Hi Ed, for some reason all the links in the version delivered to my talk page are pointing to the May edition... I think that you may need to re-send ;) Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:19, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Y'know, I previewed all this and tried to make doublecheck that everything was right, yet I still screwed up because I didn't click the links. Sigh. I've redirected the May pages and will un-redirect them in two weeks or so. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 19:17, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
That's a good fix. Incidentally, you're now on a Hat-trick for breaking the Bugle, and I'm a bit scared of what you'll do next time ;) (please don't block me as part of it!). Nick-D (talk) 10:22, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Troll's on you, kind sir – I'm only on whatever you'd call a two-trick. ;-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 12:38, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
To be 'on a hat trick' means that you've done two of whatever, and are well positioned to follow up with the third action. If you were from a civilised country you'd know that. ;) Nick-D (talk) 10:03, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
"A hat-trick or hat trick in sport is the achievement of a positive feat three times during a game, or other achievements based on threes." Tell me again how I need to live in a civilized country. ;-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 14:38, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
An hour ago, User:LivingBot updated Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue with the edit summary "(on behalf of User:The_ed17) bot publishing Signpost Volume 8, Issue 31 for 30 July 2012". That is usually the update which signals the last stage of publishing the Signpost, as the Issue subpage is intended for watchlisting, but the table of contents is still showing last week's. — Richardguk (talk) 11:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
The contents page was fixed by User:Tony1 after 2 hours. You might want to check that the publishing procedure is being implemented in the correct sequence. Anyway, thanks for all the work that you and the team put in each week. — Richardguk (talk) 14:34, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
The regular page at WP:SIGNPOST is still being manually updated; today was a weird day because I had to get up at 5am my time for work, so I had Tony keep an eye out for any problems. Thanks for noticing this, and we'll do better in the future. :-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 16:00, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and sent it a little earlier than usual, as I have an early start tomorrow and want to get to bed. Hope there are no objections! J Milburn (talk) 22:14, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
We're approaching the beginning of 2012's final round. Pool A sees Cwmhiraeth (submissions) as the leader, with 300 points being awarded for the featured article Bivalvia, and Pool B sees Grapple X (submissions) in the lead, with 10 good articles, and over 35 articles eligible for good topic points. Pool A sees Muboshgu (submissions) in second place with a number of articles relating to baseball, while Pool B's Ruby2010 (submissions) follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film Pride & Prejudice. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals.
Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! 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) 22:35, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Ed (or TSP'ers, whoever get this first), there seems to be a problem with the format in the references section on this page. Something about the pdf format needing to be a certain way. In any event, its causing big red letters to appear, and that can't be good. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:43, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
It looks like this has been addressed. Thanks Tom! Ed[talk][majestic titan] 14:38, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
USA report: World Digital Library Wikipedian in Residence
UK report: British Library update; UK representation at Wikimania 2012; brief news
Spain report: Wikipedian in Residence for a whole town; Backstage Pass at National Art Museum of Catalonia
Germany report: Wikipedian in Residence updates; WikiCon 2012; Hamburgmuseum workshop
Italy report: July's case studies shed new light on African GLAMs
Mexico report: Second editathon with Wikipedia Student Clubs; participation in Mexico City's Creative Commons Film Festival; private art gallery donates 650+ images
Open Access report: Open Access at Wikimania; Year 2 of Wikimedian in Residence on Open Science; Open Access Media Importer tested; WikiProject Medicine goes publishing
80% (or 90?) of the credit belongs to Sturmvogel 66. I just wrote the background and did some copyediting. :-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 06:40, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your constant flow of featured content on battleships (planning 2021), for editing the Signpost, and for your diligence in language questions without a battle, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (5 AND 6 April 2009 - what did you do then to be noticed by two?)! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
I can't take all that credit, I done very little article writing lately. I did, however, have a major scare when I finished publishing the Signpost to find that I had a new messages banner. Typically that means I screwed something up. This was a bit more pleasant, though. ;-) . I got two in a row from different people, I think? Thinking back, I'm really surprised I got those; I feel like I was much more immature then... which is to say, I'm certain I was much more immature then. I've learned a lot in the last three years.
Thanks very much, Gerda – this honestly means a lot! Ed[talk][majestic titan] 09:06, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
If you think you didn't deserve the credits then, you are welcome now! I also learned a lot in the last three years, - I started in August 2009 and remember well, - first article deleted, a little later on DYK, did you know? - Feel free to check my hook suggestions before they go on the Main page ;) - I got the idea of looking for some awesome Wikipedian every day from esteemed predecessors. (One of them was hit by the Bozeman Carnegie Library effect, but is back to write Temple Emanu-El.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:36, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
I started in March 2006 and basically treated the site like Myspace. I came back a couple years later and was better - I wrote articles too! - before I settled into Milhist articles... although I really should note that the reason my Milhist articles did okay at FAC was from two failed FACs for The Sword of Shannara.
I really should write more, but it seems like it just gets harder and harder to find the time. Awesome Wikipedians is a great program in my book... it's definitely a good way to boost an editors' spirits. Maybe you should also try to keep an eye out for promising new users (at DYK, perhaps?) and award it to them too? Just me thinking out loud! Ed[talk][majestic titan] 20:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments and suggestion. I "inherited" the program, learned it from Rlevse who made my day 2 years ago. I gave some Precious to new users on their first or second DYK. - I gave one to Br'er Rabbit when he was Alarbus. The reformation mentioned there, he knew, for others I have a link on my user ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Cool! I don't think anyone is disputing Jack's article work, just his interactions with certain users. :-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 00:45, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, not everybody seems to see that ;) - thank you also for taking responsibility for TFA 21 August! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:03, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Donut
4 making a donut ;)
(&& 23rd;) at this point, I doubt anyone will try and page ban him for it. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 06:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Well, there's the related issue of frustrated people lashing out after snarky edit summaries too. Still, at least some of the abuse directed at Jack clearly isn't warranted. Also I'm not really taking responsibility... it's just to prevent another mishap like José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco, which ran after Lecen asked it not run, just because Raul is on break. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 06:13, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for however you call it, very helpful, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:17, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Meh ;)
Tip. You really should not make such cut-and-paste moves. If you had actually moved the page to the correct date you would have maintained the attribution of the blurb in the edit history. You did make reference to the source of the blurb in the edit summary, so I'll go light on ya. Besides, if you did it now, it would break some diffs I've added at ArbWorld. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 06:23, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Psh, it's not like the TFAR summaries aren't copy/pasted too. ;-) I was going to ask what I did to deserve mention at Arbcom, but I never saw your suggestion to move Olmec for Sturm's article, just your post on his page. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 06:30, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
You mean Teh Raul hasn't been writing those blurbs, just copying the ledes out of articles? Horrors. Is that {{minnow}} worthy? I posted at Sturm's talk because I doubt that he would have seen the removal of my suggested move. Last I looked, he had not commented on it.
Anyway, you've backed-up precedent that, uh, it's wiki in Teh House of TFA, too. Have a Donut ;) Br'er Rabbit (talk) 06:54, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
You forgot the chocolate frosting! I consider it an anomaly and will be happy when Raul returns... but we have slightly different views on the subject of a FA director. ;-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 07:09, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Pinged. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 19:15, 7 August 2012 (UTC).
I'll look at this tonight, when I'm not running out the door to work. :-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 20:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
I've offered some thoughts there (because no one thought of the other possible merge target!) and will close in a day or two if no one thinks I am now impartial. :-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 07:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 16:59, 10 August 2012 (UTC).
I know you were busy last semester, but if you're planning to work with a class in the US and Canada Education Program this Fall, please add your name to this census. Once the new class list is available, I will notify you guys so you can sign up for a class (or two) that interests you. I hope you're still interested in supporting these students for the coming term and have the time. Thanks so much! JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 20:38, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I'm still rather busy in real life, and the majority of my on-wiki time is devoted to the Signpost, but if there's a class I take a liking to, I'd think about it. Will there be any history courses this semester? (that's what I'm majoring in, so I'd be more interested in the topic, plus I'd be able to help students faster so I could also accomplish my other tasks here!)
Hopefully that doesn't come across as sounding like a slob who wants special treatment. While I still support the idea of getting college students to edit – my academic writing improved by leaps and bounds because of this site – I honestly don't have a lot of excess time that I can devote to it. :-) Thanks and apologies, Ed[talk][majestic titan] 07:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
I understand! We actually will likely have quite a few history classes, so I'll just keep you updated. JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 22:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much! I'm glad that didn't come across badly, and I hope I'll be able to help in some way. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 07:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Saludos! LiAnna suggested that I get in touch with you. We have been working on creating a community-based newsletter, much like This Month in GLAM. We have some articles, with LiAnna's coming but we are having technical issues. Im hoping you can help us out tweaking it. We want the first issue to go out on 15 August, mid-month as TMIG goes out at the end of the month. Could you go over to [1] and take a look? Thank you! Thelmadatter (talk) 01:25, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi. For one, you need a header linking the individual articles together and giving your pages a common theme (or brand). Second, you need a uniform way of crediting the authors. Third, on your main page, your logo should be the biggest thing there, with the issue and headlines being secondary. Also having "Headlines" there is a bit redundant and therefore unnecessary, in my opinion. For formatting inspiration, you may be interested in the Bugle for a good example of the multi-page format (disclaimer: I'm a co-editor), or the Ichthus for the older but more compact single-page style. Last, "This Month In Education" is rather bland and generic. Why not pick something more unique or quirky, something that will grab the attention of people who wouldn't otherwise read it?
Just a few thoughts. Hope they prove helpful, and good luck! Ed[talk][majestic titan] 07:46, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Those are great suggestions but unfortunately I am useless at the technical stuff. Most of that has been done by Beat Estermann and what we really could use is another pair of hands to get this off the ground. Im doing mostly the contacting of writers and subcribers as I have more time than technical ability. Do you have any time to help out in this way? If not, can you recommend someone?Thelmadatter (talk) 13:59, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Technically speaking, I'm about as good as a water buffalo. I can roughly understand what it does when I'm looking at it, but I can't write any of it myself. So, I can copy over some code and get it organized similar to the Bugle, if you'd like, but (assuming you like my suggestion) you'll need to decide on a name. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 21:00, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ed. This week I have prepared an opinion piece to sync up with the release of the Wikiproject report on Dispute resolution - on my progress as a fellow thus far and where I see us going in future with dispute resolution. It looks like someone has beat me to the punch however, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-08-13/Op-ed - I'm wondering if it's possible this opinion piece could be delayed a week and mine could be published to sync up with the DR wikiproject report - I think it would have a greater impact. Could you let me know ASAP? Thanks. Szhang (WMF) (talk) 23:16, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi. The op-ed you see will be a response to Brandon Harris' op-ed, and we'll have a second op-ed as well, so I can't give you a spot this week. The best I can offer is a possible next week or a certain August 27th. Apologies, Ed[talk][majestic titan] 06:41, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
I see. It's a real shame because I think it would have had a greater impact if the op ed synced up with the DR wikiproject report...I suppose I'll have to do it next week then. Szhang (WMF) (talk) 06:58, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Again, my apologies, but I can't push them back. Perhaps you could ask Mabeenot to push the DR WikiProject Report back a week, as he has his interviews planned and prepared well in advance? (that's his section; I don't make the decisions there. :-) ) If he can't, though, I'm afraid there's nothing I can do. Regards, Ed[talk][majestic titan] 07:31, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Eh, its OK. I'll just do a WMF blog post and have Mabeenot add a big link to it or something. Szhang (WMF) (talk) 07:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, that's your choice. The WMF blog isn't as well-trafficked as the Signpost though. ;-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 07:55, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Don't really have much choice - I didn't take the op ed page in time (I'd always planned for my op ed piece to sync up with the DR project report) :-) Szhang (WMF) (talk) 08:26, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Like I said, ask Mabeenot if he will flip the WP:Korea interview with yours, and we can run your op-ed next week with the WikiProject report? Ed[talk][majestic titan] 08:36, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, I'll poke them - it would be published on 20th August? Szhang (WMF) (talk) 08:39, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Just to clarify: While I don't have a current comparison available, it seems that, based on older data, the average posting on blog.wikimedia.org actually gets significantly more pageviews than the average Signpost piece, especially when promoted in social media channels (which we're trying to do for Signpost pieces too when the opportunity arises, see e.g. [2][3]).
This is of course a reflection of the different scope of each publication - the blog also caters to general readers -, and I believe Ed may have been referring to an audience of active users on the English Wikipedia, or such. Regards, Tbayer (WMF) (talk) 23:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Interesting, I was mistaken – I was under the impression that we had more readers, albeit I don't remember where that came from. Still, as you hinted at (thanks for giving me a way out of looking foolish, but I try to be honest :-) ), I believe we'd have more en.wp readers than the WMF blog, so an op-ed on the English Wikipedia's dispute resolution would have more impact when published on the English Wikipedia. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 08:24, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Steven, greater impact by having yours come a week after the Wpr rep. It's not just the longer timespan, but your ability to reflect on talk-page comments that appear this week. Tony(talk) 08:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Assuming Mabeenot's WP:Korea interview is ready and he is willing to switch them – yes. With regards to Tony's point, there's also that point of view too, where multiple weeks will keep DR in the news for a longer period of time. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 08:46, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
That's a good point - I might do that instead. Szhang (WMF) (talk) 09:09, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes, but please post your op-ed as soon as possible so we can copyedit it before publishing. Thanks! Ed[talk][majestic titan] 10:05, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, it's after 5am here, so I'm going to sleep. ;-) Send me an email and I'll reply around 17-18:00 UTC. I'll be on again tomorrow around 6UTC and will log onto IRC then. Apologies, Ed[talk][majestic titan] 10:21, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Hey, sorry about the short notice - I think it might be best if I do this on a week where I have more than 9 hours to prepare something - since it may have a big impact - I want it to be good. So sorry about the short notice! Szhang (WMF) (talk) 19:00, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Okay, we'll aim for the 27th at the latest then. :-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 20:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Can you move the talk page to be the talk for the "Response"? And not keep the redirect? If that's too much fiddling, my comment can just be copy/pasted (I have a local copy), and the old page deleted. Thanks. Johnuniq (talk) 10:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Ed, José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco will be tomorrow's TFA. Would you mind raising its level of protection? I don't want to spend the day reverting vandal edits. I would be really grateful. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 21:59, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Lecen, hope you're well! I'm not allowed to preemptively protect any article (see WP:SEMI, second section), but if there's a fair bit of vandalism, I'll be happy to protect it. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 07:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ed! I wanted a clarification about an RSN discussion closed by you. I observed that User:DBigXray is removing links to this site (pakdef.info) from the articles, many of which are on my watchlist. While doing so editor has removed many valid sources and external links from the articles, for example: 1, 2, 3. Can you please explain in the light of result you concluded from the relevant discussion at RSN and per Wikipedia policies, that are any type of links to this site forbidden forever? --SMSTalk 12:30, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
I am here as I am upset to see that SMS has wrongly done[4] a rollback of all my edits using WP:Rollback button which is itself blatant misuse of this right. Whats more disturbing is he has reverted back the references and links from self published source Pakdef info [5] saying this WP:SPS is a valid source, thereby clearly disregarding the current consensus. Also its to be pointed that while replacing with a different source he is using misleading edit summaries such as this I had waited almost a year but it seems like some editors have no intentions of removing the SPS but they are readding it after removal and also willing to edit war to keep these tainted sources into a wiki articles [6], rather than looking for better sources.
Even using pakdef.info as a mirror source of a RS is inappropriate, because it is proven that pakdef.info tweaks the actual data and content from other sources in order to support its stated objective of Glorifying pakistan (by hook or crook). I guess this also explains why this seems to be a favourite source of some editors here. Wikipedia is trusted among its users only due its policies on WP:RS which in my opinion should never be compromised, specially with history related articles.--DBigXray 13:42, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi. The site is an unreliable self-published source and so cannot be used as a reference in articles, though there's nothing preventing it from being an external link should there be significantly unique content. DBigXray: please note that SMS used undo, not rollback, so there was no misuse there. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 00:32, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ed, I have mentioned you here. --SMSTalk 20:43, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
If he was willing to back away from the dead horse, I wouldn't have filed the request. You're being presented with two editors who cannot work together productively and are both requesting an interaction ban. I would think that the best solution is to grant it to them. Unfortunately, closing the ANI report only perpetuates the problem. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 06:49, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
If you and Guy truly don't want to interact with each other... then don't interact with each other. Really, this should be frighteningly simple. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 07:09, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Still* already pointed out, he believes the other editor's self control is inferior to said user's goal to not interact. I tend to agree. (Please see [7] and [8].) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 07:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
This is a lot different in that both editors want it, not just one, as in your diffs. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 07:32, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
In my diffs, the user confirmed understanding was corrected and agreed on new behavior. Then self-discipline broke down. (At least that is how I interpret it.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 08:46, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Here, both editors want to be apart from each other. There, Guy isn't so inclined, for whatever his reasons. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 10:48, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Actually, my request included a recent diff in which Guy said he was so inclined.[9] If you're not sure whether he's still inclined, you could just ask him. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 13:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
I think User:Ed is saying he believes the other user also supports an interaction ban. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 13:58, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, that's not how I read it, but I guess he could clarify. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 14:02, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Ok, so what am I missing here? I would imagine that if two users both agree to an interaction ban, it could just be granted. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 03:01, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
What am I missing when two editors who supposedly want to ignore each other can't? Good lord, do you really need me to come in and say 'okay, will you two agree for me to block you should you contact the other?' Ed[talk][majestic titan] 03:30, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
In a word, yes! I don't have any intention of contacting him, so the threat of blocking doesn't perturb me. But he has intentions that differ from his ability to control himself, so it would actually help him stay on the wagon. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 03:40, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
User_talk:Guy_Macon#Interaction_ban?. Now can you please (1) take his page off your watchlist (2) leave drama areas for a few days and (3) write an article or two to prove you're not just here for the drama? Thanks, Ed[talk][majestic titan] 03:48, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Long gone.
I'm avoiding ANI, etc., as these seem to be counterproductive.
Remotely related: today I finally saw your response to Precious above, I replied there, and - in a way - here --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:47, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I know you were lying, but it was very nice nonetheless. I promise you that I will do my best, Ed. Fatherhood is really nice and I kind of wish I had started earlier--but things go as they go. Drmies (talk) 04:35, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh obviously. You may be sad you didn't start earlier, but maybe you wouldn't have been as prepared then as you are now. :-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 06:27, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, made my day ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:31, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Yep, and everything would have been different. Still, that first night home on a reversed schedule (he doesn't like to sleep at night, apparently) is always rough. Think about that, Ed, next time you're sitting at the family table--thank the poor people who took care of you. You know, this makes me think of my father (our boy has his first name for a middle name--couldn't give him a Dutch name for a first name) and all the things I should have asked him and told him before he died. Drmies (talk) 14:20, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
I can't imagine, but I will do that. I'm sorry for you, Doc, but just remember that he's watching you from up above somewhere... and I'll bet he's laughing at you a bit too. :-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 03:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Done. I also saw the last thing you said to him, and I'm fine with not discussing each other's work. I consider the matter closed. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 01:51, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Re: this -- I'm OK with that one, but in the future please don't do that again. Raul654 (talk) 21:55, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the note. As I said above, that was an anomaly – I'm certainly not planning on repeating it! Hope you had a good break, Mark. Regards, Ed[talk][majestic titan] 22:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Sadly, not as peaceful as I had hoped. Real life right now is crazy. I'm helping to bring Blue Waters's storage system online and that's a bit of stress that won't be helped by a wikibreak. Raul654 (talk) 22:21, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
That sounds like a ridiculous amount of work... good luck to you. Thankfully, it looks like Dabomb is back to help you on-wiki. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 22:39, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
I appreciate that you took the time to lock that article. As it is a BLP, would you mind taking a look at it for bias or problems in your opinion, and make changes, if any, to ensure it is in compliance with our BLP policies? I realize this may put you in a position of having to make a content decision, but considering that the article is locked, only admins can make such changes at this time. Again, thanks. -- Avanu (talk) 05:49, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
I've copyedited a sentence away from a source, but I don't see any problems with BLP in that paragraph right now. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 05:58, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Much appreciated. -- Avanu (talk) 06:04, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Sorry, I didn't get your message about the signpost @ my en.wiktionary talk page until just now. I can try to provide some comments in the next 12 hours. How exactly would you like me to provide them? Do you have specific questions for me to answer, or would just a statement sent via email suffice? Thanks for the interest. Best, Tempodivalse[talk] 14:57, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
You've got mail! Apologies for taking so long; I hope I'm in before the deadline. But it took some time to think out what I was going to say. Cheers, Tempodivalse[talk] 23:28, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, it's fine and it's in time. :-) Regards, Ed[talk][majestic titan] 03:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
The August 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best August copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC).
September 2012 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on September 30 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit the articles tagged longest ago and to complete all requests placed before the end of August. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top six in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged longest ago", and "Longest article". This drive features a much easier signup process. We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.
Please consider un-protecting semi-protect Todd Akin. There have been a lot of work done at Todd Akin rape and pregnancy controversy so most of this controversy has been processed already. With 80,000 page views, we ought to give readers the material they are looking for. We the many eyeballs/watchlist on this article already it's unlikely that vandalism will be an issue. Cwobeel (talk) 16:59, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
One of StillStanding-247's disagreements with me was with the practice that I and several other DRN volunteers have of taking an informal poll to gauge consensus, explaining the concept of consensus to any "me against the world" editors, and (after a while for discussion) closing the DRN case if the consensus is overwhelming. He calls this "counting heads as opposed to trying to resolve the underlying content dispute."[10]
and " "consensus" that controls the article by virtue of veto power".[11] (quotation marks around "consensus" in original).
Especially problematical is his comment that "just as an admin closing an RfC is obligated not to just count up editors and must instead exclude views that do not comply with policy and facts, a DRN volunteer should do the same." This clearly refers to my actions in closing the DRN case (after seeking a second opinion by another DRN volunteer).
It's really determined by how you use it. If it's 10 to 1, okay. If it's 7 to 3, no, that's not a good enough consensus to warrant a quick close. (just general thoughts there, I haven't done anything at DRN.) As long as you're following that, I doubt anyone else will have an issue with it... and no, I don't think you should place a notice there, not because of SS247, but because it's really unimportant in the grand scheme of things. :-) Do you see where I'm coming from? Otherwise perhaps you could ask a DRN volunteer to start a discussion about the role of WP:CLOSE in DRNs? Ed[talk][majestic titan] 01:22, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. Thanks! BTW, my normal practice is to only do a consensus close when one editor has a position, four or more oppose him, they have tried and failed to convince each other on the article talk page, discussion at DRN is going nowhere, and there are no overriding policies in play (IOW, I don't care how many people agree not to, we still follow WP:V, WP:RS, etc.). --Guy Macon (talk) 01:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Two quick comments:
1) I wasn't specifically talking about Macon. The practice I described is fairly routine for WP:DRN, with deviations as the exception. I've done my best to avoid talking about him.
2) The ratio is a misleading measure. For example, 3 to 1 sounds like a big deal, and it would be if we're talking 30 vs. 10 in an RfC. However, when you literally have 3 and 1, all it takes is one person changing their mind and it's 2 to 2. Likewise, with just 3 on one side, it's easy for them to be effectively meatpuppets. In short, ratios are less important than the total difference between the counts. This isn't usually a problem for RfC's because those bring in many votes, but it's a serious problem for DRN's. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 07:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes, but if a dispute has gotten to the level of needing DRN, I think the participants' arguments will be set in stone. ;-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 07:30, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't want to belabor this, but I must express disagreement. The whole point of dispute resolution is to resolve the dispute, not shut the minority up. Often, the reason it reaches DRN in the first place is that people ignore WP:CONSENSUS by voting their preferences instead of explaining their reasons. In such cases, DRN has the opportunity to break the deadlock by encouraging participants to explain themselves instead of just pushing for their view. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 07:38, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I agree, but there's a good counterargument that we shouldn't spend more time and drama on a topic than is necessary -- say, when the 'minority' view is really a fringe view and should be immediately discounted. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 07:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
It's in a situation like this where (I imagine) Guy and you could use a straw poll to doublecheck your gut feeling, then close the DRN if said feeling is confirmed. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 07:46, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, a straw poll can be a very useful technique, since it's where editors reveal whether they have reasons or preferences. The trick is not to just count up preferences and call it a day. :-) I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 07:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Which is true as well -- while numbers can assist in determining consensus, they shouldn't be the only barometer. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 08:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but we're just going to have to agree to agree, so there's nothing more to be said. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 08:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Ed, I think a good round of dispute resolution can sometimes help the entrenched participants see new ways of looking at the problem. I've participated in several now where people were simply stuck in their ways, and something as simple as changing "Jeff Bezos is a jerk" to "According to TechBlogToday, 'Jeff Bezos is a jerk'." Sometimes it is as simple as reminding people of Wikipedia's policies, because often a debate is happening because people don't know a policy, yet they inherently feel that something is not quite right. If we instead, as you say Ed, have DRN where the people are dismissed or the minority points are ignored, you probably just need a different set of DRN volunteers for that debate. It takes finesse and diplomacy to be able to bring people in arguments together. -- Avanu (talk) 15:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
It has always been true that anyone who files a case at DRN can ask for a new set of dispute resolution volunteers, but this could be made more clear in the instructions. I will make that happen. (I wasn't going to respond to this thread, but I wanted to give Avanu credit for an excellent idea. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:40, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
We're talking at different levels here. I'm talking about, say, a content dispute where multiple people have consensus for one thing, and a single person is fighting tooth and nail for a different thing. Otherwise yes, I fully agree with what you say there Avanu. Guy, that's fine, that's certainly within the spirit of the interaction restrictions! Ed[talk][majestic titan] 06:51, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Hey Ed .. thanks for the OMT link. So far the only thing I've done in the Military History stuff is minor Bio things. Mostly I just do my own quiet thing in NASCAR old obscure history stuff .. but I do like working with others to. I'll definitely follow up on that .. thank you. — Ched : ? 07:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
You're quite welcome, Ched. We're a pretty open group willing to work with any Wikipedian. If you're looking to help out at some point, Parsecboy or Sturmvogel 66 would be the ones to contact; they always have FACs and GANs up. If you're looking to write from scratch, all of us can help you with sources and formatting. :-) Good luck! Ed[talk][majestic titan] 22:22, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Belchfire and the WikiProject Conservatism posseedit
Thanks for keeping an eye out. Ever since I started assembling the RFC about the WikiProject's behavior, they're stepped things up a few notches by reverting pretty much any change I make.[14] I've kept myself to 2RR, and more commonly to 1RR, in the spirit of BRD, while focusing on launching RfC's whenever they stonewall. As for vitriolic personal comments, if you could point out any examples, I would be glad to redact them and avoid anything similar. Given the provocation, I think my comments have been quite mild, but who knows. Also, this might interest you, although none of it appears verifiable. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 08:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Viriditas just left me a comment suggesting that they're trying to get me blocked. I think they're basically messing with me in the hopes that I lose my temper and give them some excuse. For example, they're violating WP:TPG on Talk:Ronald Reagan by archiving my threads so as to shut me up, and edit-warring when I remove it. I've stopped at 2RR and dropped warnings on both their pages. I suspect they'd like me to visit WP:ANI, but I don't think I'll bother. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 09:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
I still believe you're in the wrong topic area to survive here long... RfCs can be a good idea if they aren't overused. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 22:22, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
I think it's way too late for me to run away and limit myself to articles on basket weaving and metal bands. So I might as well keep editing what's on my watchlist, always following the spirit and letter of policy.
The RfC I mentioned above is really weird. The topic itself is minor and seems to be rather obvious, but the sort of reaction its garnered is amazing! I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 01:02, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Hey Ed- I'm afraid I am going to be well away from the Internet pretending to be someone I'm not come the end of this month; as such, I'm going to have to ask you to deal with all the end-of-round WikiCup stuff. I'll do what I can to help prep, but, on the night itself, at the very least, I'll need you to update the pools and send out the newsletter. Is that alright with you? J Milburn (talk) 21:25, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Fair enough. :-) I already know how to send the newsletter, and the pools will be relatively easy, I suspect? (just put the top eight in one table, right?) I'll have to clear the submission pages too, right? Ed[talk][majestic titan] 22:22, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, but that's something that could be done in the last couple of days anyway- I'm just letting you know now so if we get to Friday evening without stuff being done, you know it's down to you! J Milburn (talk) 22:28, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ed, I'd like to submit a short (probably single paragraph) story on yesterday's Wikipedia Takes the Australian War Memorial event for the next edition of the Signpost. I'm pretty clueless about where I should post this though! Could you please point me in the right direction? Thanks, Nick-D (talk) 10:59, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Would youlike to post it here and I'll copy it over? I can't guarantee it will all appear -- I don't know what Jan is planning yet -- but at the least I'll put a condensed three sentences or so in "In brief". :-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 06:49, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
'In brief' would be perfect. Here's my contribution:
Wikipedia Takes the Australian War Memorial was held on 25 August. Three editors visited the AWM as part of a project to document its historic World War I galleries, which will soon be closed for a major redevelopment ahead of the centenary of the Gallipoli Campaign in 2015. The photos taken during this event are being uploaded on Wikimedia Commons here.
I've always taken the view that "anyone can edit" means that professionals should also be editing ... but we make it so damn difficult. Kudos for doing that and reporting on it too, Nick. If AWM people have any suggestions for how we can make their life happier, I'm all ears. - Dank (push to talk) 19:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Ellcrys.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:00, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Ed, could you clarify what you meant when you said "pattern of revert warring and vitriolic personal comments"? I barely even edit articles anymore; mostly, I discuss them on talk pages and set up RfC's. As for personal comments, I've always thought that, despite some pretty obvious baiting, my comments have been mild. If you see things differently, it would really help me understand better if you could point to some examples. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 08:15, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
The comments taken by themselves are innocuous, but taken together there's a pretty vicious pattern of sarcasm and baiting, and you're going to be called out on not having a collegial attitude suitable for Wikipedia collaborations. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 23:25, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your clear and direct response: I much appreciate that approach.
I likewise prefer to be direct, so I'll tell you what I would tell the RFC/U committee: The reason that my comments, taken by themselves, are innocuous is that I am quite intentionally not allowing myself to be baited by a consistent pattern of hostility that includes incivility, edit-warring and abuse of process. Given this high level of provocation, the fact that my remarks are still individually innocuous is a testament to my attempt to come as close to a collegial attitude under these trying circumstances.
Still, I am responsible for my comments, even when provoked. The reason I asked for examples is that sarcasm detection in an environment without tone of voice is notoriously unreliable, so I wondered if perhaps I was being ambiguous in a way that could be taken as sarcastic. If so, there are things I could do to make it more clear when sarcasm isn't intended. As I said, I prefer to be direct, and sarcasm is indirect. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 02:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't have time for diffs at the moment, but there are many users warning you about this, and I've even gotten emails about it. Perhaps you could listen to their advice? Given the areas you refuse to stop editing in, I understand the frustration you're feeling, but that's not going to matter when you're dragged to ANI next and the community decides to block you. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 05:06, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, no, they're planning an RFC/U first, and it'll be a huge pile-on, like a bonfire for burning books. They'll toss in all of these wonderful out-of-context diffs, provide insultingly inaccurate summaries of my history and try to rile up a lynch mob mentality. They'll succeed, too. As soon as the RFC/U has poisoned the well, they'll move to ANI and have me blocked "by the community".
At this point, backing off wouldn't protect me, so there's no reason to back off. Instead, I'll press forward and spend my remaining time keeping articles neutral and accurate. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 05:28, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Like your Christian-right crap which you didn't even bother to read what section you were modifying and yet you still pressed for inclusion. Especially your bias was obviously showing that you wanted to label a political party a religious organization which is not the case at all. ViriiK (talk) 05:34, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Featured Content for Signpost August 27 missing Featured Picturesedit
Hi, this week's content report only covers up to 25 August (see "This edition covers content promoted between 19 and 25 August 2012"), and the two FPCs were closed on the 26th. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 23:25, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, my mistake, I thought that said 26th. Pine✉ 01:55, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
A kindly third party alerted me to this. Given the context -- it was posted right after you warned Belchfire about his interactions with me (and vice versa) -- and his caginess about who it refers to, I don't think it would be unreasonable to infer that he might be talking about me and congratulating Belchfire.
Please tell me I'm wrong and I'll drop it. In fact, I'm done here: you have the link and you can decide what to do with it. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 02:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
You'd think this would be easy. I've left a note at his talk page. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 05:06, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
I changed my mind. I said I was just walking away and leaving this to you, but now I'm told he's ignoring your note. If he violates the ban but acknowledges his error and agrees not to do it again, I'd be fine with that. But if he violates it and ignores your note, this becomes a problem.I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 22:30, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
He hasn't edited since I left the note, so let's not assume too much here... also the message below is intended, sort of, for you. It would be nice if you could collegially collaborate with the conservatism people, as it would take a lot of heat off you.Ed[talk][majestic titan] 02:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
I apologize; I misread the date. I've redacted my comment above.
You know, it's a funny thing, but I've been trying to for some time. Somehow, it's been difficult. They're quick to revert, they're very uncooperative on talk pages, and they're often quite uncivil. It's frustrating. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 02:51, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
So? Always be civil back, and take the moral high ground. That will get you the 'win' in the end. Ed[talk][majestic titan] 02:53, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
I agree, at least in principle. In practice, it's not always that easy. Anyhow, thanks for your advice and sorry about my inability to use a calendar. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 03:02, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
I know it can be difficult, but it's always good to have a reminder every so often. Anytime, and no worries, we've all done worse things before. :-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 03:20, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm tempted to drop what I'm doing to write WP:YOUKNOWWHO, a polemic an essay against coded references. This sort of behavior ranges from childish to conspiratorial, and it's a particularly bad idea for anyone with an interaction ban. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 21:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello Ed! I am on the Paul Ryan GA Team. As you can see it is quite an assortment of editors. When a certain editor signed up I initially had my reservations, but I decided to put the pedia first and ask everyone to "leave our personal differences at the proverbial door." Well a recent series of confrontations make it impossible for this team to proceed as assembled. I know you're handling the IBan with Guy and the certain editor, and I was hoping you could ask the certain editor to withdraw for the good of the pedia so the GA can go forward. Thanks! – Sir Lionel, EG(talk) 12:31, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
I've asked, sort of, above. What he does is up to him. Good luck with the GAN; it's going to be a rough ride no matter how you slice it. I hope the article ends up in a quality, neutral state in the end! Ed[talk][majestic titan] 02:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm sure that it's fine for me to participate in getting Paul Ryan to GA status. We'll all be collegial. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 02:52, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't know if it's just me, but the latest issue of the Signpost seems to have a problem--I'm seeing the right half (with the WikiProject and such) as new, and the left half has articles from last week's Signpost. Just wanted to make you aware of the problem. :) Knight of Truth (talk) 04:29, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
What page are you seeing that on? The Toolserver is having major issues, so I've gotten step one of our semi-automated process done, but nothing else. ;-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 04:31, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Ah, that is because I haven't updated WP:SIGNPOST yet. I suppose I'll do that now while I'm waiting on the Toolserver. Thanks for the note! Ed[talk][majestic titan] 04:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Ed. Just to be clear (because I mentioned the same problem a few weeks ago), Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue should be updated only after all editorial updates have been completed (including those at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost), because the /Issue subpage is the one intended for watchlisting and is therefore the only publication notification for many readers. — Richardguk (talk) 09:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
I've drafted this month's WikiCup newsletter here. Anything you want to add? Also, the final pool is here, ready for copy-pasting. In response to a request on the main talk page, I've opened a brainstorming discussion here on the subject of next year's competition. I've updated the main page and I'm about to wipe the submission pages. Anything else that needs doing? J Milburn (talk) 14:51, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Looks good to me, but you're the expert on everything Cup-related. ;-) Ed[talk][majestic titan] 20:06, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Just so we're singing from the same book, you actually edited last month's newsletter (I forgot to change the titles). It's the August one, at the bottom of the page, which will need to be sent out in just over 24 hours. J Milburn (talk) 21:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
OH, oops. I'll take another look later today. Do you still need me to send it out tomorrow? Ed[talk][majestic titan] 02:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, gonna be away from my computer for a few days. You'll also need to post the new pool to the main WikiCup page- I typically do both at midnight Wikipedia time. I don't think anything else will need doing. J Milburn (talk) 12:09, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) as the leader, with 300 points being awarded for the featured article Bivalvia, and Pool B sees 
Grapple X (submissions) in the lead, with 10 good articles, and over 35 articles eligible for good topic points. Pool A sees 
Muboshgu (submissions) in second place with a number of articles relating to baseball, while Pool B's 
Ruby2010 (submissions) follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film Pride & Prejudice. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals.
Template:Royal Netherlands Navy cruisers has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DH85868993 (talk) 12:07, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
- The Bushranger One ping only 03:41, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
){kind=link}
Thanks for uploading File:Ellcrys.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
