk) 10:06, 1 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Heh, yeah, it can be like that. Normally when one requests a CU it's because the behavioral evidence provided is pretty strong but not certain. I looked at the evidence page you linked and couldn't make much sense of it, hence my "wtf" sort of response. I'm watching the case so will see any updates. Best, Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 10:21, 1 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Pedro would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Pedro to accept or decline the nomination. A page will then be created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Steven Crossin. If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

You have been nomed :) Pedro :  Chat  10:18, 4 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Indeed, I have. :) Now we just wait for Doug and then transclude :) Wish me luck :p Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 10:24, 4 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Are you talking about being an administrator? I'll support you, if that's what this is referring to. (What is "transclude"?) HuskyHuskie ( talk) 11:56, 4 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Yeah, this is for an RfA. It's not live yet. Transcluding an Rfa, when it's added to the main Rfa page, marks the start of the 7 day period. Hope that explains it. Thanks :) Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 12:04, 4 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I just now signed on and saw you at RFA then voted my support, but I guess it was too soon, so I undid it. When can we vote our support? HuskyHuskie ( talk) 12:33, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

You can vote whenever you like, the Rfa is live. The listed date is when it ends. Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 12:35, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Steven, when I look at your RFA page, and click on your name, it goes to some type of a "draft" page. Is that correct? HuskyHuskie ( talk) 12:38, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks for pointing that out, I've fixed it. Best, Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 12:43, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Now I see that, while you have two support votes, the vote counter is not registering them. Something else is amiss, no? HuskyHuskie ( talk) 12:45, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

The vote counter isn't immediate, but yeah, I made other errors. That will teach me to transclude an RFA with my iPhone :P Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 12:48, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

You're an iPhone user? Hmmmmm, I'm going to have to give more thought to this before giving you my support. HuskyHuskie ( talk) 12:51, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi. It appears that the transclusion is not fully complete. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 12:49, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Crap, what did I miss? Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 12:53, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Kudpung, what issue are you seeing? I don't see a problem except that the counter seems inordinately slow.-- Doug.^{( talk • contribs)} 12:59, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

The counter is what I was going to ask about. Is it not instantaneous? HuskyHuskie ( talk) 13:00, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I may have contributed to the confusion regarding Kudpung's comment, as I inserted my comment above his, though it was posted later. HuskyHuskie ( talk) 13:00, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

OK, maybe that was it. There were some early issues with the transclusion related to the draft link you noted but they have all been resolved I believe and the counter is now up-to-date. The counter is a little slow, nothing is instantaneous. ;-)-- Doug.^{( talk • contribs)} 13:05, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

As it is visible from my comments and from comments of others, the article suffers from distortions, incompleteness, and narrowness which is not in category of general concerns; the comments are very particular and precise. About consensus, the exiting article version is not result of any consensus nor it make sense expecting any consensus ever. Ignorance, bad intentions, and disrespect of real knowledge are unsurmountable barriers here. Your refusal to make the article editable does not make sense. You did not participate in this discussion, your overall user contributions are outside history, which makes me ask you: what makes you qualified to judge this case?-- 71.191.19.40 ( talk) 19:50, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello there. My decline of the edit protected request was for a few reasons. The main reason for it is that you didn't request anything specifically to be changed, and from reading the section you linked I could not determine what changes to made either. Edit protected requests should be used when you know exactly what needs to be altered, for example, "Change word X to word Y, because this reference states that the opinion has changed" or something like that. As for the protection of the article, this is neither something I applied or something I can remove, as I am not an administrator. You can of course request the article be unprotected at requests for page protection, but you may be better off discussing your concerns at the article talk page and coming to a consensus on what changes should be made. Best, Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 20:01, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

In response to this, there is a strong assertion of notability in that he has received several regional awards as well as a national RTNDA Edward R. Murrow Award. The latter award is verified by this, and—considering that WP:ANYBIO states that someone is notable if he "has received a well-known and significant award or honor"—I think it establishes Bush's notability. Goodvac ( talk) 23:55, 5 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Ah, you are right. I'm not sure how I missed that, my google news search for some reason didn't find that. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I have undone my redirect. Best, Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 00:00, 6 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks! Goodvac ( talk) 00:06, 6 November 2011 (UTC) reply

You are welcome :) Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 00:07, 6 November 2011 (UTC) reply

After our discussion about my desire to get better at content work I spoke to Wehwalt about it and they agreed to help me on that. Cloveapple ( talk) 00:43, 6 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Great, glad to hear it. Wish you the best of luck, keep in touch. :) Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 00:49, 6 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Your phone rings every time you check your email? You expect us to believe that? Gigs ( talk) 03:21, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

No, you must have misread. If I login from a computer from which I have logged out of my email account, I have to answer a call which provides me with a verification code. It's Google 2-step verification, you can see the details here. Regards, Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 03:26, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

OK, thanks for the explanation. That makes more sense. Gigs ( talk) 03:30, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I've updated my answer at RFA as well, as I do see how it is a little bit unclear. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 03:38, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi there, Steven. I'm hoping to mediate my first case at the Mediation Cabal and I was wondering, as it's my first, if you'd mediate it with me. The case is Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/08 November 2011/Iraqi Turkmens. Would that be ok? Thanks, ItsZippy ^{( talk • contributions)} 21:02, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Sure, I'd love to. My MedCab case is a bit slow at the moment and I could use something to take my mind off the RFA. Jump on IRC, into #wikipedia-medcab, let's chat there and get started. Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 21:11, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks very much. I'll join the IRC in a second. I've just opened the case, essentially copying what I saw in others. ItsZippy ^{( talk • contributions)} 21:16, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I think I'm in the IRC - I've never really used it before, so I'm not too sure what I'm doing. ItsZippy ^{( talk • contributions)} 21:23, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Nope, can't see you anywhere. Go to Webchat, put ItsZippy as the username, type #wikipedia-medcab as the channel to join and enter the captcha. I'll guide you from there. Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 21:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Ah ha - that's worked, thanks. ItsZippy ^{( talk • contributions)} 21:35, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hey, when you reviewed Darren Osborne you said you'd rereview it when i felt it was ready. If you'd rather someone else review it than thats fine too, i don't mind either way. D4nnyw14 ( talk) 22:35, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello there. It's looking a lot better. I'd be happy to re-review it but it may take me until Sunday or Monday to get to (it's Thursday morning here). I've got a few things I need to attend to over the next few days, but should be free after that. By the way, you can use {{ Cite episode}} to reference storyline/plot info. Regards, Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 22:41, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks, i've cited most of the plot now but will keep that in mind in future. D4nnyw14 ( talk) 22:44, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

nm; 6 mth, or someth.  Chzz   ►  03:13, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Steven, I'm so sorry for the way things went down. I think you helped yourself with the way you withdrew; it was a classy exit. I don't know how long will be long enough for you to make it (obviously, for some, no amount of time will matter), but I will support you again whenever it is, but I promise that next time I'll only cast my !vote and otherwise remain silent. I don't know if I was part of the problem for you, but I realize now that some people can turn anything against someone, if they want. HuskyHuskie ( talk) 03:29, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

At least you proved RFA is still broken and that off-wiki canvassing to generate opposes is tacictly accepted and allowed to go unchallenged. Bugger. Always happy to renominate mate. Chin up. Pedro :  Chat  07:20, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks Pedro, I appreciate that. I think I'll get back to work witg my ideas in reforming the dispute resolution processes. It may be a while before I take you up on your offer, I'd say at least th middle of next year. Regards, Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 07:26, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

• I just wanted to chime in and say that I'm sorry your RfA went up in flames like that. I'm not sure if we've ever met, but I've seen you around and I really appreciate all the good work you do for this site. Although I respect the opinions of everyone in the oppose column, I still think it's very unfortunate that all of this happened because of a few really poor choices from three years ago. I suspect your RfA would have ultimately passed had it been allowed to run the full duration, but I respect your decision to end it before it got out of hand. If you ever apply for adminship again, rest assured I'll support. Master&Expert ( Talk) 09:17, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hey Steven, sorry all that shit happened. I was going to !vote today, went to RfA and saw that it had closed. That's a shame: I do think you would make a good admin. Don't worry, though, if some of the oppose votes are to be believed, you'll be an admin sometime before the heat death of the universe. (Sigh.) You've shown considerable maturity throughout the whole process, and you can go forward from this with your head held high. You don't have a problem; the process is borken. Again, sigh. — Tom Morris ( talk) 09:40, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello, Steven. While I completely understand that you understand that what you did in 2008 was wrong. Quite frankly, don't take any of this personally. I admire the way you went out, and for it you should keep your head high. If you are wondering why so many people fretted over the 2008 incident (which I'm not saying it's something not to be fretted over) is that you only have 6 months of recent editing. I understand you've changed, and like you said, by the middle of next year, depending on how things go, if you do accept another RfA, I will support it. But with the 2008 incident still fresh in everybody's mouths and only 6 months of recent editing, like I said, you're just not ready for the mop and bucket...yet. Not now, but soon. Thanks for all your hard work on the wiki the past 6 months, and God bless. Beluga boy ^{cup of tea?} 13:51, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hey, Steven. Sorry to see that this RfA ended up going downhill. I was pretty confident you'd pass, and am disappointed to see that people crawled out of the woodwork to !oppose towards the end. I hope you continue to edit as productively as you have been, without letting it bring you down. You can count on me for a !support next time around, if you so choose to run again. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 16:13, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

This is obviously not a good situation. But what can we do, if they're going to hold discussion someplace other than the case page and then complain that the case page is inactive? Anomie ⚔ 17:44, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hmm. Perhaps increase the threshold for inactivity from one to two weeks? Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 20:52, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Except for the bot marking it inactive and then the mediator making a small edit, that case page has already been inactive for 2 weeks. I've invited Alpha Quadrant to comment here, in case he has any insight. Anomie ⚔ 21:09, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hm. Perhaps there's a field or something we can put in somewhere the mediator can use to ensure the bot doesn't mark it inactive? I dunno, didn't expect this. Mediation on the article talk page really isn't my style. Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 21:12, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Ok, did just that: {{ medcabstatus}} now takes a parameter |external discussion= to point to where the external discussion is occurring, and the bot will consider the last edit to that page when trying to determine inactivity. Note that if that is pointing to a page with other active discussions on it, the bot may never be able to mark the case inactive. Feel free to adjust the wording at Template:Medcab case update or the field label and formatting at Template:MedcabStatus; if you want changes to how the bot lists it on the Cases page, let me know. Anomie ⚔ 14:24, 14 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I felt sorry when you withdraw your RfA nomination. However you are keeping up with you're best efforts so I gave you this. Mohamed Aden Ighe ( talk) 01:17, 11 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks :) I could use some coffee actually... Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 01:21, 11 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Do you have any objection to moving Opposition to the legalization of abortion to Opposition to the legality of abortion and Support for the legalization of abortion to Support for the legality of abortion? To " legalize" is to make something legal that's presently illegal, whereas "legality" is the term with the relevant extension. Since the current titles were imposed after a lengthy controversy, I wanted to check to make sure there wasn't some hidden rationale I was missing for the choice of "Legalization" over "Legality." - Silence ( talk) 01:25, 11 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I think that might be something worth discussing, however think that it may wise to wait until the Abortion arbitration case is over, and that it should be brought up on the talk pages of the respective articles. Regards, Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 01:38, 11 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I ran into Jack Bauer on flickr and suggested he stop by your page, but he said it would be better if you stopped by his office. Cloveapple ( talk) 07:59, 11 November 2011 (UTC) reply

P.S. Hope this is useful for one of the articles. I don't know enough about the show to know if this is during filming or between takes, but it's definitely on the set and with the right license. The office one is also right licensing, but I wasn't sure it was useful. Cloveapple ( talk) 04:57, 14 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Lol, that is not Jack Bauer's office :P Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 05:06, 14 November 2011 (UTC) reply

The office photo caption must have been a private joke then. Naïveté thy name is Cloveapple. Cloveapple ( talk) 05:17, 14 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Seems a shame, the uploader of that image has many other images they uploaded but they copyrighted all of them. Maybe I can convince them to change the license. Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 05:21, 14 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I don't know if I noticed the other images. I was just focused on finding free ones. Are they good? It sure couldn't hurt to ask. Cloveapple ( talk) 22:10, 14 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Yeah, it's not bad. :) Did you find any other free ones? Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 22:14, 14 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I didn't see any other free ones on that search unless you count some clearly stolen ones and some ad ones. [1] [2] But since the ads would be copyrighted & take up most of the shot I doubt they are usable. I saw one ad one that might be useable if Japan has Freedom of Panorama copyright rules since it's part of a wider scene, but now I can't find it. (I'll look again.) So far I just did searches for Bauer under the actor's name & the character's name, so I could have easily missed shots of other 24 things. I'll let you know if I see some though. (Are you familiar with Flickr's Creative Commons search engine? You can search by license at Flickr:Creative Commons if you click on "see more" under the license that interests you. There's a section for plain Attribution Licensed stuff and one for the Attribution-ShareAlike License.

I know you mentioned seeing other pics by the same person as the one I uploaded to Commons. I looked again but didn't see them. If you are hoping to sweet talk a Flickr person into releasing some unfree ones Mike Lynaugh's photostream is full of shots of actual filming and the set.

Also have you ever asked anybody connected with the show if they'd release any of the pics? IMDB.com has a free trial offer of their Pro version which lists contact info for lots of producers, actors, etc. Might be worth trying. Who knows maybe they'd have pictures of sets, props, or actors. After all it benefits them to have an article covering them look good. Cloveapple ( talk) 21:35, 15 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello, Steven

This Wikipedia log says you are not an administrator! It is wrong, isn't it? I am sure you were nominated.

Regards, Fleet Command ( talk) 08:35, 11 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Indeed I was. My RfA was failing, so I withdrew it. Regards, Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 09:31, 11 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Amazing indeed. Last time I checked my user page, you had 90% support with over 200 supporters.

Although, I must confess that I was also worried. Those who become an administrator in Wikipedia change beyond recognition; they become extremely conservative, often afraid of their own shadows, refuse to cooperate with their colleague as they did before becoming an administrator though not because of the backlog they are burdening – as if something is binding them. Even the boldest administrators I know mellowed over time. Three administrators whom I was fond of have vanished. I briefly knew you, so I was afraid you might become like that. Regards, Fleet Command ( talk) 12:06, 11 November 2011 (UTC) reply

That's true, and I've seen it before. ~~ Ebe123~~ → report ← Contribs 16:08, 11 November 2011 (UTC) reply

FWIW, I had no plans on being a nervous admin. Backlogs are there to be cleared, I didn't for a second think of not doing admin stuff out of fear. But that ship has sailed. Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 22:13, 14 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks :) Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 04:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Could you finalise your reversion series soon? Fifelfoo ( talk) 00:15, 15 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Oops! I forgot! I've done that now. Thanks :) Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 00:47, 15 November 2011 (UTC) reply

No worries! Fifelfoo ( talk) 01:28, 15 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Do we want to add a new 'category' for "Hold", or just lump them in with Inactive? Or what? Anomie ⚔ 04:15, 15 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I made a category for cases that have been placed on hold, Category:Wikipedia Medcab cases on hold. Perhaps lump them with inactive but instead of the field "Inactive since X", make it something like "On hold since X"? Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 04:21, 15 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I was going to ask for a second mediator to help - how about you act as the second mediator? -- Thehistorian10 ( talk) 07:04, 15 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I'd love to, but I'm up to my neck with other disputes at present. I've poked two other mediators to see if they can assist. Regards, Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 04:24, 16 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi Steven!

I understand that an official welcome message was overlooked upon approval of your application to join the Global Education Program as an Online Ambassador. My apologies. Welcome just the same! The steps you need to take now, a few things you need to read, are bolded.

When you get a chance, please add your username to the official list of Online Ambassadors and add a profile for yourself here (which helps match Online Ambassadors with classes in their areas of interest).

Here are some things you should know to help you get started:

The role of the Online Ambassador

The main role of for an Online Ambassador is to join the "pod" for one or more participating classes. The pod is the team of people helping a class of students contribute effectively to Wikipedia, consisting of the course instructor, the local Campus Ambassadors who will work with the class in person, the Online Ambassadors who work with the class online, and the Regional Ambassador for the pod who will check in periodically with the pod to make sure everything is going well.

A prototypical pod might look something like this:

• An instructor who is fairly new to Wikipedia, leading a class of 20 students assigned to make significant contributions to new or existing articles related to the course subject.
• Two Campus Ambassadors, one of whom is an experienced Wikipedian and one of whom is new to Wikipedia. The Campus Ambassadors will have gone through a training program on the basics of Wikipedia and how to help students contribute effectively.
• Two Online Ambassadors, one moderately experienced on Wikipedia and one very experienced, who can answer basic questions and give good editing advice and find others to help when they get in over their heads, one of whom has a particular interest in the subject area of the course.
• One Regional Ambassador, a moderately experienced Wikipedian who is working with 15 different pods spread across a big geographical region.

(That's an idealization, but it gives you an idea of the spectrum of people in each of the roles in the program.)

The expections for an Online Ambassador in a pod (and what you can expect from other pod members) are laid out in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between pod members. In short the role of the Online Ambassador is to:

• Help students in your class(es) when they ask for it, answer their questions, and generally watch out for them
• Help students to get feedback on their work (whether from you or other editors an interest in / knowledge of the subject area)
• Be a good example for students, modeling good wiki communication and editing practices
• Communicate regularly with the other members of your pod about how things are going and problems are coming up

To join a pod, go to the MOU signup page, which lists the courses for the current term, and leave your signature in one of the Online Ambassador slots for the pod you want to join.

You can also help as an Online Ambassador outside of your role as a pod member, anywhere you see students who could use help. Feedback on the substance (rather than style and formatting) of student articles, in particular, is always a need.

If you use IRC, please consider adding #wikipedia-en-ambassadors and #wikipedia-en-classroom to your channel lineup. The latter is the main help channel for the program, where students and instructors come from time to time in search of live help.

Wikipedia Ambassadors are expected to follow the Wikipedia Ambassadors Principles. Please review them.

Communication channels

There are three main places for news, updates and discussion about Wikipedia Ambassadors and the Global Education Program:

1. Wikipedia talk:Ambassadors
2. The Ambassador Program announcements list, which all ambassadors should join. It is a low-traffic email list that is only used for significant announcement that are relevant to the whole program. Please sign up as soon as you get a chance.
3. The Wikipedia Ambassadors Google Group, a discussion list shared by Online Ambassadors and Campus Ambassadors. It's not required, but it's strong recommended and most of the ambassadors are on it. Request to join the Wikipedia Ambassadors Google Group if you would like access.

Newsletters about the program, or messages for Online Ambassadors particularly, may be delivered to your talk page on occasion.

Thanks for volunteering as a Wikipedia Ambassador! If you have any questions, please let me know.

--Best regards, Cind. amuse (Cindy) 12:00, 15 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Dear Steven Crossin/Archive 41: Hello, this is to let you know that a Mediation Cabal case that you are involved in, or have some connection with:

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/08 November 2011/Iraqi Turkmens

is currently inactive as it has not been edited in at least a week. If the issues in the case have been resolved, please let us know on our talk page so we can close the case. If there are still issues that need to be addressed, let us know. If your mediator has become inactive, also let us know. The case will be closed in one month if it remains inactive. You can let us know what's going on by sending a message through to your mediator, ItsZippy, on their talk page. Thanks! MedcabBot ( talk) 13:14, 17 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi Steven, I was wondering if you could give me some advise. The MedCab case I am mediating is not going anywhere because the other editor involved has not made any comments. I've sent him a reminder, to no avail. Would it be best to close the case? If so, where shall I direct the dispute? ItsZippy ^{( talk • contributions)} 19:27, 17 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I'd just close out the case. The other editor hasn't been active for almost two weeks. No point referring it elsewhere. If they return to editing. The case can always be reopened. Regards, Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 20:17, 17 November 2011 (UTC) reply

You closed the dispute I raised on Billy Fox, and I hadn't realised. So just to say here thanks for your assistance. The result isn't everything I'd want, but the other editors haven't reverted it and I think your help contributed to a compromise. Thanks. -- Flexdream ( talk) 16:19, 20 November 2011 (UTC) reply

• Heh, I hardly did anything, but you of course are welcome. Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 22:04, 20 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello! Note this my proposal please. In thhe past there was a time when I hoped this mediation wouldn't proceed too fast, but now it is clear we should speed the things up. GreyHood ^Talk 13:28, 23 November 2011 (UTC) reply

While he is the CEO of an NCI Cancer Center in Florida (his principal accomplishment), he is relatively unknown outside of his institution and internationally, and there are at least 66 NCI Cancer Centers in the US. He has received a few national accolades, but so have many others. Others equally well known such as Michael Caligiuri, CEO at OSU cancer center, David Alberts Director of the Arizona Cancer Center, are not listed. It is my opinion, he does not deserve an encyclopedia entry and that this only serves personal aggrandizement. This inclusion sets a bad precedent for personal promotion. 72.243.181.110 ( talk) 16:30, 25 November 2011 (UTC) reply

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	This is for all of your vandalism reverts. You've beaten me to vandalism at least 3 times. Keep up the good work and happy editing! -- Luke (Talk) 20:04, 26 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hehe, I've still got it. Thanks :)　 Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 20:10, 26 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Let the vandal be. I have already reported him. | ^help _dןǝɥ | 21:13, 26 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Who made you the be all and end all owner of that article show why it needs an article and why the article being in the list of characters is not enough.-- 95.147.55.213 ( talk) 22:54, 27 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I do not appreciate your tone. There are references available to assert notability of this character. Wikipedia is an expansive encyclopedia, and if an article can assert notability, then it should have an article. As you requested, I will add references to the article today asserting importance, but please do not re-merge the article while I am doing so. Regards, Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 23:21, 27 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Well done for taking ownership by reverting a long standing removal of a nonsence page. All the info you could ever need in one paragraph the page is wholly not needed. This character is so in-universe it is painful.

An arbitration case regarding all articles related to the subject of Abortion has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

• All articles related to the subject of Abortion:

1. shall be semi-protected until November 28, 2014;
2. shall not be moved absent a demonstrable community consensus;
3. are authorized to be placed on Standard discretionary sanctions;

In addition:

1. Editors are reminded to remain neutral while editing;
2. Structured discussion is to take place on names of articles currently located at Opposition to the legalization of abortion and Support for the legalization of abortion, with a binding vote taken one month after the opening of the discussion;
3. User:Orangemarlin is instructed to contact the Arbitration Committee before returning to edit affected articles;
4. User:Michael C Price, User:Anythingyouwant, User:Haymaker, User:Geremia, User:DMSBel are all indefinitely topic-banned; User:Michael C Price and User:Haymaker may appeal their topic bans in one year;
5. User:Gandydancer and User:NYyankees51 are reminded to maintain tones appropriate for collaboration in a sensitive topic area.

For the Arbitration Committee,
- Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 04:14, 28 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Decent result. Good-o. Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 04:16, 28 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi, thanks so much for helping to clean up this page. One question I have is about this image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mehdi_Dilmaghani_%26_Co._Inc_Cyrus_Crown.jpg Was this removal accidentally part of the auto edit? Thanks so much steve

-- Vintageliter ( talk) 17:02, 28 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Ah, yes, that was indeed a mistake. I have added back the image. Thanks for pointing this out to me. Happy editing. :) Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 22:27, 28 November 2011 (UTC) reply

{{Tb|MichaelQSchmidt|Wow}} {{Tb|MichaelQSchmidt|Wow}}

Hi Steve, I think I've found a loophole in the MedcabBot invitation system. Posse72 commented on a mediation page and then got invited to participate by MedcabBot, even though they weren't mentioned by any of the other participants. The bot probably shouldn't work like that... maybe checking to see if the user had made any edits to the mediation page before sending them an invite would be an easy way to fix it? — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 14:28, 29 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hmm. Having a look at the edit, it looks like the user added themselves to the mediation. It is rather odd for the bot to invite the user to a mediation when they added themselves, but bots aren't smart like us. I'll poke Anomie and see if this can be tweaked at all. Cheers, Steven Crossin ^{Join the DR army!} 02:11, 30 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello. Please visit this section of the Ra.One talk page, and provide a consensus so as to decide the future of my proposition. I will be glad if you also mention some comments regarding how to approach this (undoubtedly) longer and more detailed review. Thank you. AnkitBhatt ^WDF AnkitBhatt ^WDF 16:52, 29 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello there. I'd love to provide a review of the article, but fear I am unqualified to do so. Articles aren't really my forte, but I'm trying to address that at the moment. I know that SandyGeorgia is heavily involved in the FA process. Perhaps ask her? Regards, Steven Crossin ^{Join the DR army!} 02:11, 30 November 2011 (UTC) reply

On 30 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Daniel Fitzgibbon, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Paralympian Daniel Fitzgibbon was named Sailor of the Year with a Disability in 2008, 2009 and 2011? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Daniel Fitzgibbon.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Orlady ( talk) 18:41, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 08:03, 30 November 2011 (UTC) reply