User talk:28bytes/Archive 9

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Congrats!

Yes, you have some time left, but let's not kid ourselves. Congrats on the overwhelming success of your RfA! Swarm ^X 02:21, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

So how is it coming along with the mop? For a retro game, have you tried playing Goonies II for the NES? –BuickCenturyDriver 09:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, a "beat the 'crat congrats" seems in order. Please remember, as the newbie admin you get the coffee's and I prefer my doughnuts plain. Ha Ha! Pedro :  Chat  09:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes sir! Better than latrine duty, at least! Thanks, guys. 28bytes (talk) 12:27, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Now that it's official, let me beat the crat to offer you my heartiest congratulations!--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:36, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

• Our newest admin, RFA closed by our newest 'crat! Pedro :  Chat  14:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict × 2) Congratulations! I opposed last time, but this one definitely merited full support. Good luck with your new admin duties. (Hey! I just noticed you left me as the only active non-sysop EFM!) Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
    • Hey, you did oppose me the first time, didn't you? Let's see, how does that block button work... ;) 28bytes (talk) 15:14, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
      • D: Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Congrats. As expected above, your RfA was successful. The New Admin School might be useful to play around with admin tools, and here is the how-to guide. This and this are good words of caution—had I known of that before, I wouldn't be the reason as to why these two pages exist. :p Good luck with the new tools. Maxim_(talk) 14:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you sir! 28bytes (talk) 14:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

• Added to the hall of shame fame. :) Feel free to ask if I can be of any help whilst you get used to the shiny buttons. Pedro :  Chat  14:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Pedro, thank you again for the nomination and the support. Don't be surprised if I drop by asking how stuff works. 28bytes (talk) 15:18, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! jorgenev 14:48, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

• Hooray! Danger (talk) 14:54, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
• Well done - enjoy the mop! Brookie :) - he's in the building somewhere! ^(Whisper...) 14:56, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

• Ooh, it's all over, and you made it! (There never seemed much doubt, mind) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:39, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

• I knew you'd do it! You're welcome for the nomination and the support, but thank you for letting us nominate in the first place. :D Best. Acalamari 15:54, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
• You've been late at updating your userpage with this :). But, I knew that, with your patience and excellent decisions as my mentor, you were the perfect candidate.Jasper Deng (talk) 15:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank you Jasper, I appreciate that. (I figured I'd not worry about my user page until it was official.) 28bytes (talk) 16:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
    • Hey. It is official - you have the sysop flag right now. But, hey, you only use the mop when you have a mess to clean up :) .Jasper Deng (talk) 16:10, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Holy crap there are a lot of buttons on the top of pages now. There's one that says "deli-batch" but I suspect pushing it won't cause someone to bring me a batch of sandwiches from the deli as it should. I feel a bit like Homer Simpson encountering the tab key on his new computer. 28bytes (talk) 16:13, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

After all, Wikipedia is a MMORPG :). When you push those extra buttons, you exercise powers unavailable to all but less than 2000 of us xD.Jasper Deng (talk) 16:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Have you seen the Claim £2500 monthly admin paycheck button yet? It's really great. </sarcasm> Pedro :  Chat  20:13, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

• congrats 28, .. sorry I missed the !vote. VERY strong showing indeed. — Ched :  ?  18:28, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks! 28bytes (talk) 19:05, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
• Congrats, 28bytes! Enjoy your new t-shirt:
  

  

  
  —mc10 (t/c) 22:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Ah crap, didn't see that User:Σ beat me to it below. Still, congrats! —mc10 (t/c) 22:42, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
    • Thanks! And don't worry, a man can never have too many T-shirt. :) 28bytes (talk) 22:47, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
      • Belated congrats from me. Now go block Jimbo or delete the main page or something... :P —James ^{(Talk • Contribs)} • 6:14pm • 08:14, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
        • Thanks! 28bytes (talk) 16:22, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
• I've taken the liberty of moving you from the DYK non-admins to the "Willing to help" DYK admins. Feel free to bump yourself up to "Actively involved". Congrats :) (Oh, and if you haven't already, it'd be good to watchlist User:DYKUpdateBot/Errors.) Shubinator (talk) 05:07, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks Shub! I'll watchlist that now. 28bytes (talk) 13:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
    • It's been a long while since we have a overwhelming majority of support in RfA. Congratulations. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 02:32, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
      • Thanks! 28bytes (talk) 02:47, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Why did you delete my page????

Just wanted to be the first! Catfish Jim (ex-soapdish) 17:14, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Ha ha ha! Thanks. 28bytes (talk) 17:16, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

But he did delete WP:NAZI as his first admin action. Now all vandals inserting {{unblock|[[WP:NAZI]]}} will be sad. (Didn't know that page existed. 0_o) Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, my first two admin actions were to delete NAZI and HITLER, which was pretty fun. (Hope I did it right!) I was going to vote delete on the RfDs, then noticed that the creator had just voted delete, so... 28bytes (talk) 19:45, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Tell me when you make your first block :) .Jasper Deng (talk) 23:24, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Sure thing. It might a while, though, I'm tied up with bot work at the moment. 28bytes (talk) 23:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Go write a fucking article...

...and watch out for that Tryptofish fellow. Guy has no sense for how serious our Wiki-processes are. But seriously, congrats young man, and please try to keep making this place better for our READERS. (/mother hen) TCO (talk) 18:24, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Ha ha. Thank you, sir. There's definitely some writin' on my to-do list, but this week will probably be fine-tune-the-bot and learn-what-the-new-buttons-do week. I see you've got a Project Elements userbox, long-term I'd love to help out with that. I ♥ elements. 28bytes (talk) 18:33, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

My advice is that you block that trouble-maker Tryptofish. Wiki-scum, for sure. Glad it's over. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it being over is quite nice, actually. :) 28bytes (talk) 20:08, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Article writing will plummet the first few weeks. It took me nearly two months to get back into the swing of things :) (congrats!) --Errant ^(chat!) 22:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! And yeah, between the bit and the bot, I don't expect to pound out too much content this month. 28bytes (talk) 22:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Mail order

Someone order this?

--The Σ ^talk_contribs 21:12, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, now it's official. 28bytes (talk) 21:13, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

I couldn't let them deprive you of the Shirt for over 12 hours. :P --The Σ ^talk_contribs 21:17, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Page move and...

Thank you very much, 28bytes, for this page move! A N D...

C O N G R A T U L A T I O N S on your recent demotion!>) – Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX )  05:49, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Glad to help! Figured I'd better start earning my T-shirts. :) 28bytes (talk) 05:49, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

• Likewise from me; congratulations and great to have you as an admin! Wifione _....... ^{Leave a message} 00:35, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks! Glad you were there to turn 127 supports to 128 in the end! 28bytes (talk) 02:26, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

external links in my ELIPS article

Hi 28bytes, you had an opinion tnat I should remove three very relevant external links at the end of the article. I do disagree, as these are - as said - very relevant links. I cannot see the logic in routing people to locations that are less good quality, just because I use Wikipedia external links. Please explain the rationale and if there are regulations that speak against these links. The article is describing an international scientific programme, and obviously needs here and there to relate the story back to the wealth of information that is existing on ESA's sites. It makes little sense to rewrite that all to become wiki pages.

Further, the comments I get each time I upload one of our own - ESA's - tables, appear deeply irrelevant. yesterday I have rewritten four tables and till now have uploaded three - and still get the same comments re. fair use and license: It is our own material, so we can use it as we want and there is no copyright on it, and if there were, we would have that copyright. It derives basically from papers that are fully public, also from our hand. I would appreciate explanatioons for these aspects, that do not appear logic to me. best regards,

Benny — Preceding unsigned comment added by Belmann3 (talk • contribs) 09:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Benny. Here is a link to the relevant guideline. It's somewhat complex, but the first sentence, "Wikipedia articles may include links to web pages outside Wikipedia (external links), but they should not normally be used in the body of an article" is the main gist of it. Please let me know if you have any questions. 28bytes (talk) 15:25, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Advertising by a user

• Zacw123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I had given this user a 4im warning about advertising long ago (a month) after having SoundSoap speedily deleted, which this user created. Other things related to that were also marked for speedy deletion. Now, the user is advertising another similar product (BIAS Peak), which was tagged for CSD as well as related things. I just wonder if you knew how to deal with something like this (which I know you do :) ).Jasper Deng (talk) 02:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Looking at it now. 28bytes (talk) 04:29, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Interesting, the article's been around since 2007. The current form is a lot less spammy than the earlier versions; looks like it's got some eyes on it, which is good. I imagine Δ or someone else will AfD it if it can't be improved further. 28bytes (talk) 04:37, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

duuu....ude!

There were so many other ways I was going to take that. Just wanted to give it a little time for the flames to get higher before I poured on new chemicals.  :( TCO (talk) 18:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I mean a little one was "strip Malleus" where he has to take off an article of clothing every time he threatens to quit. And that was just one. :(  :( TCO (talk) 18:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

If you take away all my trolling, I am going to have to do useful things like track down some photos (there are some shockingly major and important subjects that need illustration...and I'm not talking Commons pulls...talking making them or getting donations...all that...work. Meh!TCO (talk) 18:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

TCO, I would never dream of taking away all your trolling. :) I just hate distracting the good people at AN/I from all the important article work they were about to do, ya know? 28bytes (talk) 19:01, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

OK, boss. I will try to ration it out. I just have so many ideas. Need to make a spreadsheet or something...TCO (talk) 19:04, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

You gotta admit...it was getting a lot of fast responses. At least people were interested in that thread.TCO (talk) 19:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, absolutely. A proposal like that, on AN/I? Like tossing raw meat to starving bears. 28bytes (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

28b, the note should read "Successful troll is successful." TCO is on a roll! ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 01:08, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Heh. Well, I can't take credit for the note. 28bytes (talk) 01:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

about geep edit

Sorry, I'm new. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linguardia (talk • contribs) 02:32, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries, we were all new at some point! Welcome, and feel free to drop by here with any questions you might have. 28bytes (talk) 02:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Benjamin Maisani

Please restore the Benjamin Maisani article I created. Being (Personal attack removed) is very notable, so he deserves an artice. PingaBinga (talk) 01:04, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

No. Being someone's boyfriend or girlfriend does not make them notable. This is an encyclopedia, not a gossip column. You can take it to WP:Deletion review if you like, but I suggest reading WP:NOTINHERITED first. 28bytes (talk) 01:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

ANI - NPA

I loved your close rationale, have a cookie.--v/r - TP 01:54, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

TParis has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Ha ha! Thanks. 28bytes (talk) 01:56, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Good job

I decided to wait a few days after your RfA before giving you this.

	Valued Contributor Award
	You have been identified as a valued contributor and your efforts are appreciated. We are honored to present you with the Valued Contributor Award and we thank you for donating your time, expertise and effort to Wikipedia. Keep up the good work. Thanks. (more details)

I just wanted to say that you have been doing a fantastic job and have really made a name for yourself. Your sucessful RfA really proves that your hard work has not gone unnoticed. The project has benefitted greatly from your participation and I'm thankful for all your contributions. Good job. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 02:03, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! I appreciate the kind words. 28bytes (talk) 02:05, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit filter for porn

I've noticed that there have been many vandalism incidents by usually unregistered or non-autoconfirmed vandals adding pornography to various places. While Wikipedia isn't censored, I don't see a reason why any non-autoconfirmed user should be editing them into our pages, especially those not in the main namespace. Is it possible to put all pornographic images on Wikipedia in a category for that and then make an edit filter?Jasper Deng (talk) 03:34, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

You mean images? There's an image blacklist, which helps somewhat, although it will never be able to stop somebody from uploading a new one and adding it to an article. 28bytes (talk) 03:50, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I mean, there are lots of existing porn images that won't be deleted that are often used by vandals. Adding these to a special list or category and then making an edit filter for non-autoconfirmed users when they try to add one of these images is my idea here. Also, image uploaders must be autoconfirmed, which helps a lot.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:10, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, the blacklist I linked to essentially serves as such a list. 28bytes (talk) 04:17, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

There are certainly offensive images not on this blacklist, so either we add those to that list or filter it.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:43, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't know how you could build a filter for it, to be honest. 28bytes (talk) 04:45, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't know if I know what I'm talking about, but, I believe we can set it up so that if the image is in a page in a certain category, it can't be added to things outside of that category.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:47, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, I understand what you're describing, but I don't think it's feasible to do technically. I'd explain why, but WP:BEANS and all. 28bytes (talk) 04:54, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Recent action

Hi there. Thanks for taking care of... that. I assume you deleted the images, told the CUs about the latest incantation, and sent the contributor responsible off to indef land?

Well... thanks again. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:07, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, indef'ed, at least. Still working on the image part, they're on commons. 28bytes (talk) 04:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

		The Admin's Barnstar
		Oh dear, your shiny new mop is all covered with... oh dear. Danger (talk) 08:45, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Ha! Thanks. I didn't figure it'd stay shiny and clean for long! 28bytes (talk) 08:47, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Help

Hey 28bytes. I'm out of town right now, (hence the IP) but I'll try to help draft something for that NFCC this coming week when I get back. User:Ched Davis 98.27.172.234 (talk) 17:35, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Ched, I would appreciate the help. I think having a doc like that could prevent a lot of the frustrations on all sides. 28bytes (talk) 18:06, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Always enjoy working with one of Pedro's noms. But that's because I know that Pedro only nominates the very best :-) — Ched :  ?  23:52, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Do we get a secret handshake? If so Pedro forgot to tell me what it is. 28bytes (talk) 01:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

You have to fix your sig. first .. LOLOLOLOL. — Ched :  ?  01:24, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

• -28- :  bytes ..... there ya go ... directions for handshake are in the mail. :} — Ched :  ?  01:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
• Cabal :) Pedro :  Chat  19:23, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Spitefully closing threads with assumptions of bad faith

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Follow_up this was an on-going discussion and despite your assumption of bad faith, nowhere did I decline to help you draft a document. When I wrote that, I was on the way out, and didn't see your small comment nestled in the middle. There are several on-going conversations and people randomly closing them does not help us solve this problem.--Crossmr (talk) 23:39, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I'd be shocked if there was any ABF, but I'll let 28 speak for himself. TBH .. I thought the same thing ... not in assuming bad faith, just thought you weren't interested in doing that type of thing. That's not a bad thing, we all have areas we enjoy .. and areas we don't .,., and stick with what we like to do. that's all. — Ched :  ?  00:25, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Spitefully? Wow, that's a new one. If you feel there's more to be gained by keeping that thread going, be my guest and re-open it. You have my blessing. But it's my view that the underlying issue is that NFCC is extremely easy for new and even experienced editors to get wrong, and we need better ways of helping them than expecting our NFCC workers to do the coaching. I think that reiterating that Δ isn't a particularly good coach doesn't really help anything, and that we're better off working together to improve our FUR troubleshooting system. But again, if you want to re-open the thread, go for it. Regardless, my invitation for you to help draft a "Common FUR problems" document stands, as you seem to have a good sense of some of the pitfalls editors may run into in trying to get FUR right. 28bytes (talk) 01:00, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

To be honest it comes across as very spiteful. I didn't catch his question because I was in a hurry, and because I didn't answer it, he turns around makes an assumption of bad faith (he states I declined when I did not, I made no statement either way) and makes further bad faith assumptions on my motives as a result of that and then closes it based on that assumption, when there were other discussions on-going.--Crossmr (talk) 04:16, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I would like to point out the irony of lecturing somebody about assuming bad faith while simultaneously accusing them of acting out of spite. As it happens, my assumption that you were mainly posting to bash Δ seems to be supported by your subsequent actions: you preceded the above post with another AN/I post criticizing Δ, and followed it with yet another AN/I post critical of Δ. I note that you have already received a final warning, and another warning after that for your comments concerning Δ, so I would encourage you to consider how your continued posting about Δ is being perceived by other editors. 28bytes (talk) 04:39, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

You clearly stated that you were closing the thread because of your false assumption that I had declined your offer when I stated nothing either way. Since you declined to respond to my offer above to help draft a document that would help these confused users you speak of, I'm forced to assume you're more interesting in bashing Δ than in solving the problem with confused users. As such, I'm closing this thread. As far as Future perfect's warning, his warning is little more than baseless personal attacks with zero merit. As I pointed out on his talk page [1] there is absolutely nothing to support his claims and he's failed to provide a single diff to back up his "warning". As to the other warning, this is little more than than someone's view that my somehow reporting a community sanctioned user to an admin who had been closing several threads on the user was uncivil because I didn't notify the community sanctioned user. I'm still looking for the text in WP:CIVIL that states that is required.--Crossmr (talk) 12:14, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I will be happy to accept that you simply didn't see my request to you to move on to a more productive area of discussion when you decided to post another lengthy criticism of Δ right below it. Honest, I'm happy to assume good faith here. But let's be clear: (1) I closed that thread not because you failed to respond to my request, but because you did not respond to the request and you posted a lengthy follow-up about Δ in the same thread; and (2) I've already told you that you're welcome to re-open the thread if you like, which you essentially have done by posting extensively just below it. So I'm not clear on what is it you hope to gain by continuing to post to my talk page, accusing me of bad faith? 28bytes (talk) 13:43, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay. I realize how my missing your post could look, I hope you can appreciate how the way what you wrote is worded can look as well. Let's all move on to things more productive.--Crossmr (talk) 14:06, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Best, 28bytes (talk) 14:19, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Bans

Are they for a set period of time or permanent?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:34, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

They're indefinite, but after a reasonable length of time you can request they be reconsidered. I'd give it maybe 6 months or so before asking they be lifted. Ideally you could get Sven or one of the other people who supported the bans to propose to lift them, once you and they are on the same page about how FS should be approached; that would provide the best shot at getting them lifted, I think. 28bytes (talk) 03:38, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Is there such a thing as a ban review (like WP:DRV) or appeal?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:41, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

As I understand it, there are two avenues open to you for appealing a topic ban: the venue in which it was proposed (AN/I in this case) and an ArbCom request. As a practical matter, you're probably better off just focusing on DYK, FAC and other areas for a while, as an AN/I or ArbCom appeal will probably not be fruitful this soon after it was enacted. 28bytes (talk) 04:52, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Also, am I allowed to comment on my WP:FSC nominations that are still open?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:02, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

By the letter of it, I'd say no, but if you were to leave Sven a message telling him (1) you accept the topic ban and won't add any more nominations for now but (2) you would like to comment on your still-open ones, he might be open to it. 28bytes (talk) 05:13, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I am not promising to accept a topic ban, and I am certainly going to appeal the ban issued without violative conduct, or warnings regarding the XfD. I just have to figure out what is what. It looks like I have to exhaust other appeals before going to arb com. Does that mean I have to go back to AN/I first?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:31, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I believe ArbCom would be less likely to accept an appeal without an attempt to have it lifted at AN/I. However – and this is just me speaking as an editor here – you're probably better off giving it some time before doing that; at least a couple of days to think about it and consider your options. But that's up to you. 28bytes (talk) 05:37, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

28bytes, apparently your suggested plan of action was not heeded by TTT. Considering that most of the active members of FS voted for the FS topic ban, I personally would think that TTT going back to FS, even to monitor current submissions, would not be the best of ideas. None the less, between me being the person who initiated the topic ban proceedings and TTT's recent threats against me, I would have to consider myself 'involved' for the time being. Sorry I could not be more helpful in this matter. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:05, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)(edit conflict) A ban may be temporary or permanent, and for all or only certain pages of the Wikipedia. There is not much to be gained by lodging an appeal too soon. Reading this might help: WP:BAN#Review and reversal of bans. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:11, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Be advised of the new discussion regarding a ban that you closed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:22, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

ahhh .... you're up ..

hang on a second .. moving something to your user space. — Ched :  ?  14:00, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

• User:28bytes/Non-Free. Feel free to hack away .. delete and start from scratch ... chop it up .,.. or burn with fire... lol. — Ched :  ?  14:03, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

BTW ... just ignore this edit ... I'm not exactly "normal" first thing in the morning. :) — Ched :  ?  14:06, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Ched, this is a great start! I'm going to be busy with Fathers' Day activities today, but will see what I can add to it early tomorrow. 28bytes (talk) 14:12, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Cool ... happy Father's Day. Have a great one! — Ched :  ?  14:19, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Socks messing around

Hi, do you mind taking a look at File:Account Creation - Progress bar - Step 3.png? Creativewires9 (talk · contribs) posted some nonsense the day before on the talk page and you deleted it but now Digvinder Rawat (talk · contribs) added something onto the file page itself, I suspect they are one and the same. I mean, which newbie would stumble on that file page from out of the blue??? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 16:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Dave. I don't think this is socking (although I'm not a checkuser). What it looks like to me is that when a newly created account gets to this page, the instructions say to click on a link on the left and edit it, and it looks like they're taking that a little bit too literally, and clicking on the banner itself (which is a link to File:Account Creation - Progress bar - Step 3.png) and clicking edit, and saving it. I've re-deleted the page and will watchlist it, but that's my theory for now. 28bytes (talk) 18:05, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply, I understand what you're thinking but this is a complex problem, really. What are the odds of these chaps being editors from India? All I can say is, I've watchlisted the page and noticed that there seems too much of a coincidence that this has occurred three times within the week, all by Indian editors (or so it seems with their Indian names). Something just doesn't add up. Well, it is my conclusion that they are one and the same. First, the Admin January deleted the talk page after she was alerted, then you came along to delete it the second time after it was recreated ... and now this. I'm just joining the dots. Thoughts? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 18:19, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

As someone who has a bot that detects test edits, I can say it does not surprise me at all that they were all from India. I see tons of test edits on Indian topics from a broad range of IPs, for some reason. I'm a Hanlon's razor type myself, but if you're still concerned there may be some socking or other malign intent in these edits, probably the best bet is to ask a checkuser for their opinion, since they'll be able to do the appropriate poking around if they agree with your concerns. 28bytes (talk) 18:27, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Its not a big deal if it was on different article/subject page but this senseless thing happened three times within the week. Well, I supposed if I look at it from another perspective, it is better not to feed into their psyche to avoid falling into their trap for attention. I'll leave it to you, better enjoy the weekends while it still last. Cheers! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 18:41, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, you too! 28bytes (talk) 18:43, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

JohnCD, another Admin, just deleted something on File:Account Creation - Progress bar - Step 3.png, this is the fourth instance this week. Seriously, you have to come up with a better solution soon or there be no end to this nonsense day in day out. Facepalm... --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 11:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll start a noticeboard thread. 28bytes (talk) 13:44, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Thread started here. 28bytes (talk) 15:58, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

RfA reform

A couple of weeks ago, we discussed inviting our task force members to comment on the possible proposals. If you had the idea for a message to send out, that would still be appreciated. The discussion is still on my talk page, if you need a reminder. Swarm ^X 19:52, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Right?

I am wondering whether this was good judgement by me. Since I suspected the IP to be a sock of JarlaxleArtemis (talk · contribs) (banned), and the personal attacks were so extreme (that they were considered vandalism by me), I decided that Rollback use would be reasonable here. I highly doubt that this IP needs to be taken to ANI for something like this though that can be solved in a minute by any admin (IP blocked). If this wasn't proper use of this tool, tell me alternatives.Jasper Deng (talk) 02:57, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

In general it's best to explain in an edit summary why you're reverting something. Twinkle lets you do this, whereas standard rollback does not. Sock or not, statements like [removed] are in no way acceptable discourse, and I have no objection to you removing them. You were right to give them a 4im warning for that. 28bytes (talk) 03:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Watching before I leap

I'm not going to get myself involved with this, even though it's a blatant personal attack just asking for talk page access removal.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:44, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

A wise decision. 28bytes (talk) 04:46, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Task force WP:RFA2011 update

Hi. As of 20 June: More stats have been added on candidates and !voter participation. Details have been added about qualifications required on other Wikis for candidates and RfA !voters. Some items such as clerking, !voters, and candidates are nearing proposal stage. A quick page`link template has been added to each page of the project. Please visit those links to get up to speed with recent developments, and chime in with your comments. Thanks for your participation.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 07:57, 20 June 2011 (UTC).

The Signpost

Hi, can you please check and edit if necessary: Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-06-20/News_and_notes. Tony (talk) 09:49, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Tony, it looks fine to me. Thanks, 28bytes (talk) 14:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Help please

I have been dealing with a LTA on List of indigenous peoples, which I was doing because it was a very straightforward non-controversial process (rollback banned user, report to AIV, rollback some more, tag as sock). However, on User talk:Gogo Dodo#JarlaxleArtemis, Bsadowski1 and I have started a discussion on the significance of WP:DENY on tagging socks. This is a question best answered by you, not me, since my understanding of WP:DENY may not be the appropriate one.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I would defer to Bsadowski1 and Gogo Dodo's judgement on this. They have been dealing with these accounts for a very long time and I presume they know what they're doing. 28bytes (talk) 10:51, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

OK

... Think I'm done. (at least for now) Probably needs a "nutshell" and maybe "essay" tags added. Likely needs a better name too ... lol. Anyway, drop me a note when it goes live, or you post a board notice. Cheers. — Ched :  ?  02:53, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Ched, I'll take another look at it today. 28bytes (talk) 07:47, 23 June 2011 (UTC)