User talk:Aervanath/Archive 15
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 April 2010
- Sanger allegations: Larry Sanger accuses Wikimedia of hosting illegal images
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Motorcycling
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 April 2010
- News and notes: Berlin WikiConference, Brooklyn Museum & Google.org collaborations, review backlog removed, 1 billion edits
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Environment
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 April 2010
- From the team: Introducing Signpost Sidebars
- Museums conference: Wikimedians meet with museum leaders
- News and notes: Wikimedia announcements, Wikipedia advertising, and more!
- In the news: Making sausage, Jimmy Wales on TV, and more!
- Sister projects: Milestones, Openings, and Wikinews contest
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Gastropods
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010
- Book review: Review of The World and Wikipedia
- News and notes: iPhone app update, Vector rollout for May 13, brief news
- In the news: Government promotes Tamil Wikipedia, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject U.S. Roads
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The Wikipedia Signpost: 10 May 2010
- From the editor: Reviewers and reporters wanted
- Commons deletions: Porn madness
- Wikipedia books launched: Wikipedia books launched worldwide
- News and notes: Public Policy and Books for All
- In the news: Commons pornography purge, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Birds
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The Wikipedia Signpost: 17 May 2010
- News and notes: Backstage at the British Museum
- In the news: In the news
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Essays
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The Wikipedia Signpost: 24 May 2010
- News and notes: New puzzle globe, feature for admins, Israel's "Wikipedia Bill", unsourced bios declining
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Saints
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The Wikipedia Signpost: 31 May 2010
- Photography: Making money with free photos
- News and notes: Wikimedians at Maker Faire, brief news
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Zoo
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 June 2010
- From the team: Changes to the Signpost
- News and notes: "Pending changes" trial, Chief hires, British Museum prizes, Interwiki debate, and more
- Free Travel-Shirts: "Free Travel-Shirts" signed by Jimmy Wales and others purchasable
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Comedy
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 June 2010
- News and notes: Pending changes goes live, first state-funded Wikipedia project concludes, brief news
- In the news: Hoaxes in France and at university, Wikipedia used in Indian court, Is Wikipedia a cult?, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 June 2010
- Sister projects: Picture of the Year results declared on Wikimedia Commons
- News and notes: Collaboration with the British Museum and in Serbia, Interaction with researchers, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject U2
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 June 2010
- Objectionable material: Board resolution on offensive content
- In the news: Wikipedia controlled by pedophiles, left-wing trolls, Islamofascists and Communist commandos?
- Public Policy Initiative: Introducing the Public Policy Initiative
- WikiProject report: Talking with WikiProject Ships
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 July 2010
- Wikimania preview: Gearing up for Wikimania in Gdańsk
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Children's Literature
- Features and admins: This week's highlights
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 July 2010
- UK COI edits: British politicians accused of WP cover-ups
- News and notes: Board changes, Wikimania, Public Policy Initiative
- Discussion report: Article ownership, WikiProjects vs. Manual of Style, Unverifiable village
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Apple Inc.
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 July 2010
- News and notes: Politician defends editing own article, Google translation, Row about a small Wikipedia
- WikiProject report: Up close with WikiProject Animals
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: ArbCom to appoint CU/OS positions after dumping election results
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 July 2010
- News and notes: New interwiki project improves biographies, and other news
- In the news: Wikipedia leads in customer satisfaction, Google Translate and India, Citizendium transition, Jimbo's media accolade
- WikiProject report: These Are the Voyages of WikiProject Star Trek
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Discussion report: Controversial e-mail proposal, Invalid AfD
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 August 2010
- News and notes: Canadian political edits, Swedish royal wedding, Italian "right of reply" bill, Chapter reports
- In the news: Gardner and Sanger on why people edit Wikipedia, Fancy and frugal reading devices, Medical article assessed
- WikiProject report: Always Expanding: WikiProject Images and Media
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution
The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 August 2010
- News and notes: FBI requests takedown of seal, Public Policy advisors and ambassadors, Cary Bass leaving, new Research Committee
- In the news: Wikinews interviews Umberto Eco, and more
- Sister projects: Strategic Planning update
- WikiProject report: Chocks away for WikiProject Aviation
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 16 August 2010
- WikiProject report: A Pit Stop with WikiProject NASCAR
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: ArbCom releases names of CU/OS applicants after delay
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 23 August 2010
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Cryptozoology
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Proposed decision of climate change case posted
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 30 August 2010
- In the news: Agatha Christie spoiled, Wales on Wikileaks, University students improve Wikipedia, and more
- WikiProject report: Studying WikiProject Universities
- Features and admins: Featured article milestone: 3,000
- Arbitration report: What does the Race and intelligence case tell us?
The Signpost: 6 September 2010
- Book review: Cognitive Surplus, by Clay Shirky
- WikiProject report: Putting articles in their place: the Uncategorized Task Force
- Features and admins: Bumper crop of admins; Obama featured portal marks our 150th
- Arbitration report: Interim desysopping, CU/OS appointments, and more
- Technology report: Development transparency, resource loading, GSoC: extension management
The Signpost: 13 September 2010
- News and notes: Page-edit stats, French National Library partnership, Mass page blanking, Jimbo on Pending changes
- Public Policy Initiative: Experiments with article assessment
- Sister projects: Biography bloopers – update on the Death Anomalies collaboration
- WikiProject report: Getting the picture – an interview with the Graphic lab
- Features and admins: "Magnificent" warthog not so cute, says featured picture judge
- Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 20 September 2010
- From the editor: New ways to read and share the Signpost
- News and notes: Dutch National Archives donation, French photo raid, brief notes
- In the news: Rush Limbaugh falls for Wikipedia hoax, Public Policy Initiative, Nature cites Wikipedia
- WikiProject report: All Aboard WikiProject Trains
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Dispatches: Tools, part 2: Internal links and page histories
- Arbitration report: Discretionary sanctions clarification and more
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 September 2010
- News and notes: French million, controversial content, Citizendium charter, Pending changes, and more
- WikiProject report: Designing WikiProject Architecture
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: EEML amendment requests & more
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 4 October 2010
- WikiProject report: Hot topics with WikiProject Volcanoes
- Features and admins: Milestone: 2,500th featured picture
- Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution
- Technology report: Code reviewers, October Engineering update, brief news
The Signpost: 11 October 2010
- News and notes: Board resolutions, fundraiser challenge, traffic report, ten thousand good articles, and more
- In the news: Free culture conference, "The Register" retracts accusations, students blog about Wikipedia, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Smithsonian Institution
- Features and admins: Big week for ships and music
- Dispatches: Tools, part 3: Style tools and wikEd
- Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 18 October 2010
- News and notes: Wikipedia fundraiser event, Frankfurt book fair, news in brief
- WikiProject report: Show Me the Money: WikiProject Numismatics
- Features and admins: A week for marine creatures
- Dispatches: Common issues seen in Peer review
- Arbitration report: Climate change case closes after 4 months
- Technology report: Video subtitling tool, staff vs. volunteer developers, brief news
The Signpost: 25 October 2010
- News and notes: Mike Godwin leaves the Foundation, ArbCom election announced
- In the news: Good faith vs. bad faith, climate change, court citations, weirdest medieval fact, brief news
- WikiProject report: Nightmare on Wiki Street: WikiProject Horror
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- ArbCom interview: So what is being an arbitrator actually like?
- Arbitration report: Case closes within 1 month
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 1 November 2010
- In the news: Airplane construction with Wikipedia, lessons from the strategy project, logic over rhetoric
- WikiProject report: Scoring with WikiProject Ice Hockey
- Features and admins: Good-lookin' slugs and snails
- Arbitration report: Arb resignation during plagiarism discussion; election RfC closing in 2 days
- Technology report: Foundation office switches to closed source, secure browsing, brief news
The Signpost: 8 November 2010
- News and notes: Second Wikipedian in Residence, {{citation needed}} for sanity
- WikiProject report: WikiProject California
- Features and admins: No, not science fiction—real science
- Election report: The countdown begins
- Arbitration report: No cases this week; Date delinking sanctions reduced for one party; History ban extended
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 15 November 2010
- News and notes: Fundraisers start for Wikipedia and Citizendium; controversial content and leadership
- WikiProject report: Sizzling: WikiProject Bacon
- Features and admins: Of lakes and mountains
- Dispatches: A guide to the Good Article Review Process
- Arbitration report: No cases this week; Amendments filed on Climate Change and Date Delinking; Motion passed on EEML
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 22 November 2010
- News and notes: No further Bundesarchiv image donations; Dutch and German awards; anniversary preparations
- Book review: The Myth of the Britannica, by Harvey Einbinder
- WikiProject report: WikiProject College Football
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Election report: Candidates still stepping forward
- Arbitration report: Brews ohare site-banned; climate change topic-ban broadened
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 29 November 2010
- In the news: Fundraising banners continue to provoke; plagiarism charges against congressional climate change report
- WikiProject report: Celebrate WikiProject Holidays
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Election report: Voting in full swing
- Arbitration report: New case: Longevity; Biophys topic ban likely to stay in place
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
FYI
The Signpost: 6 December 2010
- News and notes: ArbCom tally pending; Pediapress renderer; fundraiser update; unreferenced BLP drive
- WikiLeaks: Repercussions of the WikiLeaks cable leak
- WikiProject report: Talking copyright with WikiProject Copyright Cleanup
- Features and admins: Birds and insects
- Arbitration report: New case: World War II
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 13 December 2010
- Rencontres Wikimédia: Wikimedia and the cultural sector: two days of talks in Paris.
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Algae
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Election report: The community has spoken
- Arbitration report: Requested amendment re Pseudoscience case
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 20 December 2010
- News and notes: Article Alerts back from the dead, plus news in brief
- Image donation: Christmas gift to Commons from the State Library of Queensland
- Discussion report: Should leaked documents be cited on Wikipedia?
- WikiProject report: Majestic Titans
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Motion passed in R&I case; ban appeals, amendment requests, and more
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 27 December 2010
- Ambassadors: Wikipedia Ambassador Program growing, adjusting
- WikiProject report: WikiProject National Basketball Association (NBA)
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 3 January 2011
- 2010 in review: Review of the year
- In the news: Fundraising success media coverage; brief news
- WikiProject report: Where are they now? Redux
- Features and admins: Featured sound choice of the year
- Arbitration report: Motion proposed in W/B – Judea and Samaria case
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 10 January 2011
- News and notes: Anniversary preparations, new Community fellow, brief news
- In the news: Anniversary coverage begins; Wikipedia as new layer of information authority; inclusionist project
- WikiProject report: Her Majesty's Waterways
- Features and admins: Featured topic of the year
- Arbitration report: World War II case comes to a close; ban appeal, motions, and more
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Template:Conote has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mhiji 17:24, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 17 January 2011
- WikiProject report: Talking wicket with WikiProject Cricket
- Features and admins: First featured picture from the legally disputed NPG images; two Chicago icons
- Arbitration report: New case: Shakespeare authorship question; lack of recent input in Longevity case
- Technology report: January Engineering Update; Dutch Hack-a-ton; brief news
The Signpost: 24 January 2011
- News and notes: Wikimedia fellow working on cultural collaborations; video animation about Wikipedia; brief news
- WikiProject report: Life Inside the Beltway
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: 23 editors submit evidence in 'Shakespeare' case, Longevity case awaits proposed decision, and more
- Technology report: File licensing metadata; Multimedia Usability project; brief news
The Signpost: 31 January 2011
- The Science Hall of Fame: Building a pantheon of scientists from Wikipedia and Google Books
- WikiProject report: WikiWarriors
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Evidence in Shakespeare case moves to a close; Longevity case awaits proposed decision; AUSC RfC
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 7 February 2011
- News and notes: New General Counsel hired; reuse of Google Art Project debated; GLAM newsletter started; news in brief
- WikiProject report: Stargazing aboard WikiProject Spaceflight
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Open cases: Shakespeare authorship – Longevity; Motions on Date delinking, Eastern European mailing list
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 14 February 2011
- News and notes: Foundation report; gender statistics; DMCA takedowns; brief news
- In the news: Wikipedia wrongly blamed for Super Bowl gaffe; "digital natives" naive about Wikipedia; brief news
- WikiProject report: Articles for Creation
- Features and admins: RFAs and active admins—concerns expressed over the continuing drought
- Arbitration report: Proposed decisions in Shakespeare and Longevity; two new cases; motions passed, and more
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 21 February 2011
- News and notes: Gender gap and sexual images; India consultant; brief news
- In the news: Egyptian revolution and Wikimania 2008; Jimmy Wales' move to the UK, Africa and systemic bias; brief news
- WikiProject report: More than numbers: WikiProject Mathematics
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Longevity and Shakespeare cases close; what do these decisions tell us?
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 28 February 2011
- News and notes: Newbies vs. patrollers; Indian statistics; brief news
- Arbitration statistics: Arbitration Committee hearing fewer cases; longer decision times
- WikiProject report: In Tune with WikiProject Classical Music
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: AUSC applications open; interim desysopping; two pending cases
- Technology report: HTML5 adopted but soon reverted; brief news
The Signpost: 7 March 2011
- News and notes: Foundation looking for "storyteller" and research fellows; new GLAM newsletter; brief news
- Deletion controversy: Deletion of article about website angers gaming community
- WikiProject report: Talking with WikiProject Feminism
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: New case opened after interim desysop last week; three pending cases
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 14 March 2011
- News and notes: Foundation reports editor trends, technology plans and communication changes; brief news
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: New case on AE sanction handling; AUSC candidates; proposed decision in Kehrli 2 and Monty Hall problem
- Technology report: Left-aligned edit links and bugfixes abound; brief news
Tu página de discusión esta bloqueada
¿esta bien si te hago las preguntas acá?. En caso de no ser así en que sección puedo escribirte. 190.51.148.21 (talk) 15:48, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 21 March 2011
- WikiProject report: Medicpedia — WikiProject Medicine
- Features and admins: Best of the week
- Arbitration report: One closed case, one suspended case, and two other cases
- Technology report: What is: localisation?; the proposed "personal image filter" explained; and more in brief
The Signpost: 28 March 2011
- News and notes: Berlin conference highlights relation between chapters and Foundation; annual report; brief news
- In the news: Sue Gardner interviewed; Imperial College student society launched; Indian languages; brief news
- WikiProject report: Linking with WikiProject Wikify
- Features and admins: Featured list milestone
- Arbitration report: New case opens; Monty Hall problem case closes – what does the decision tell us?
The Signpost: 4 April 2011
- News and notes: 1 April activities; RIAA takedown notice; brief news
- Editor retention: Fighting the decline by restricting article creation?
- WikiProject report: Out of this world — WikiProject Solar System
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: AUSC appointments, new case, proposed decision for Coanda case, and motion regarding CU/OS
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 11 April 2011
- Recent research: Research literature surveys; drug reliability; editor roles; BLPs; Muhammad debate analyzed
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Japan
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Two cases closed – what does the Coanda decision tell us?
- Technology report: The Toolserver explained; brief news
The Signpost: 18 April 2011
- News and notes: Commons milestone; newbie contributions assessed; German community to decide on €200,000 budget; brief news
- In the news: Wikipedia accurate on US politics, plagiarized in court, and compared to Glass Bead Game; brief news
- WikiProject report: An audience with the WikiProject Council
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Case comes to a close after 3 weeks - what does the decision tell us?
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 25 April 2011
- News and notes: Survey of French Wikipedians; first Wikipedian-in-Residence at Smithsonian; brief news
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Somerset
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Request to amend prior case; further voting in AEsh case
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 2 May 2011
- News and notes: Picture of the Year voting begins; Internet culture covered in Sweden and consulted in Russia; brief news
- WikiProject report: The Physics of a WikiProject: WikiProject Physics
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Two new cases open – including Tree shaping case
- Technology report: Call for RTL developers, varied sign-up pages and news in brief
The Signpost: 9 May 2011
- In the news: Billionaire trying to sue Wikipedians; "Critical Point of View" book published; World Bank contest; brief news
- WikiProject report: Game Night at WikiProject Board and Table Games
- Features and admins: Featured articles bounce back
- Arbitration report: AEsh case comes to a close - what does the decision tell us?
The Signpost: 16 May 2011
- WikiProject report: Back to Life: Reviving WikiProjects
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Motions - hyphens and dashes dispute
- Technology report: Berlin Hackathon; April Engineering Report; brief news
my page is missing
~new msg~
hi, basically a random person decided to tag my page (most likely out of the goodness of this person's heart) after all this time when nobody else did. so i just need my resource page that was on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rm2dance -- it doesn't seem to be on http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=User:Rm2dance and i don't know if it's supposed to? basically i just need my page, i guess you can just post it back on my page and then i can move it out of wikipedia. thanks~
~original msg -- (just forget everything -- too much trouble)~
my page is missing out of nowhere and there's nothing in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=User:Rm2dance and i can't check the history of my page? is that how it's supposed to be?
hmm.. so my page is missing randomly just today with no problems after all this time. then a random person decides to tag it because the person felt like it? is there like mediation or something for something like this?
but basically if it's too complicated or too much trouble, just nevermind, im just wondering if they have mediation
also, was there any way to protect my page? just wondering
hmm.. it says "If all else fails, try another wiki" so i'll just do that -- where is my resource page? the history for it that is. so the page took years to build up so im glad a random person decided to tag it... it's fine. i'll just put it on wikia for the time being. wikia doesn't have any problems and wikipedia also... but it depends on the random people.. well.... rm2dance (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:10, 21 July 2011 (UTC).
Resolved- Looks like it's been taken care of by User:RHaworth.--Aervanath (talk) 15:37, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
You closed this discussion under "no consensus". A simple count of !votes shows 7 in favor (myself, Geewhiz, Biosketch, Nableezy (who said he supports a move based on news sources after originally saying he opposes), Brewcrewer, Ynhockey, and Plot Spoiler) and 3 opposing (Zero, Tiamut and Huldra). If you count only those who explained their reasoning (no "per user X"), you still have 5:2 supporting the move.
Could you please explain your reasoning? Thanks. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 01:43, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, I'd be glad to explain my reasoning. On pure numerical grounds, I counted it as 7-3 in favor of moving the page. However, due to the number of transliterations under discussion, I felt that there wasn't a consensus on exactly what to move it to. Among those supporting the move, there wasn't a consensus on which spelling the article should use. Cheers, --Aervanath (talk) 02:10, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
- Unless I'm missing something, there was only one editor who supported the move in general but objected to the new name in the proposal. Anyway, could you either reopen the discussion so we can discuss what the new name should be or change your closing comment to make it clear that there's a consensus to move but not exactly what to move to so I can open an RfC on that? Thanks. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 02:29, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
- Sure, that's no problem. :)--Aervanath (talk) 02:51, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
- Much obliged. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 03:05, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
- Sure, that's no problem. :)--Aervanath (talk) 02:51, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
- Unless I'm missing something, there was only one editor who supported the move in general but objected to the new name in the proposal. Anyway, could you either reopen the discussion so we can discuss what the new name should be or change your closing comment to make it clear that there's a consensus to move but not exactly what to move to so I can open an RfC on that? Thanks. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 02:29, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
King's Cross move
Hey there,
In your RM close on this page, you said "no consensus" and closed as a "no" - however, excepting editors from 2002 the only people commenting were myself (as nominator) and QuentinUK, who said "both are correct" (which I'd interpret as neutral). Though I'm mindful of not wanting to step on your toes as closing reviwer, I've been away from enwiki since my nomination; hope you don't mind if I ask some of my fellow old-guard whose opinions you evaluated if their thoughts have changed in the past nine years before we put the matter to bed? :-)
James F. (talk) 19:57, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
- Hey, you are of course welcome to start a new discussion and move request. I suppose a more accurate closing statement should have been "case for move not met". If both possible titles are approximately equal in common usage, then we stick with the status quo absent some other applicable policy. Cheers, --Aervanath (talk) 22:00, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Fine Art Edit-a-Thon & DC Meetup 26!
| Fine Art Edit-a-Thon & Meetup - Who should come? You should. Really. | |
|---|---|
 |
FINE ART EDIT-A-THON & DC MEETUP 26 is December 17! The Edit-a-Thon will cover fine art subjects from the Federal Art Project and the meet up will involve Wikipedians from the area as well as Wiki-loving GLAM professionals. You don't have to attend both to attend one (but we hope you do!) Click the link above and sign up & spread the word! See you there! SarahStierch (talk) 21:46, 26 November 2011 (UTC) |
Kodak
Hi, Aervanath. You closed the discussion at Talk:Kodak as "no consensus". Per Wikipedia:Consensus#No consensus: "If an article title has been stable for a long time, then the long-standing article title is kept." The long-standing article title is Eastman Kodak, the title it held from creation in 2002 until two months ago. As such, I would request that you return the article to the long-standing title pending such time as a consensus is found to move it. Powers T 19:34, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Genesis/Mega Drive Sub Articles move closure
Thank you for your attention to the move request regarding these sub articles. I was wondering, though, why you thought that there was a consensus to move the list of Mega Drive Games but not the list of Mega CD games. Both had 6 editors for it, 3 opposed, and two neutral. I would argue (and in fact did) that the Mega CD article also had consensus to move as the editors broke down exactly as the two above, except one editor had an oppose vote rather than a neutral one.
Regardless of your response, thank you again for your attention to the matter.
(BTW, if this is improper to ask here on your talk page, feel free to move this to the list of games talk page where the other conversations are located.)LedRush (talk) 20:40, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
- Hi! You were absolutely correct in asking me first. (This is standard practice when questioning an admin or other editor's actions.) After reviewing my decision and the discussion, I realized that my decision was inconsistent, as you (quite nicely) pointed out. This means I wasn't careful in evaluating consensus, so I probably should let another admin who watches WP:RM close it instead. Also, I realized that there was some discussion still ongoing, so it would be inappropriate to close at this time. I have instead relisted it, so in a week or so another admin will come along and evaluate consensus (hopefully better than I did).
- Cheers,--Aervanath (talk) 00:33, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
- Perhaps you'd like to help us achieve consensus so this doesn't stay in limbo?? 6 to 3 isn't like a 50/50 stalemate or anything. Plus if it's really the arguments that matter, our arguments are IMHO stronger than "it's fine where it is now". Which I know is a 100% valid argument. I can post Google Books result links if it helps.--SexyKick 04:13, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
- Edit: It's 7 to 3, don't forget Born2Cycle's vote.--SexyKick 04:16, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Lambano Blosko
I need help with creation page about Cynthia Basinet, page over Creation protection, so help me please to unlock this page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lambano Blosko (talk • contribs) 14:45, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Quemoy --> Kinmen
does local consensus trump community consensus
I'm perplexed by your "no consensus" decision. Perhaps there was an oversight here? Can you please re-evaluate, or maybe get someone else to take a look? Or am I missing something?
Talk:Catholic_Memorial_School_(West_Roxbury,_Massachusetts)#Close_challenged
Thanks! --Born2cycle (talk) 23:13, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
- Based on the replies there, would you consider reversing your decision, explaining it better, or at least reverting it and letting someone else close it? Thanks! --Born2cycle (talk) 21:51, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- Having read the three separate discussions started since then, I don't think reversing my decision or reverting it will change the outcome; I think other admins would also find no consensus. However, I will try to explain it in more detail on Talk:Catholic Memorial School (West Roxbury, Massachusetts). If you still disagree with my reasoning, try posting to WP:AN to get other admins to weigh in. Cheers, --Aervanath (talk) 17:46, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
- Based on the replies there, would you consider reversing your decision, explaining it better, or at least reverting it and letting someone else close it? Thanks! --Born2cycle (talk) 21:51, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
In your addendum to your closing comments at Talk:Catholic Memorial School (West Roxbury, Massachusetts) you wrote: Others claim that there is ambiguity, since there are enough other schools with similar names that disambiguation is necessary. Simply saying "there are enough other schools with similar names that disambiguation is necessary" does not mean "there are enough other schools with similar names that disambiguation is necessary". It's not even an argument, unless those alleged names are produced and listed, preferably on a dab page.
Let me put it this way, if it were true that were other schools sufficiently notable to be in WP with similar enough names to make disambiguation necessary, I personally would create the dab page, and support the disambiguation of this title. There is no such dab page because there are no such schools. That's the point you keep missing! In fact, a good faith effort was recently made to create such a page[1], but was quickly reverted[2], for good reason.
You also say, "If there is an overriding Wikipedia policy which supports either side in unequivocal terms, I am not aware of it". Really? Perhaps you have not read the lead of WP:D, which states:
Disambiguation in Wikipedia is the process of resolving the conflicts that arise when a single term is ambiguous—when it refers to more than one topic covered by Wikipedia articles.
Since the single term "Catholic Memorial School" refers to only one topic covered in WP articles (it has not been shown to refer to any other topics covered by WP articles), it is not ambiguous, by definition. Since it's not ambiguous, there is no conflict, much less one to be resolved by disambiguating this title. That is clear support for no need for disambiguation in unequivocal terms.
Saying that this term is ambiguous and requires disambiguation, in the face of no dab page and a long-standing redirect from this term to this article, makes no sense, as others have noted at Talk:Catholic Memorial School (West Roxbury, Massachusetts). Please address these serious fundamental problems with your explanation that multiple people have noted, or reverse the decision. Thank you. --Born2cycle (talk) 19:30, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Several schools with names of varying similarity were mentioned in the discussion. I'm not going to list them here, because Noetica already did. I realize that you and other editors don't regard these as similar enough to create ambiguity, but other editors who participated in the discussion do. I personally have no opinion on how similar the names have to be to create ambiguity. This is what I don't think there is consensus on, at the moment. If I saw consensus that "Catholic Memorial School" couldn't refer to any of the schools listed, then I would have moved the page and closed the discussion accordingly. But I saw disagreement with that, and I don't think the disambiguation guideline can be read so clearly in this case as to override that disagreement. As you quoted above, ambiguous means "when it refers to more than one topic covered by Wikipedia articles". There is disagreement about whether the term in question is ambiguous under this definition. I do not see "clear support for no need for disambiguation". I do not see "clear support for" a need for disambiguation. Thus, I do not see consensus. Please note that I have not said, myself, that the term is ambiguous or unambiguous; I am merely taking the arguments I have found in the discussion. A finding of "no consensus" is not a finding for or against ambiguity here. Should a future consensus find that "Catholic Memorial School" unambiguously refers to this school, then it will be moved to that title. Should a future consensus find that "Catholic Memorial School" could refer to multiple articles in this encyclopedia, then that page should be a disambiguation page. Since there is no current consensus on this fact, the status quo ante remains: Catholic Memorial School redirects to Catholic Memorial School (West Roxbury, Massachusetts).
- If you still find "serious fundamental problems" with my analysis of the discussion, this is your prerogative. I am certainly capable of making mistakes, but I don't see the problems with my analysis. If you were to invite wider review of my logic at WP:ANI, that would be fine.--Aervanath (talk) 01:55, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
- "I realize that you and other editors don't regard these as similar enough to create ambiguity, but other editors who participated in the discussion do." Unless you're relying on WP:IAR (if so, what would be the good reason to do that here?), this is not a matter for debate. WP:DPAGES spells out the criteria for what constitutes ambiguous names quite clearly, and none of those names that Noetica listed qualify. That's what is so frustrating about your decision. You give equal weight to a pure WP:JDLI argument based entirely on personal preference as you do to one solidly steeped in policy, guidelines and convention. I mean, this should have been 10:0 decision (based on strength of arguments), and you called it 5:5. It wouldn't matter that much, except for the bad precedent aspect, which I just explained in the discussion at the article talk page so I won't repeat here.
"But I saw disagreement with that, and I don't think the disambiguation guideline can be read so clearly in this case as to override that disagreement." Seeing disagreement in a discussion like that is, at best, lack of WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. Clearly there was a lack of local consensus on this, but "Consensus among a limited group of editors, at one place and time, cannot override community consensus on a wider scale.". So, as a closer, you have to give more weight to consensus of the community, as expressed in guidelines like WP:D, and, in particular for this case, in the WP:DPAGES section, which I suggest you review. If you can find a way to justify any of the names on Noetica's list (only those that are actually articles, of course) as being ambiguous with Catholic Memorial School, please let me know.
By the way, if you're making your decisions solely on LOCALCONSENSUS interpretations of policy and guidelines, that explains much. --Born2cycle (talk) 05:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
- "I realize that you and other editors don't regard these as similar enough to create ambiguity, but other editors who participated in the discussion do." Unless you're relying on WP:IAR (if so, what would be the good reason to do that here?), this is not a matter for debate. WP:DPAGES spells out the criteria for what constitutes ambiguous names quite clearly, and none of those names that Noetica listed qualify. That's what is so frustrating about your decision. You give equal weight to a pure WP:JDLI argument based entirely on personal preference as you do to one solidly steeped in policy, guidelines and convention. I mean, this should have been 10:0 decision (based on strength of arguments), and you called it 5:5. It wouldn't matter that much, except for the bad precedent aspect, which I just explained in the discussion at the article talk page so I won't repeat here.
A WP:AN mention
You were mentioned in a discussion at WP:AN; Wikipedia:AN#Should_editors_be_discouraged_from_asking_admins_to_justify_their_actions.3F --Born2cycle (talk) 17:37, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Protected status
Aervanath, at this Editrequest, I forgot to include the protected status of this redirect. It can be added easily by piping it to the end of the others, like this:
#REDIRECT [[London#Climate]]
(PLEASE LEAVE THIS LINE BLANK)
{{This is a redirect|to section|unprintworthy|protected}}
I realize you're not very active on Wikipedia, so if I haven't heard from you in a day or two, I'll reopen the Editrequest to add in the protected status. Thank you for all your help, and best of everything to you! – PIE ( CLIMAX ) 18:18, 7 February 2012 (UTC)