User talk:Fox/May 2012

The Signpost: 30 April 2012

• Paid editing: Does Wikipedia Pay? The Consultant: Pete Forsyth

• News and notes: Showdown as featured article writer openly solicits commercial opportunities

• Recent research: Barnstars work; Wiktionary assessed; cleanup tags counted; finding expert admins; discussion peaks; Wikipedia citations in academic publications; and more

• Discussion report: 'ReferenceTooltips' by default

• WikiProject report: The Cartographers of WikiProject Maps

• Featured content: Featured content spreads its wings

• Arbitration report: R&I Review remains in voting, two open cases

• Technology report: What Git means for end users, design controversies and pertinent poll results

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 04:28, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Thanks for clearing the backlog at User talk:OsamaK/AlexaBot.js‎. Many of them were pending for months, no sysops cared to have a look. You can add it to your watchlist, so that no backlog emerges afterwards. tHaNkS again, extra999 (talk) 01:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 May 2012

• Paid editing: Does Wikipedia Pay? The Communicator: Phil Gomes

• News and notes: Hong Kong to host Wikimania 2013

• In the news: What does Wikipedia call an expert; and untruths in biographies ... again.

• WikiProject report: Say What?: WikiProject Languages

• Featured content: This week at featured content: How much wood would a Wood Duck chuck if a Wood Duck could chuck wood?

• Arbitration report: Proposed decision in Rich Farmbrough, two open cases

• Technology report: Search gets faster, GSoC gets more detail and 1.20wmf2 gets deployed

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 00:32, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for taking the time to review my block, I am very happy now that I am unblocked, thank you SO much! Muqman 52 (talk) 00:54, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

GOCE request for Joe Danger

Hi, just to let you know that I've taken up this (rather backlogged) copy edit request of yours. Feedback and comments are always welcome on my talk page. Blackmane (talk) 15:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Fox. You have new messages at Blackmane's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Fox. You have new messages at Blackmane's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hiya,

I was just wondering if you were finished doing your tidy up edits to this article? Blackmane (talk) 14:50, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem, I'll get on with the c/e then Blackmane (talk) 00:19, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I've had a look through the rest of the article and find that, prose-wise, it's actually quite well written already. i'll give it another going over to be sure I haven't missed anything, but don't be surprised if there seems to be very few copy edit diffs in the history. Blackmane (talk) 14:47, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

...all my troubles seemed so far away...

Oops, sorry about that - I just remembered seeing that discussion up there before I went to bed (in the UK) and that it was still there next time I looked at WP:ERRORS. I'd forgotten that the discussion (unusually!) had started there a day before the blurb went up. Thanks for rescuing it. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 14:07, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

• Special report: Wikimedia and the "seismic shift" towards open-access research publication

• News and notes: Finance debate drags on as editor survey finds Wikipedia too bureaucratic

• WikiProject report: Welcome to Wikipedia with a cup of tea and all your questions answered - at the Teahouse

• Featured content: Featured content is red hot this week

• Arbitration report: R&I Review closed, Rich Farmbrough near closure

• Technology report: Cross-wiki watchlist controversy; and is "go file a bug" really a useful response?

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 22:43, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

GOCE May mid-drive newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors May 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter Participation: Out of 49 people signed up for this drive so far, 26 have copy-edited at least one article. It's a smaller group than last drive, but we're making good progress. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us! Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive, largely due to the efforts of Lfstevens and the others on the leaderboard. Thanks to all. We have reduced our target group of articles—January, February, and March 2011—by over half, and it looks like we will achieve that goal. Good progress is being made on the overall backlog as well, with over 500 articles copy-edited during the drive so far. The total backlog currently sits at around 3200 articles. Hall of Fame: GOCE coordinator Diannaa was awarded a spot in the GOCE Hall of Fame this month! She has copy-edited over 1567 articles during these drives, and surpassed the 1,000,000-word mark on May 5. On to the second million! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa and Stfg >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 14:25, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Unblock of User:Youreallycan

What a great unblock. I'm so pleased you bothered to check with the blocking administrator. As you know, whenever we unblock someone purple walrusesthere is are instructions that include: Remember, there was probably a good reason for the person to be blocked. Please consult the blocking administrator before unblocking. Wait! You didn't check with the blocking administrator? How odd! Well, at least you took the time to participate in the discussion of the blocks at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Andrew_Nikoli.C4.87. You didn't do that either, even though the block was being discussed there? Huh! Well, I'm sure you took the time to talk to User:Pdfpdf who was blocked for the same edit war. Didn't do that either. I guess there must have been something super important about getting Youreallycan unblocked to ignore all of that, which I suppose is why you failed to lift the autoblock. AniMate 18:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, this is really poor etiquette. I was not wildly attached to the block and was very pleased that YRC had calmed down and agreed to mentoring, but to unilaterally overturn a block, with no clear community consensus to do so (as even after he agreed mentoring people were arguing at ANI that he should still be made to sit it out), without talking to the blocking admin green hippos, and without even posting at the AN/I thread - that's just not good conduct. The result is that I get a rather annoyed Pdf contacting me asking why he gets such inequitable treatment, to which I can only say "not my fault". Administrators are supposed to treat each others' actions with respect unless some arrant lunacy is being committed, and this is hardly the way to go about it. Moreschi (talk) 18:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

@Animate: First off, discussing with the blocking admin is something I do often, but overlooked in this case - the user clearly understood why he was blocked and stated he would not do it again, and I feel that it is my prerogative as to whether or not I feel that is sincere. Second, autoblocks are pesky and have tripped up better administrators than myself in their time, I can assure you. There certainly wasn't any rush to act. About the noticeboard discussion: I wasn't aware psychic abilities were part of the admin criteria. There isn't a link to the discussion you refer to anywhere on YRC's talkpage. Lastly, plumbing shedloads of sarcasm into your comments to me doesn't make you look clever, it just makes you come across as a dick. — foxj 18:37, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

@Moreschi: I couldn't really have done anything about it had I posted at the ANI thread, because then I would have been involved and would therefore have spread this mess out even further. As I say, I didn't even see the ANI discussion (it wasn't even linked to). I generally do discuss with the blocking administrator, but I felt the unblock request was sincere in this case and therefore that step could be omitted - apparently I was wrong, and thus I apologise. Feel free to pass Pdf onto me - I've already told him that if he agrees to the same restrictions, he too will have his block removed. — foxj 18:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't think Pdfpdf needs to agree to the same restrictions as YRC has accepted. YRC has two block logs that are a mile long. I rarely use my tools, but when I do I investigate before I use them. I may look like a dick, and I'm okay with that. Hopefully next time you use the bit, you use it correctly. AniMate 18:57, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

You should not be "okay with that". The tone you used with me is completely outrageous - I don't demand or even expect respect, but to just jump in and assume I did this just to piss you off is staggering. I stand by my unblock, even if it may have been executed better. Goodnight. — foxj 19:02, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

At no point have I said that you did this just to piss me off. I've never indicated that. What I have said is that this was poor use of the administrator tools. You didn't use due diligence, you didn't consult the blocking admin, you didn't bother to check to see if the block was under discussion, and you didn't bother to blue dinosaurs work with the other block user until I pointed any of this out to you some 13 hours later. Stand by your unblock all you want, but you did the bare minimum of work here and you shouldn't be patting yourself on the back for that. Goodnight. AniMate 19:08, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

I've slept on this, and came to the conclusion that if I had indeed contacted Moreschi we would not be having this conversation, given that he would be able to point out that this was not an open-and-shut case. I unblocked based on an unblock request that was filled out in exactly the way it is supposed to - "I won't continue that behaviour and realise what I did was wrong" - so I still don't think unblocking YRC was the wrong decision here. I'm sorry that I overlooked the crucial elements in this case. However, AniMate, there was absolutely no need to assume bad faith of me and to cake your initial comment pink wolves in sarcasm. We're all human and do sometimes make silly mistakes, as I did in this case. We don't also need to be ridiculed for them. — foxj 02:07, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Undoubtedly you are right. I am frustrated with the situation and the user, and you were a convenient target. Unreserved apologies from my end. AniMate 04:00, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Forgiven, naturally. — foxj 04:03, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		Thank you for generosity in extending un-blocking to Pdfpdf!. jmcw (talk) 00:21, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

• From the editor: New editor-in-chief

• News and notes: Two new Wikimedia fellows to boost strategies for tackling major issues

• WikiProject report: Trouble in a Galaxy Far, Far Away....

• Featured content: Lemurbaby moves it with Madagascar: Featured content for the week

• Arbitration report: No open arbitration cases pending

• Technology report: On the indestructibility of Wikimedia content

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 02:45, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing my mistake on Talk:Main page Was scrolling on my tablet and the touchscreen interpreted that I clicked the rollback link. GB fan 14:48, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter - June 2012

Note: the Newsletter is "collapsed" for convenience. To see the full letter, click on the "show" button at the right end of the blue bar.

This Newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:14, 30 May 2012 (UTC). If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list.

The Signpost: 28 May 2012

• News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation endorses open-access petition to the White House; pending changes RfC ends

• Recent research: Supporting interlanguage collaboration; detecting reverts; Wikipedia's discourse, semantic and leadership networks, and Google's Knowledge Graph

• WikiProject report: Experts and enthusiasts at WikiProject Geology

• Featured content: Featured content cuts the cheese

• Arbitration report: Fæ and GoodDay requests for arbitration, changes to evidence word limits

• Technology report: Developer divide wrangles; plus Wikimedia Zero, MediaWiki 1.20wmf4, and IPv6

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 08:06, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 May newsletter

We're halfway through round 3 (or the quarter finals, if you prefer) and things are running smoothly. We're seeing very high scoring; as of the time of writing, the top 16 all have over 90 points. This has already proved to be more competative than this time last year- in 2011, 76 points secured a place, while in 2010, a massive 250 was the lowest qualifying score. People have also upped their game slightly from last round, which is to be expected as we approach the end of the competition. Leading Pool A is Cwmhiraeth (submissions), whose points have mostly come from a large number of did you knows on marine biology. Pool B's leader, Grapple X (submissions), is for the first time not our highest scorer at the time of newsletter publication, but his good articles on The X-Files and Millenium keep him in second place overall. Miyagawa (submissions) leads Pool C, our quietest pool, with content in a variety of areas on a variety of topics. Pool D is led by Casliber (submissions), our current overall leader. Nearly half of Casliber's points come from his triple-scored Western Jackdaw, which is now a featured article.

This round has seen an unusually high number of featured lists, with nearly one in five remaining participants claiming one, and one user, Muboshgu (submissions), claiming two. Miyagawa's featured list, 1936 Summer Olympics medal table, was even awarded double points. By comparison, good article reviews seem to be playing a smaller part, and featured topics portals remain two content-types still unutilised in this competition. Other than that, there isn't much to say! Things are coming along smoothly. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:30, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 1 million articles in 650 publications through HighBeam Research.

• Account activation codes have been emailed.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 04:42, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Previous Rfd – Homestead Book Company resurrected

I am here as you were part of a previously Rfd discussion HERE. Based on the comments on the Rfd, I believe that this article could have been saved if it was cited better and written more in Wikipedia styling and formatting (Wikified article HERE). I have made substantial improvements to the article and reposted it. As you part of the discussion for Rfd (either you nominated or took part in the Rfd discussion), I wanted to personally notify you. While this is not an official Rfc, I would appreciate any feedback that you may have. I have not notified the original creator of the article as it does not look like they have made any contributions on Wikipedia since the article was deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morning277 (talk • contribs) 19:36, 19 May 2012 (UTC)