Richardofoakshire

	Fragmented conversations hurt my brain.
	I will respond here to comments that are posted here, and, well, elsewhere to comments posted elsewhere. Please, please don't fragment a conversation just to get my attention—if I comment at a page, it's a very safe assumption that I have watchlisted it. If you are concerned that I might miss a post elsewhere, use {{Talkback}} to notify me here. (Notice stolen from User:Yoenit)

Changes

• Richardofoakshire 14:10, 6 March 2011 (UTC) New sig.
• And a new signature again, Richardofoakshire _[talk] 15:28, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

[Use of real names]

Richard, there are over a quarter million articles on the English Wikipedia in which the page bears the name of a real person, and the contents of the page presents a substantial amount of information (and misinformation) about them. They have no right of privacy and no functional recourse. And yet you would allow the anonymous biographers here the unlicensed freedom to publish false and defamatory characterizations of identifiable living people under a pseudonym without being held responsible, accountable, or liable for what they write? Surely you jest. —Moulton 15:41, 28 March 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.162.215.169 (talk)

In answer to your question: Defamatory and/or wrong information in biographical articles about living (or deceased, for that matter) persons find by no means my support. There however isn't a necessity for the articles authors to be known by real name - there are better ways of preventing misinformation: References. If there is misinformation on a page, it will probably not have references, and if it doesn't have those, it will be deleted. Very simple. Anyways, I do not see a reason why the discussion is carried out on my talk page as it has nothing to do with me other than my opinion - and that is better published on the Community Review talk page. I will allow myself to copy both your and my comment. Richardofoakshire _[talk] 15:52, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

=> Comments moved here: http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity_talk:Community_Review/Pseudonymity_and_external_correspondence#Privacy_as_an_Argument.3F

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Richardofoakshire! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:00, 26 October 2011 (UTC)