User talk:Reaper Eternal/Archive 11
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Reaper Eternal. 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. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
Recreating kaioo?
Hi, you deleted kaioo in August as a result of an A7 speedy deletion request. I believe the site is rather significant and unique, in that it has received media coverage for being a non-profit social network that lets users vote on how to donate its proceeds. A previous version of the article pointed out this uniqueness, but later versions de-emphasized that point, so that the ultimate deletion decision was justified. Would you be ok with me recreating the article and highlighting the site's significance? Cheers, AxelBoldt (talk) 18:10, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
Feedback Dashboard task force
Hi Reaper Eternal,
Since you were a part of the WikiGuides project, I thought I'd give you a heads-up about a new way you can help/mentor newbies on en.wiki: we've recently released a feature called the Feedback Dashboard, a queue that updates in real time with feedback and editing questions from new registered contributors who have attempted to make at least one edit. Steven Walling and I are putting together a task force for experienced Wikipedians who might be interested in monitoring the queue and responding to the feedback: details are here at Wikipedia:Feedback Dashboard. Please sign up if you're interested in helping out! Thanks, Maryana (WMF) (talk) 22:07, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 7 November2011
- Special report: A post-mortem on the Indian Education Program pilot
- Discussion report: Special report on the ArbCom Elections steering RfC
- WikiProject report: Booting up with WikiProject Computer Science
- Featured content: Slow week for Featured content
- Arbitration report: Δ saga returns to arbitration, while the Abortion case stalls for another week
Howdy
Don't stay away too long or you'll forget all about us. Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 00:51, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Japan-related articles
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Japan-related articles. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
Protection Complaint
What the hell were you thinking protecting User:Sitush? That page has hardly had any vandalism, and user pages of admins I thought were only protected! It looks to me like you did it cause you like the user. That user can get a little mean, and messes up articles like Yadav and Kim Kardashian, and definitely doesn't deserve it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GreenMario1993 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 14 November 2011
- News and notes: ArbCom nominations open, participation grants finalized, survey results on perceptions on Wikipedia released
- WikiProject report: Having a Conference with WikiProject India
- Arbitration report: Abortion and Betacommand 3 in evidence phase, three case requests outstanding
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low 
to High 
, while for quality the scale goes from Low 
to High 
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:34, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (companies)
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (companies). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 21 November 2011
- Discussion report: Much ado about censorship
- WikiProject report: Working on a term paper with WikiProject Academic Journals
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: End in sight for Abortion case, nominations in 2011 elections
- Technology report: Mumbai and Brighton hacked; horizontal lists have got class
Please look at this ip editor at 190.46.95.25 & 190.45.54.212
This ip editor 190.45.54.212 has been edit warring [1]; making personal attacks: [2] and [3] and is being generally disruptive [4]. If you go to his talk page for his one computer [5], you will note I left him a message earlier today and he just went off on another rant. Thank you. Kierzek (talk) 02:00, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Please note that Reaper Eternal has not edited since September 22nd. You may wish to consult with another administrator or report the user to the edit-warring noticeboard. Logan Talk Contributions 02:04, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, Logan. Kierzek (talk) 02:17, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
- Kierzek, you didn't leave a note--you left a templated warning, in which you falsely accused the IP of vandalism. Drmies (talk) 04:24, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
- I left a civil note of Wikipedia policies and warning after he already cussed me out, and threatened me on my talk page. In my opinion he vandalised my talkpage. With that said, I will not edit war with him and if he comes back around to articles I edit will give him a chance like anyone else. I don't like to waste my time on baloney. The matter is now moot anyway. Kierzek (talk) 13:50, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
- Kierzek, you didn't leave a note--you left a templated warning, in which you falsely accused the IP of vandalism. Drmies (talk) 04:24, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, Logan. Kierzek (talk) 02:17, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Almoravid dynasty
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Almoravid dynasty. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Continuation War
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Continuation War. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 04:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 08:40, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 28 November 2011
- News and notes: Arb's resignation sparks lightning RfC, Fundraiser 2011 off to a strong start, GLAM in Qatar
- In the news: The closed, unfriendly world of Wikipedia, fundraiser fun and games, and chemists vs pornstars
- Recent research: Quantifying quality collaboration patterns, systemic bias, POV pushing, the impact of news events, and editors' reputation
- WikiProject report: The Signpost scoops The Bugle
- Featured content: The best of the week
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low to High , while for quality the scale goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:15, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 05 December 2011
- News and notes: Amsterdam gets the GLAM treatment, fundraising marches on, and a flourish of new admins
- In the news: A Wikistream of real time edits, a call for COI reform, and cracks in the ivory tower of knowledge
- Discussion report: Trial proposed for tool apprenticeship
- WikiProject report: This article is about WikiProject Disambiguation. For other uses...
- Featured content: This week's Signpost is for the birds!
Please comment on Talk:Senkaku Islands
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Senkaku Islands. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Richard von Krafft-Ebing
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Richard von Krafft-Ebing. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Another RfA
Hello, Reaper Eternal, I am the beginner in Wikipedia, but would like to become an admin sometime, so your kind assistance would be very useful to me. I hope to count on your nomination as I reach the level of edits required by Wiki rules (soon, hopefully) - have only 1500+ edits so far in English Wiki. I will really appreciate your support --Orekhova (talk) 12:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Absence
Sorry for being M.I.A. for so long, but that last quarter was very tough, and left me no time for wiki activities (adminning, writing articles, copyediting, and so forth). I had to focus on my homework and learning, so please accept my apologies for all the unanswered messages. I'd also like to give a big THANK YOU to all my talk page stalkers who intervened in my absence. I'm back! Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:44, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Welcome back, Reaper. HurricaneFan25 16:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Dear Reaper!
- How great to see that you are again enriching Wikipedia and our lives!
- Warmest regards, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 16:56, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Nice to see you back here. Had been wondering where you had gone off to... Calabe1992 19:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks guys! I'm glad to be back. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:43, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Nice to see you back here. Had been wondering where you had gone off to... Calabe1992 19:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Welcome back, I missed seeing you in action here, I hope all is well with you. SwisterTwister talk 23:41, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Welcome back, Reaper!--Hallows AG (talk) 01:14, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Filter
Is an abuse filter appropriate to prevent User:Brucejenner and his socks from calling me a fag/faggot on my user talk page? Since apparently changes usually can't apply to a single page. CTJF83 19:32, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Blech... I've modified filter 52, since it seems that the vandalism is mainly occurring in edit summaries, and your userpages are already in the huge laundry list of commonly disrupted userpages that is filter 294. Hope this helps. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Umm, what exactly does that mean? lol CTJF83 19:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Basically, filter 294 has a list of people (like you, NawlinWiki, Bsadowski1, Gfoley4, myself, and Elockid) and a huge regex describing what cannot be added to these people's userpages. It is horribly difficult to maintain and debug due to its incredible size, which is why I called it a "laundry list". Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:52, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- ......I'll just take your word it'll help, lol, thanks! CTJF83 19:56, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Umm, what exactly does that mean? lol CTJF83 19:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Rollback
Just wanted to say thank you for granting me rollback. I intend to put it to good use. Tymun (talk) 21:25, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- You're welcome, and good luck! Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:54, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
I think User:94.168.91.48 can go bye-bye at this point. Calabe1992 21:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Blocked 31 hours for that little spree. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:54, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 04:43, 13 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
The Signpost: 12 December 2011
- Opinion essay: Wikipedia in Academe – and vice versa
- News and notes: Research project banner ads run afoul of community
- In the news: Bell Pottinger investigation, Gardner on gender gap, and another plagiarist caught red-handed
- WikiProject report: Spanning Nine Time Zones with WikiProject Russia
- Featured content: Wehwalt gives his fifty cents; spies, ambushes, sieges, and Entombment
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low to High , while for quality the scale goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:02, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Article
the ISI article is locked for my editing
Seeing as you are and admin, and the article is blocked from my editing, I wanted to include the offician denial from the goverment to the allegations
"Whilst the Provincial Government says it is doing its best to improve law and order and end target killing which it blames on rival factional fighting.As many as 985 people have been sentenced so far while the cases of 875 accused in various crimes were in the courts" source http://www.thenews.com.pk/NewsDetail.aspx?ID=24183 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambelland (talk • contribs) 23:23, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
furthere more another section says "From 1994-2001, the ISI is widely agreed by the international community to have provided support to the Taliban in their rise to power and fight against anti-Taliban forces "
it should say:
"From 1994-2001, the ISI is widely agreed by the international community to have provided support to the Taliban in the after math of the fall of Commmunist Afghan when the Afghan Civil War started power" , I think its wrong to refer to all groups then as anti taliban, they changed sides many times and groups where fighting for thier interest not some grand primarily anti taliban alliance --Ambelland (talk) 23:27, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but when articles are fully protected, even administrators are not supposed to be editing them except when consensus is that the change should be made. Please request the change on the talk page of the article using the
{{editprotected}}template to ensure that an administrator looks at it after awhile. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:34, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Revision Deletion/Suppression
Hey Reaper. Given my work on rollbacking and patrolling for vandalism, I was hoping to remove my last name (that I foolishly included on my User Page back when I was a teenager...) and DOB from Wikipedia. The most recent edit on my userpage has both removed. If you could kindly work your magic to make all of the editions of my userpage prior disappear it would be appreciated. Thank you. :] --Tymun (Contact Me - Contribs) 07:31, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- I've temporarily revision deleted them all and emailed oversight. In the future, emailing oversight is the best course of action since my talk page has a decent number of watchers (more than 100), who could look at the information in the meantime. Additionally, I can only hide the information from regular users (not admins), whereas oversighters can hide information from everybody. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:31, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- You rock. Thank you! --Tymun (Contact Me - Contribs) 14:00, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:1953 Iranian coup d'état
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:1953 Iranian coup d'état. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
FYI
[6] Thanks! Crazynas t 14:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- There have been 10 reverts to WP:V in about as many hours. Please make up your minds on the talk page before changing the policy pages, which should represent consensus. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:49, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 19:39, 15 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
WP:V
Hi, Reaper
Earlier today you complied with a full protection request on WP:5P Policy page WP:V. A request was lodged for unprotection by those seeking to change it. The key policy page has been under much discussion and 3 Admins. recently closed a long running RFC as no consensus to change. Unfortunately you protected the page with a highly controversial, non-consensus version, possibly due to a highly misleading edit summary, and there is concern on the talk page that, despite the RFC close, those who have long argued for a change have somehow succeeded in gaining an inappropriate victory. Above all however, the policy is simply without community support. Is there any reason why the correct consensus version cannot be reinstated and the page locked for the remaining 3 days? See also [7]. Thanks. Leaky Caldron 20:07, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- I have restored the last known stable version of the page per WP:PREFER and per the closure of RFC as "no consensus to change". (I had just locked the page on the version which happened to be up, as the differences are minor.) However, I dislike your reference to "their inappropriate victory", since Wikipedia is not a battleground. Good grief...I feel like I've waded into Balkan/Israeli-Palestine territory again. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. Unfortunately it is a battleground in relation to this issue. Although I said that there was concern on the talk page about one side winning and loosing I didn't say that was my personal sentiment. I just believe that the continued debate should be based on the neutral, long-standing version, not the disputed one. Leaky Caldron 21:53, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
You'll be needing this.
|
You'll probably need this after the AN/I storm in a teacup that going on.
It was bad enough that some idiot protected the wrong version, but then you compounded things by reverting the protected page to the wrong version. Drink to forget, but don't forget to drink! GraemeL (talk) 22:53, 15 December 2011 (UTC) |
Haha, FWIW Reaper, I support you reverting me back to stability although I disagree with the page being protected in the first place. Thank you for recognizing that my edit really was minor (as you stated above) glad that some people have some perspective around here. Crazynas t 23:00, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Ha, thanks! I was aware that as soon as I took any action on the request at RFPP, I was going to be taken to ANI sooner or later. I'm just quietly laughing at how some people get so worked up over something that really doesn't matter—no matter which wording is present, the meaning is still the same. If I had done what I personally wanted to do, I would have fully protected WP:V and WT:V. Reaper Eternal (talk) 23:47, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Stick around for 3 days time when the current prot. expires. ;) Leaky Caldron 23:50, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Support protecting the talk page! A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 00:07, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- Support beer! Chzz ► 09:01, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Controversial edit through full protection
I think you have just made a controversial edit through full protection on WP:V. Please self-revert before there is an admin edit war or this goes to ANI. Hans Adler 21:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- See above for reasoning. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- The encyclopedia isn't going to explode just because for a short while WP:V doesn't tell editors it's OK when we lie in article space. The current RfC is 7:1 in favour of not including "not truth" in the first sentence. And in case it's not clear: The RfC that ended in a "no consensus" of 1.85:1 in favour of change was about a different edit. Hans Adler 21:45, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- I have restored the last known consensus version as stated by the admins who closed the last RFC. And six people does not make a consensus for removing the phrase "not truth" when you consider how many people participated in the last RFC. If any admins feel I was inappropriate in restoring the consensus version, he/she can revert my edit. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:48, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Hans: There is no "current RfC". Most editors aren't taking the WP:POINTy RfC seriously. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 21:58, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- It's nothing new that the side that is happy with the status quo disrupts processes that may lead to change. Hans Adler 22:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Hans: There is no "current RfC". Most editors aren't taking the WP:POINTy RfC seriously. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 21:58, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- I have restored the last known consensus version as stated by the admins who closed the last RFC. And six people does not make a consensus for removing the phrase "not truth" when you consider how many people participated in the last RFC. If any admins feel I was inappropriate in restoring the consensus version, he/she can revert my edit. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:48, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- The encyclopedia isn't going to explode just because for a short while WP:V doesn't tell editors it's OK when we lie in article space. The current RfC is 7:1 in favour of not including "not truth" in the first sentence. And in case it's not clear: The RfC that ended in a "no consensus" of 1.85:1 in favour of change was about a different edit. Hans Adler 21:45, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
See WP:ANI#Controversial edit through full protection. Hans Adler 22:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- ...Which is now closed with the firm consensus that my revert was correct. Thank you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:33, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
| heres a barnstar for you Leeboy100 (talk) 20:16, 16 December 2011 (UTC) |
- Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
From userpage
"hey ill be glad to help with vandalism so try to message me if someones getting on your nerves but im not on all the time and sorry if this is getting on your nerves too i wont bother you anymore if you dont need help" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leeboy100 (talk • contribs)
My edits
I'm not a vandal, I just wanted an information. If you cannot or don't want give it to me you could say instead of revert me. I made my question seriously.--95.239.184.117 (talk) 21:21, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- Stop trolling the reference desk, which doesn't exist to transcribe random porn videos for you. Please find something constructive to do. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:23, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- Why didn't you answer that you couldn't transcribe the video below my RD question instead of revert my edits? You were trolls in this case, not I.--95.239.184.117 (talk) 21:33, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Coaching
Hi, are you still interested in coaching me? Jarkeld (talk) 00:21, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
- Certainly! I'll try not to disappear for a couple months this time. :/ Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:23, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
I liked your idea
So I just stole it... 
Salvio Let's talk about it! 20:20, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
- ... and I am about to do the same. - Sitush (talk) 20:22, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
- Heh. Glad you liked it! Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:46, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
1 user likes this. HurricaneFan25 — 20:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
- Heh. Glad you liked it! Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:46, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Article Feedback Tool
Thanks for adding yourself to the list :). Can I ask what you mean when you say "this is concerning"? Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:00, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
- I'm very concerned about the possibilities of using the AFT for the purposes of mass spam or vandalism, which was why I asked my questions on the talk page. Having seen the way some vandals recruit 4chan raiders to mass-vandalize a user's talk page or flood an article with vandalism, I do not wish to be unable to do anything but hide comments if they decide to vandalize the comment section. (There can easily be 10 edits per minute during raids.) I hope my questions on the talk page help clarify this. :) Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:05, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah; saw those comments immediately after I posted this (doh!). We are doing our best to ensure that regular spam isn't a problem (evaluating various different forms to get the one that produces the least junk, including AbuseFilter and Spam Blacklist access, weaving in a hide and oversight tool) and there will be some sort of blocking system and the technical architecture to put on limits of say, 1 comment per article per minute for each user. The specifics on who can use which tools and which bits get turned on immediately are still to be worked out - I wanted to wait until we'd finished finnicky testing before we brought it up, because that way I can engage editors as much as possible in making the decisions instead of being distracted by a/b testing :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:15, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
- Okay. I guess I'll put my plug for having the protect tool (or variant thereof) added to the comments field on the AFT into the community discussion. The throttle also seems like a good idea. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:26, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
- Hey...you should already know about the 4chan raiders/GNAA trolls. You're Ironholds! Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:30, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
- Of course! I'm also secretly an eternal optimist. My bad :P. Don't get me wrong, I think those guys are problems - they're also edge cases, though. We shouldn't design for edge cases from the get-go, but we should totally be open to tweaking things if those edge cases prove to be a real problem. I'll drop you a line when we're discussing this stuff so you can get involved :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:45, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
- Hey...you should already know about the 4chan raiders/GNAA trolls. You're Ironholds! Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:30, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
- Okay. I guess I'll put my plug for having the protect tool (or variant thereof) added to the comments field on the AFT into the community discussion. The throttle also seems like a good idea. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:26, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah; saw those comments immediately after I posted this (doh!). We are doing our best to ensure that regular spam isn't a problem (evaluating various different forms to get the one that produces the least junk, including AbuseFilter and Spam Blacklist access, weaving in a hide and oversight tool) and there will be some sort of blocking system and the technical architecture to put on limits of say, 1 comment per article per minute for each user. The specifics on who can use which tools and which bits get turned on immediately are still to be worked out - I wanted to wait until we'd finished finnicky testing before we brought it up, because that way I can engage editors as much as possible in making the decisions instead of being distracted by a/b testing :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:15, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Invitation to comment
I've been trying to think of something to finally put the pending changes issue to rest. It is still in an interim period, just not on articles at this point. Would any of my talk page stalkers mind taking a look at User:Reaper Eternal/Pending Changes for a very rough idea of what I am thinking? Thanks! :) Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:53, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Vandal Fighting
Thank you for blocking Floobadoo. Can you also block his pals Stoner2396 and Sargeni1, and handle the Gears of War RFPP? Floo dosen't appear to have been acting alone (or is the other two). Sven Manguard Wha? 00:41, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
- It looks like another admin has already dealt with that problem. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 19 December 2011
- News and notes: Anti-piracy act has Wikimedians on the defensive, WMF annual report released, and Indic language dynamics
- In the news: To save the wiki: strike first, then makeover?
- Discussion report: Polls, templates, and other December discussions
- WikiProject report: A dalliance with the dismal scientists of WikiProject Economics
- Featured content: Panoramas with Farwestern and a good week for featured content
- Arbitration report: The community elects eight arbitrators
GOCE newsletter
Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors
  Elections are currently underway for our third tranche of Guild coordinators. The voting period will run for 14 days: 00:01 UTC, 16 December – 23:59 UTC, 31 December. All GOCE members, as well as past participants of any of the Guild's Backlog elimination drives, are eligible to vote. There are five candidates vying for four positions. Your vote really matters! Cast your vote today. |
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 11:17, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
My Sincere Wishes For This Festive Season
|
★*★*★*★*★*★*★*★* Merry Christmas And Happy New Year 2012 *★*★*★*★*★*★*★*★ | |
| I Wish You And Your Family A Merry Christmas And A Happy New Year 2012. May The New Year Bring Much Happiness, Prosperity, Peace, And Success In Your Life. I Am Very Happy To be Part of Wikipedia And To Have Great Friends Like You. Cheers.
- From A Big Fan of |
