User talk:Rlevse/Archive 13
 | This 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. |
| Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | → | Archive 20 |
Happy New Year
Happy New Year!
 |
Happy New Year! | |
| Hey there, Rlevse! Happy new Gregorian year. All the best for the new year, both towards you and your family and friends too. I know that I am the only person lonely enough to be running this thing as the new year is ushered in, but meh, what are you going to do. I like to keep my templated messages in a satisfactorily melancholy tone. ;)
Congratulations to Coren, Wizardman, Vassyana, Carcharoth, Jayvdb, Casliber, Risker, Roger Davies, Cool Hand Luke and Rlevse, who were all appointed to the Arbitration Committee after the ArbCom elections. I am sure I am but a voice of many when I say I trust the aforementioned users to improve the committee, each in their own way, as listed within their respective election statements. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to update the 2009 article, heh. |
Re: Day
Heh, what a great way to start off the year, thanks! --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:51, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Happy New Year!
Happy New Year 2009
Happy New Year Rlevse/Archive 13!!!! I wish for you and your family to have a wonderful 2009!!! Have fun partying and may you make many edits!!!
-Taprobanus(talk) 04:24, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
A collaborative project
Well, thanks for the response, albeit somewhat belated!
In response to your comments - yes of course this is a collaborative project, and it is the community, ultimately, that decides how everything is run. However, that doesn't mean that every corner of the project has to submit every decision it makes to the community as a whole - if we tried to operate that way, wikipedia would quickly become unworkable.
By convention, the various wikiprojects work out their own solutions to their particular problems, and those solutions will generally stand unless they are strongly opposed by someone, in which case the wider community may indeed have to be consulted. But to propose that every wikiproject must submit every decision to the total community is simply not viable. If we did that, the running of wikipedia would rapidly become bogged down in endless debate. Gatoclass (talk) 04:35, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- I never said that, I'm saying be open to the community, ie, just allow those who want to comment to comment. By saying only regulars should decide and comment, you're shutting out those who want to chime in. THAT is the problem. — Rlevse • Talk • 04:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- Where did I say "only regulars should decide and comment"? I've never said any such thing. What I objected to was your comment that (I quote): all rules used to accept/reject DYKs should be agreed to by community consensus and posted on wiki and posted on the project page after they are agreed to by community consensus. Presumably you meant the broader community, because all the rules at DYK are already hammered out by community consensus - the consensus of the DYK regulars.
- I have never argued that only DYK regulars have a right to an opinion on DYK issues, only that there is no reason to consult the broader community on the particular issues we deal with. That would just impose an unwanted burden on the rest of the community, as well as making administration of DYK much more difficult. And as I've already pointed out, no other wikiproject, as far as I know, submits its decisions to the broader community unless there is some sort of deadlock - which in my opinion is how it should be. I hope that clarifies my position. Gatoclass (talk) 04:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- For one place, right here: "community consensus - the consensus of the DYK regulars." is a contradictory phrase. I merely said "community consensus", I never said post it somewhere else besides DYK. You be allowing others to comment and all you did when I did so was give me a bunch of malarky about not being a DYK regular and I shouldn't be interfering, ie, proof you feel whomever you deem as an outsider should stay away from DYK. If you can't see the problem with that, we may as well stop discussing this. — Rlevse • Talk • 05:02, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- I have never argued that only DYK regulars have a right to an opinion on DYK issues, only that there is no reason to consult the broader community on the particular issues we deal with. That would just impose an unwanted burden on the rest of the community, as well as making administration of DYK much more difficult. And as I've already pointed out, no other wikiproject, as far as I know, submits its decisions to the broader community unless there is some sort of deadlock - which in my opinion is how it should be. I hope that clarifies my position. Gatoclass (talk) 04:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- It's not contradictory at all. The "DYK regulars" are a subcommunity within the broader community. Practically everything on wikipedia is done by subcommunities. The only time issues go to the broader community generally speaking, is when a decision by a subcommunity is objected to by members of the broader community when they become aware of it.
- As for "a bunch of malarky about not being a DYK regular and I shouldn't be interfering" - I never actually said that, but let me put my comments in context. You dropped in from nowhere onto a long running discussion in support of a highly disruptive user. You gave absolutely no reason for your opinions, it was just a comment saying "this is how it should be done." Yes, that was, in my opinion, an extremely jarring intervention, and I don't think it was at all unreasonable for me to point out in those circumstances your lack of familiarity with the topic in question. If you have little familiarity with a particular area, it is obviously not going to go down well with the regulars if you suddenly barge into a discussion and start making didactic statements about how things should be done. That was, at the very least, highly insensitive, and the fact that it was done in support of a disruptive user only made it that much more exasperating.
- As it happens however, if you hadn't been in the middle of an arbcom election at the time, I would have responded very differently, but since you were, I felt it incumbent upon me to point out what I considered a hamfisted intervention. I was extremely concerned that someone on the verge of becoming an arbitrator was apparently so casually lending support to a disruptive user, and I felt something should be said. I'm sorry if you felt offended by my comments, but you must know that elections are pretty confrontational processes, and given that the close was less than 24 hours away, I had little time to make a decision. If the close had been several days away, I would probably have just asked for an explanation on your talk page instead. Gatoclass (talk) 05:38, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- I was participating for myself in what is right-not to support any one person, allowing anyone who wants to comment on something to do so, something you still fail to realize is a core of this project. That you, an admin, still fail to see this is alarming. And yes, you should have asked about it rather than make false assumptions. That you think only DYK regulars should decide this and no one else can even comment is downright scary. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:43, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- As it happens however, if you hadn't been in the middle of an arbcom election at the time, I would have responded very differently, but since you were, I felt it incumbent upon me to point out what I considered a hamfisted intervention. I was extremely concerned that someone on the verge of becoming an arbitrator was apparently so casually lending support to a disruptive user, and I felt something should be said. I'm sorry if you felt offended by my comments, but you must know that elections are pretty confrontational processes, and given that the close was less than 24 hours away, I had little time to make a decision. If the close had been several days away, I would probably have just asked for an explanation on your talk page instead. Gatoclass (talk) 05:38, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
I guess I still haven't managed to get my point across, have I? Let me try again - any good faith user, yourself included, is always welcome to come and join discussion at DYK, or to participate in any other way they see fit. If I gave you a different impression with my reaction the other day, I very much regret that.
What I am trying to point out to you however is that this was not just some everyday circumstance. In normal circumstances, I would have considered your comments unhelpful, but would simply have responded to you on the discussion page the way I would at any other time to comments I disagreed with, by explaining why I thought your position was misguided. However, in this case the person making the unhelpful comments was in the middle of an election for arbcom. When someone stands for an election on wikipedia, they are asking their peers to pass judgement on their activities, and since I considered your comments at the discussion page to be ill-considered I made my oppose and gave my reasons accordingly.
The problem is that you now appear to be conflating my vote in the election with my regular actitivites, assuming that because I expressed dissatisfaction with your behaviour at the vote page, that this must be how I normally conduct myself with people who disagree with me on talk pages. That is, I'm afraid, a profoundly false assumption. In normal circumstances, we abide by such policies as WP:CIV and WP:AGF, because such policies have proven to be the best way to keep things running harmoniously. In an election however, it is not merely the entitlement of users, but their responsibility to give their frank opinions about the candidates' fitness for office. So please, don't accuse me of failing to understand our core policies, or my responsibilities as an administrator. I think I understand them quite well enough.
The only remaining question then, is whether the judgement I rendered at your election was a fair one, and I admit to having had some doubts as to whether or not it was entirely fair to oppose someone based on a single post - although it's not as though it hasn't been done before. You happened to intervene toward the end of a long and acrimonious discussion on the side of a disruptive user who had been testing everyone's patience for days on end, and possibly I did overreact a little to your comment. I can only say that I did what I felt was right at the time, but one's judgement can of course always be wrong, and for that reason I would like to emphasize that I am hopeful you will prove my erstwhile doubts mistaken and turn out to be a highly effective arbitrator, and I certainly wish you well in the role. Regards, Gatoclass (talk) 12:16, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
- I've done a little refactoring to the post above, as I think some of the comments I made were unhelpful and did not reflect my views accurately enough. For the record, I do understand from your POV that all you did was make a harmless comment containing a few suggestions. From my POV, I saw someone (a) supporting a disruptive user without first familiarizing himself adequately with the issues (b) making suggestions about how DYK should be run that I felt were highly impractical (c) an arbitrator-elect apparently trying to throw his weight around.
- I will take responsibility for (c), because I think I had something of a knee-jerk reaction on that score, responding to you to some extent more as an "authority figure" than as just another user. On reflection I think that was probably unfair, and I will therefore apologize for that. I still think (a) and (b) were valid criticisms however, and while in normal circumstances they might be overlooked, the fact that you would make such a post in the middle of your election was a concern to me, hence my oppose. However, I realize that from your POV you probably feel you were just making a casual comment, which did not deserve the reaction it got. I do hope now that now I have clarified my position however, we can put this difference of opinion behind us. Regards, Gatoclass (talk) 05:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
- Gatoclass, you can characterize me as a disruptive user all that you want, but doing so is part of the problem and shows in your general attitude to those who disagree with you. And highly impractical? Saying that the community should be involved is always practical. You wanted to get in the way of a Village Pump or RfC involvement. That goes against core beliefs here and directly contradicts your present claims that you were not supporting a DYK only mentality, especially when many DYK regulars don't even realize that the wikipedia talk page involves discussion on the matter. Do you not see how you claiming that someone else is throwing their weight around is equally applicable to you? So please stop with the insults. I have done enough for this project that you don't have the right to just dismiss me as disruptive. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- You're not disruptive, but here you are yet again taking an opportunity to reignite a dispute that was all but done with. Unfortunately this has become an all too familiar pattern with you over the last few weeks. I am not going to respond to your comments above, except to say that if you think I have in some way abused my position, you are free to take it to any venue of your choosing for resolution - indeed, I would welcome the opportunity to expose your recent antics to the wider community. I have no intention however of trading accusations with you on someone else's talk page. Gatoclass (talk) 18:14, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- "I have no intention however of trading accusations with you on someone else's talk page." If that's the case, why did you do it just now and in the previous entry? Ottava Rima (talk) 21:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Gents, pls carry on your dispute elsewhere. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- You're not disruptive, but here you are yet again taking an opportunity to reignite a dispute that was all but done with. Unfortunately this has become an all too familiar pattern with you over the last few weeks. I am not going to respond to your comments above, except to say that if you think I have in some way abused my position, you are free to take it to any venue of your choosing for resolution - indeed, I would welcome the opportunity to expose your recent antics to the wider community. I have no intention however of trading accusations with you on someone else's talk page. Gatoclass (talk) 18:14, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Happy New Year
Hope 2009 is a great year for you!--MONGO 15:35, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Re:Happy Nishkid64's Day!
I'm honored, Rlevse! Thanks! Happy New Year's! Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 21:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Happy New Year!
Dear Rlevse,
Wishing you a happy new year, and very best wishes for 2009. Whether we were friends or not in the past year, I hope 2009 will be better for us both.
Kind regards,
G.-M. Cupertino reblocked
I've reblocked G.-M. Cupertino because of multiple violations of the unblock condition. You might want to examine it and see if it'd be a good idea to extend the block based on his edits after the reblock. Thanks, either way (talk) 12:14, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 24, 2008 through January 3, 2009
Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 45 | 24 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 46 | 1 December 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| ArbCom elections: Elections open | Wikipedia in the news |
| WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System | Features and admins |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 1 | 3 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Possible DC Meetup
Some editors are planning a possible DC Wiki-meetup in mid to late February. If interested, please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/DC 5#Another date? (If you’re no longer interested in getting these notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 5#Nope, but let me know about future events.) Thanks. — Satori Son 16:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks very much. Very kind of you. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:47, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Morefight
can you delete the IP user 205.174.124.243 account please? i think that the person has commited Vandalism.
For how long is User:HanzoHattori banned?
How long? And who imposed it? Why? -BlueCaper (talk) 00:51, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Indef block. Bans are indef and mean they can't edit wiki at all in any way. As to why HH was banned, I don't know. Ask the blocking admin. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- I have no idea how to figure out who the admin is. Anyways, I read the ban policy (bans cannot be imposed by admins), read the contributions, and viewed the source. Forgive me, as this was almost a year ago, but you put the {{banned}} template on the user page. I just wanted to know because I invited him to join a WikiProject and later found out that he was banned. That is all. Thank you. -BlueCaper (talk) 02:32, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- I don't remember honestly. The blocking admin was User:Keilana. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image (File:SalemHSseal2006.gif)
You've uploaded File:SalemHSseal2006.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
An admin needs to have his jets cooled
Rlevse, could you please keep an eye on what User:Hex is up to? I gather from his threats that he is an admin. I’ve got a post here on WT:MOSNUM that he keeps on reverting. I’ve started an ANI on it here but I fear he might go find a friend of his to block me. He keeps citing that my post is “abusive” (as in “personal attacks”). I utterly reject such an argument. He can grow up and get a thicker skin that is roughly comparable to what one needs in the real world. Greg L (talk) 00:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi there
Hi, Rlevse: long time no talk. I haven't had much time for WP for a while, so I wasn't aware you'd become a bureaucrat: congrats!
I wonder if you had a moment to have a look at this madness here, beginning with this edit and continuing to the most recent one. I tried warning the editor both about the NPOV problem and 3RR, but got nowhere. His response was to create rather nutty image in my honour and add it to the page. I think, incidentally, this editor and User:Dinothedinasaur are one and the same.
In my opinion, this unsourced, off-topic entry ought to be excised entirely, but if I remove it that'll be my fourth revert. Cheers. --Rrburke(talk) 01:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm also a checkuser, oversighter, and arbitrator now. I deleted the image on Commons and blocked Dinothedinasaur on Commons for 24 hours. Semi protected the article on en wiki 1 week. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:09, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Confirmed socking by IP and user. Both blocked one week. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:17, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. Could I ask you to enable rollback for me? Thanks! --Rrburke(talk) 14:30, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Done, I gave you IP block exempt too. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:57, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks again.
If it hasn't already been done by the time you read this, could you permablock User:Smoogal? I've submitted 3 oversight requests due to his/her insertion of addresses and phone numbers into articles.Thanks. --Rrburke(talk) 22:47, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks again.
- Done, I gave you IP block exempt too. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:57, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. Could I ask you to enable rollback for me? Thanks! --Rrburke(talk) 14:30, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
I find that you had full-protected "Dalit" article. I wish to make a few changes in the article but I am not able to do it. Could you do it for me? :-)
I wish to replace the image in the infobox with the one here. I have discussed the matter with User:Taprobanus who appears to be the leading contributor to the article and he has agreed.-RavichandarMy coffee shop 12:54, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- I do not see his agreement on the talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 13:04, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- We did not discuss it on the talkpage of the article. Rather, it is present on my talk page-RavichandarMy coffee shop 13:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- The word "Dalit" does not appear on your current talk page. Give me a link. — Rlevse • Talk • 13:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- I thought you would oblige when I requested you. Anyway, no probs -RavichandarMy coffee shop 14:22, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Normally, yes, but given the history of the article, I'm making sure. Nothing against you personally you understand. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- It is my mistake, we should have had the discussion in the Dalit talk page not the User talk pages.1 I only had one concern about an individual, but that was a minor. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 18:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I'll unprotect the page. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:11, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. I'll make the necessary changes. I am not so comfortable with posting links from discussions I had with other editors in my talkpage or from my talk archive in someone else's discussion page. That's the reason why. Yeah, anyone in Wikipedia can see my talk page. But I kinda consider talkpage discussions private enough to posted in someone else's discussion page. Cheers-RavichandarMy coffee shop 02:39, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Uh, it's a wiki. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:42, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed, it's a wiki. But then, I don't wish to draw the interest of people who might visit your talkpage. In most cases, it ain't a problem, at times, even beneficial. But then who knows. Anyway, thank you very much. I've made the changes :-) -RavichandarMy coffee shop 02:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Uh, it's a wiki. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:42, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. I'll make the necessary changes. I am not so comfortable with posting links from discussions I had with other editors in my talkpage or from my talk archive in someone else's discussion page. That's the reason why. Yeah, anyone in Wikipedia can see my talk page. But I kinda consider talkpage discussions private enough to posted in someone else's discussion page. Cheers-RavichandarMy coffee shop 02:39, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I'll unprotect the page. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:11, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- It is my mistake, we should have had the discussion in the Dalit talk page not the User talk pages.1 I only had one concern about an individual, but that was a minor. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 18:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Normally, yes, but given the history of the article, I'm making sure. Nothing against you personally you understand. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- I thought you would oblige when I requested you. Anyway, no probs -RavichandarMy coffee shop 14:22, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- The word "Dalit" does not appear on your current talk page. Give me a link. — Rlevse • Talk • 13:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- We did not discuss it on the talkpage of the article. Rather, it is present on my talk page-RavichandarMy coffee shop 13:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Data Crystal
Me and my mate were wondering if there is any way of taking over (becoming a bureaucrat) on this wiki: Data crystal , we are asking you because it has been inactive for a long time, and we were hoping to try and take over to help fix it up. I have tried asking people on this wiki but no one is ever on besides me, the only other contributions are random IP addresses that spam the articles (even more then they already are). If you could please reply on my talk page it would be highly appreciated, thanks (This message has been sent to most bureaucrat's). --MỸŠŦЄЯỸЊӘҒҒ (talk) 13:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Socking?
Hi Rlevse. User:24.137.87.225 & User:RyanMacDonald I can say with some confidence are one and the same, but if this is the editor's only socking, he may have learned his lesson. What is less clear is whether User:RyanMacDonald might also be blocked user User:Nscotian -- and even possibly (but less likely) User:EastCoastBiker. They're all interested in adding the same content:
User:RyanMacDonald's account was created a couple of hours after User:Nscotian's unblock request was turned down. --Rrburke(talk) 17:42, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Confirmed Nscotian (talk · contribs) = EastCoastBiker (talk · contribs) = 207.231.236.5 (talk · contribs) = Woodboismadera (talk · contribs) = Woodbois (talk · contribs) = 24.137.87.225 (talk · contribs) = RyanMacDonald (talk · contribs). Nscotian 2 weeks, other named users indef. IPs two weeks. — Rlevse • Talk • 18:30, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks again. Similarly, is this just this guy trying to evade this warning? --Rrburke(talk) 22:12, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi, again. I'm fear I'm beginning to sound like a broken record. At any rate, I have the distinct feeling User:Ishan Danny Birchett, User:Ishan "Danny" Birchett, User: 72.74.110.24 and User:DetroitLegends are all the same guy, and their common purpose is to promote Ishan Dan Birchett. Additionally, User:DetroitLegends's user page suggests that this is a shared account: "Detroit Legends is an organization..." --Rrburke(talk) 18:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
My Retirement
I am retiring due to real life commitments. Could you do me a favour please? Can you fully protect my user page? And also this. It would be appreciated as part of my retirement. Before I say goodbye for the final time, I would like to offer you this.
MISTER ALCOHOL T C is offering you a Wiki Beer! Liquid refreshment promotes WikiHarmony and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the harmony by offering a beer to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Best served refrigerated (not applicable in UK). Temperature and Alcoholic strength varies according to age, religion and geographic location of recipient, US residents below the age of 21 are best advised to keep this beerstar until travelling in a country with less ageist drinking laws. NB This Beerstar is compatible with all known fake IDs
Finally, Goodbye... -- MISTER ALCOHOL T C 13:29 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Awesome Wikipedian
Wow. I'm blown away, thanks. That's some impressive names on that page. I'm quite touched, thanks. NB I'm planning to prioritise Cratwork now that I'm scaling down my contribs. --Dweller (talk) 19:14, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
WikiCup Newsletter
| The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||
Happy Wikipedians day
Hi Rlevse. This is a recommendation from my end. We're all used to having people churn up featured articles, debate policy, be an exceptional admin etc, but we fail to notice the smaller people. I know one such person: User:Dore chakravarty who has contributed rare images, and also great engineering drawings-- everything seems average about him, except the fact when you get to the part where he mentions his age – he's around 86 (2008). =Nichalp «Talk»= 12:42, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 10, 2009
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 2 | 10 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)§hepBot (Disable) 20:18, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedian of the day/CSD'er of the Week
Hey Rlevse, Just a thought for you, and this might take some effort right now to change, but I think it would be worth it on the long run. Take a look at how I'm doing the CSD'er archive. You are adding names at the end of the list, which means that new receipients will be at the bottom... or lost somewhere in the middle now that you've started 2009. I'm putting the new recepients at the top of my archive... this means that people added will easily be able to find their name. Of course, I'm only doing mine once a week, which means that it is actually fairly manageable. I'm not sure I would want to make the adjustment to your list...---Balloonman PoppaBalloonCSD Survey Results 14:57, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Pictures from Life Magazine
Google has digitized a whole slew of pictures from Life magazine at [12]. They claim copyright over everything, but of course anything pre-1923 is public domain, including, for instance, four pictures of Baden Powell. I thought I'd let you know in case you wanted any of them for the article. --B (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- first one does not appear to be on commons
- File:Rb-p00.jpg is the second one, on commons, but it black and white
- File:BP1907Brownsea.jpg looks like a modified version of the third one, on commons
- File:Baden Powell by Drawl.jpg is the one on the far right, on commons, but in color
Note
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Rlevse/Application to date my daughter. Majorly talk 02:21, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
site notice vs topicons
Hi. Something changed today related to the site notice; I'm not sure just what. But they're not being moved by a bit of script anymore and this has tweaked the positioning of them on my, Cas's and your user/talk pages. The specific change is that they've moved up and right a bit. I've tweaked it to add "top: 18px; right: 6px;". It really depends on whether you like them sitting on the horizontal rule or floating above it and how close to the right edge looks right to you. Revert this if you like the floating look. Also, if you ever change skins, such bits may need tweaking. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Happy-your-day template
Hello Rlevse. I think it rather defeats the you-are-personally-awesome message if the header is "Happy {{{nickname|{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>PAGENAME}}}}}'s Day!". :) —{admin} Pathoschild 12:29:21, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
FAR
I have nominated Scouting for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. On a personal note, I hope you realize that this FAR is unrelated to our disagreement over picture issues but due to the article quality of Scouting as it came to my attention. Best regards --Eustress (talk) 01:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Restoration of deleted images
Hi Randy, is it possible to restore File:Norway KFUK KFUM.svg and File:Norway KFUM.svg? Both pictures were deleted without previous notification on Talk:YWCA-YMCA Guides and Scouts of Norway, and the Uploader, User:Kaboom88, was not active for the last two month. Both images should be usable with coprrected fair-use-claims. Thanks. --jergen (talk) 09:26, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- I came upon two more images that should be usable:
- Boh are historical emblems, and can be used in adequate context. Especially the South African one is important. --jergen (talk) 09:34, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- I suggest you take that up with the deleting admin, as he may be more knowledgeable with regards to the deletion of the images and may be able to provide a quicker response. Maxim(talk) 16:29, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- That would be you, Maxim, for the first two ;-) As this was only yesterday, Jergen first talk to Maxim about it. I'll restore the last two, which are a month or two old and done by East718. I believe in letting someone fix a FUR if they have a mind. It can always be deleted again too if need be. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:35, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- I suggest you take that up with the deleting admin, as he may be more knowledgeable with regards to the deletion of the images and may be able to provide a quicker response. Maxim(talk) 16:29, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 17, 2009
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 3 | 17 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 00:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
User name change
Thank you! - Josette (talk) 03:55, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Contact?
Hello,
I'm totally sorry, because I'm sure it's somehow the wrong place doing it, but I just want to ask you one thing, and I do not know a better way as of I do not have an account here making it able to show me an e-mail-adress or so on your "e-mail"-page. Please feel absolutely and totally free to remove and delete this whole thing from here after reading it.
Sorry for my english.
I have read the actual article about the POTUS-Inauguration-ceremony, and I mentioned some interesting facts, but, a pity, I didn't saw the sources/references for them, and I think, they have not been at any time or at any place of the history of this article mentioned. So I looked up the origin, where this text-entry comes from, how it was created, and who stated this things. I see that all things had come and were first made in an article-change by user "Evrik", and I was going to ask him/her if he/she maybe would be able to remember his/her sources for the inserted text, so that they never could come in danger being deleted because of missing sources. It's a pity, I just saw then, that obviously the user has retired from wikipedia, as I saw on his/her user page (and later on this talk page above), but I saw these awards or so there, and because you awarded him one bold marked, I just thought of that you maybe could know him/her a bit, so that maybe you maybe could be able (and willing) to transmit this question to him/her, if you wouldn't think that that is for any reasons a bad idea. (I have also thought about asking for the sources on the talk-page of the article, but it seems to me, that because of the only recently happened retirement of the user, it just maybe would be a lot easier and more possibly to evaluate all and the right sources via the author of the text than it would be able to find for persons who didn't wrote the text and so not really can be able to know all and the right sources.)
Here's the entry of the insert in the history-page of the article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_presidential_inauguration&limit=500&action=history : "(cur) (prev) 17:22, 19 November 2007 Evrik (Talk | contribs) (24,520 bytes) (→Details)"
The additions of this change in comparison with the page before the change, showing directly the newly inserted text, of course are visible here:
So the added text in the then-new version of the site was this:
["]
Inaugural Addresses of the Presidents of the United States
The addresses are given each time that a President is inaugurated. 55 addresses have been given by 37 presidents. George Washington's second address was the shortest (135 words) and William Henry Harrison delivered the longest (8,495 words). Five presidents never gave an address: Tyler, Fillmore, Andrew Johnson, Arthur, and Ford. In each of these cases, the incoming President was succeeding a President who had either resigned, or died in office, and was subsequently not elected to a full term.
Locations With only one exception, all of the addresses were given at the building housing the United States Congress. Washington gave his first address at Federal Hall in New York City and his second address in Congress Hall in Philadelphia. Adams also gave his in Congress Hall in Philadelphia. Jefferson gave both of his addresses at the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C. and all addresses since then have been given there as well, except for Franklin D. Roosevelt's fourth address, which he gave at the White House.
Dates Presidents have delivered addresses on five different calendar dates in the year: April 30, March 4, March 5, January 20 and January 21. Washington gave his first address on April 30, 1789 and he gave his second one on March 4, 1793, which was the commencement date for presidential terms. This March 4 commencement date was changed to January 20 by the Twentieth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Sunday exceptions From the years 1793 to 1933, the addresses were given on March 4 with only four exceptions. Because March 4 fell on a Sunday in each of their respective inaugural years, Monroe, Taylor, Hayes and Wilson each gave an address on Monday, March 5. Since 1937, addresses have been given on January 20 with only three exceptions. Presidents Eisenhower and Reagan each gave an address on Monday January 21.
Religion George Washington's second address is the only one to contain no mention of the Christian God. Thirty-four of the 55 addresses contain the word "God." The addresses that refer to, but do not contain the word "God" instead say Giver of Good, Heaven, Almighty, Divine, or Providence. The last president not to say "God" was Franklin D. Roosevelt (second address).
["]
As I said, I would find it interesting knowing the sources for all that details which are in it, especially for the first and last paragraph (because I think that would be of the most relevance because the details of the other paragraphs, containing the places and dates, could be find much easier elsewhere).
Maybe you do not know a possibility to contact him/her (of course just for your own purpose, I just simple ask for transmitting this question, I don't want you to tell me private contact data of any person), but than maybe know someone, who you could ask doing it in favor, or just knowing another direct/indrect way for it.
As I said, I am sorry writing this in that way to you, and maybe it would be the easiest or the best place then, that if you maybe just could add a little response to this, if you want to, on the actual talk-page of the concerning article in its actual form (in the actual form, still the facts of the texts are included, partly in other form than originally written):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_presidential_inauguration
Maybe that for the best possibility there you could add an possible answer of the question, when you maybe could receive it from the user, when you maybe would feel right in doing the transmitting.
As I said, I just also have read his/her entry on this talk-page here read above, but I do not know the detailed background or reason for the decision leading to the recently happened retirement, so if they are (for your knowing) that way (I don't want you to tell me private data), that you do not think it would be right to ask him/her such little things or whatever, or if the one, who you maybe think could contact him/her does think so, maybe it would be able for you to just add a little, maybe that the sources for that special insert are still unknown, or something like this - so that I and others just maybe will be get to know about an possible answer or if you couldn't ask him/her, or if the transmitted question maybe would take time to maybe become answered.
Last thing: I know that that all here is very long for just this simple thing, and I just think, maybe it sounds complicated, but, well, I just think, because of it's not much more than a year ago, that the text was inserted, and so maybe I just think it would the easiest or (relatively) easy to remember for the who, who did write it, to remember, where the informations did come from, maybe that it just could be that way, that it is just easy remembering the book where they're from (if it would be a book), or from whatever everything else medium they are.
If there isn't a way to get the sources told by the text's author, I think I'm going to ask the question on the talk-page of the article, but for the said reasons and because of respect of the done work of a person (I do not know), I just want to do this try to ask him/her first, just because I don't wanna mark someone's work as "incomplete" or missing something, without having talked to the text's creator/maker first.
If you don't want to write a little thing in reply to this on the talk-page of the article, maybe you could just say anything you want, if you in general want to do so, here on your own talk-page, and maybe could last it one, two days, before you delete this whole thing, so that I could have the chance, to read, what you are saying to this here, if you want to. I then would just add the information that I have read what you would have be said, so that you would be quickly able to know when you could delete this, when it would be possible for you to last this here or wherever else you would do so, so that I could be able to read it (that's just a way coming to my mind how I would be able to read your reply, because I do not know, if it would be correct under the rules of this website to write here some private contact data of mine, because I do not know, if this here ever "really"/finally could be deleted by you from this your page, or if it ever will be in the history-page of this page, and I don't want making that maybe a problem for you).
(Or maybe you just can reply on my talk-page, it just comes to my mind, maybe I have one just without being a regualr user... maybe you just could transfer this whole thing to there after you have read it? I really don't want to trash this your site here. But I am not sure whether the IP is changing random automatically, so maybe this would be an unsure way for me to get to read to it, but I don't know.)
(If I get to know the sources, I would - with your(plural) permission - fully integrate the references in the article, leaving nothing to do for you or the text's original author - if not you expliclitly want to do it for whatever reasons by yourself(plural) - so that there wouldn't by any work for you(plural) left.)
Well, again sorry for my "english", best regards, and I hope you once one day will be able to visit Rhode Island and mark out the last "white mark" on your USA-map. Futurous congratulations for that day!
84.60.235.133 (talk) 09:18, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Dear Rlevse could you look into this issue.
Grand is evidently trying to engage in hostile suppressing of my role in WP by repeatedly filing irrelevant and offensive appeals against me, all the while demonstrating indignant non-compliance with a recommendation to build a consensual approach to solving a dispute on sources [14]. In the first instance of such appeal, you ruled no connection between me and the various other users that Grand tried to associate myself with in order to suppress my participation despite the fact that one CU by you gave no results ( here [15]). Capasitor (talk) 18:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, but as this is in a long running area of ethnic disputes here on wiki and I'm now an arbitrator, I have to stay as neutral as possible as this area could easily come up at arbcom again. I suggest you seek help at WP:AN or ask a neutral admin or file at WP:AE. — Rlevse • Talk • 18:20, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Oversight for User talk:Possum
Hello. About 20 minutes ago, an anon IP made this personal attack at User:Possum which included a telephone number. I think this is a case for oversight- it looks like a real number to me. Thanks. Oliver Fury, Esq. message • contributions 20:37, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- Good call, tks for reporting it. Oversight done. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:40, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- If I see something like this again, would it be better to e-mail instead? For a few minutes, that diff was being shown to everyone. Thanks anyway. Oliver Fury, Esq. message • contributions 20:44, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you
I appreciate the name change! Best wishes. travb (talk) 01:03, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
The Invisible Barnstar | |
| The Invisible Barnstar is awarded to users who make significant and helpful contributions to the project, but have kept to the background without seeking recognition or reward for their work.
This Barnstar is awarded to Rlevse, for always going the extra mile to help other editors in need. Rlevse epitomizes how every administrator should act and behave, he is a role model to us all. Thank you so much. Ikip (talk) 12:33, 27 January 2009 (UTC) |
Ping check
Just want to confirm you received my recent email?--VS talk 02:24, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
something hokey with rename
Resolveddid something happen with my rename? I'm still able to log in as Xenocidic and can't log in as Xeno -
A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:
(SQL query hidden)
from within function "User::saveSettings". MySQL returned error "1062: Duplicate entry 'Xenocidic' for key 2 (10.0.0.235)".
- This situation I have never seen before. The rename logs shows the rename as occuring:
- 20:24, January 18, 2009 Rlevse (Talk | contribs | block) renamed User:Xenocidic to "Xeno" (23,285 edits. Reason: WP:USURP)
- and the usernamelog with the old Xeno usurped, with the new Xeno as an admin:
- Xeno (administrator)
- Xeno (usurped)
- But also with Xenocidic still existing (not as an admin)
- Also, no contribs show as Xeno and Xenocidic has a 2 year gap in contribs. It's like this only partly worked. Perhaps due to the same reason as Inclusionist below.
- This situation I have never seen before. The rename logs shows the rename as occuring:
- Very odd. I'll have to research this one. Sorry for the trouble. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:35, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
I talked to another crat, User:Deskana. He says this is indeed weird and that it used to happen quite often. We're not sure if it's a one time thing or if rename is broken. Large renames like yours (with 20k+ edits in your case) have been know to take 2 days and possibly longer. You may need to get a dev to look at this, try User:Brion VIBBER--in fact User:MBisanz is going to file a bug report for you. If we can help in any other way, let us know. — Rlevse • Talk •
- I dunno if it helps to diagnose the issue, but my main pages (User: and User talk:) didn't get automagically moved when you moved all my other ones. Xenocidic (talk) 20:09, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- See Bugzilla:17082. MBisanz talk 21:01, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- hrm, while we wait for that to work itself out, would it be possible to +makesysop this account? cheers, –xeno (talk) 03:33, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- HOW DO I DELETED MAIN PAGE??? No, I kid I just notice above you commented on the 2 year gap in contribs - that's normal, I wasn't editing in that period. I left Brion a note. best, –xeno (talk) 04:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
another...
I see you renamed User:Inclusionist to User:Ikip, however, see;
The edits didn't move! Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- It appears the new user is logging in. The edits not moving right away is quite common with renames. It can take up to a day or two for all the edits to move over with the rename of an account with lots of edits. 19:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- What about my issue? don't mind waiting for it to be reattributed but right now I don't have any nifty buttons to play with =0 Xenocidic (talk) 19:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- It appears the new user is logging in. The edits not moving right away is quite common with renames. It can take up to a day or two for all the edits to move over with the rename of an account with lots of edits. 19:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
fixed?
- .oOo. I think I fixed it, by sneaking in thru the xeno account at simple.wiki... Edits have yet to be re-attributed, but I gather that will follow... –xeno (talk) 16:19, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
still not re-attributed?
Sorry to bother you again, only a handful of my previous contribs (a three day period in July) have been re-attributed... Is this an issue with the overworked job queue or do you think it might have something to do with above issue? I noticed Inclusionist's still aren't (fully?) transfered. –xeno (talk) 15:54, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
WikiCup Newsletter
| The WikiCup Newsletter | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
J.delanoy
I have evidence of him admitting to violating CoI (in those words too). Admin are strickly forbidden from blocking those who personally attack them. They are also forbidden for blocks dealing with the pages that they work on. If need be, I will provide screen captions of his own words to ArbCom. Him admitting knowledge that it is a CoI, plus the wording of blocking policy and CoI directly stating that he is not to use his admin powers on pages that he is directly part of, plus precedence that admin are not to block those who personally attack them as a CoI is enough evidence that he is in violation of rights to be an admin.
There was another administrator involved. There are vandalism noticeboards. There are procedures. Not dealing with an admin who knows that he is in violation sets a very bad precedent. I am posting this on your page as part of my intention and that we both know that you would have to recuse yourself if this goes to Arbcom. The mere fact that people are willing to block, claim point, and the rest when there is a clear and defined message on the pages linked, with quotations to it, from an editor in high standing along with evidence that the user in question admitted to it shows that there is a problem with reception and an egregious abuse that must be addressed. The page being archived by an IRC friend of j.delanoy only verifies a greater problem that must be addressed. If you would like to discuss this further, along with the evidence, please see my email. Ottava Rima (talk) 03:09, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I made a comment that's all, took no actions. I have no dog in this fight, so no I would not have to recuse. If there is additional evidence, I'd look at it neutrally if and when the time comes. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I would be listing the whole of responders at the AN as contributing to accusations of point and other claims of misconduct laid against me, especially after I pointed out that I had evidence of him admitting to having a CoI. Even j.delanoy admits it. You would be a party because you stated that there was no CoI, which seemed to be the common theme which went against what was said, the quotations listed, and the rest. Seeing as how this is an issue of CoI (and not j.delanoy per se), it would go to the heart of admin using tools on their own pages. I like j.delanoy. I do not appreciate administrators using tools in areas that they should be conflicted out per guidelines and policies. Ottava Rima (talk) 03:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Making one comment does not make one a party. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- But you did show up and add to it. Regardless, there is a clear lack of wording, or an error of wording. You must be able to see that, no? Are admin allowed to use tools on pages that they work on? Are they allowed to block vandals on pages that they devote their life to and have an interest in the -content-? Are they allowed to delete pages that they are connected to? Are they allowed to use other powers on such pages? CoI clause in the blocking policy has wording that leads me to believe that they shouldn't. It does not outright say that they can't. Do you agree that this needs to be clarified? Or was your one comment a complete dismissal of the issue as a whole? Ottava Rima (talk) 03:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Making one comment does not make one a party. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I would be listing the whole of responders at the AN as contributing to accusations of point and other claims of misconduct laid against me, especially after I pointed out that I had evidence of him admitting to having a CoI. Even j.delanoy admits it. You would be a party because you stated that there was no CoI, which seemed to be the common theme which went against what was said, the quotations listed, and the rest. Seeing as how this is an issue of CoI (and not j.delanoy per se), it would go to the heart of admin using tools on their own pages. I like j.delanoy. I do not appreciate administrators using tools in areas that they should be conflicted out per guidelines and policies. Ottava Rima (talk) 03:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Boyce
Hi Rlevse, I'm sorry I haven't gotten back to you about Boyce. Last week I was dealing with a sick kid, and this week I seem to have the dratted cold. My brain is essentially mush, and I suspect it will be like that for the rest of the week. Go with your best judgement on the article - maybe I will feel well enough to take a look when it is at FAC. Sorry! Karanacs (talk) 16:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Please help us celebrate our anniversary!
Please check out Anniversary - let's celebrate! Your suggestions are very welcome. — Sebastian 22:26, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi
Hi Rlevse. I don't understand how voting can start [16] without the independent review of the evidence by Arbitor Cool Hand Luke being completed [17]. Isn't that totally against proper procedure? I am afraid this is not fair at all... Cheers PHG (talk) 07:03, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Arbitor Cool Hand Luke has now completed his independent review of the evidence here. It basically shows that my contributions have been based on proper sourcing and are not even "undue weight", contrary to what has been said. Isn't it then highly unfair to ask for continued restrictions? It would be a shame if the Arbcom followed (and encouraged) the lingering enimities and unwarranted accusations of a few critics, rather than pass a fair judgement about my work. I strongly appeal to your sense of justice in this matter. Best regards PHG (talk) 07:03, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Not just any day
What a wonderful surprise, you made today my day! How sweet. Thank you. - Josette (talk) 01:34, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Question: Sam Korn seemed to confirm that SeventeenForever17 was the same user as Lzki, but not Unwrittendrew700. Your analysis indicated that SeventeenForever17=Unwrittendrew700, but that this was separate from the Lzki sock drawer. Is there an actual disagreement, or just some imprecise writing?—Kww(talk) 19:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
My day
Hey, thank you so much for this. It has definitely made my day. :-) I'll post the userbox with pride. Best, SlimVirgin talk|contribs 00:20, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 24, 2009
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 4 | 24 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Delivered at 04:55, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot (Disable)
FAC USMA question
Hi there. I left the response below to your objection on the FAC/USMA project page, but I wanted to contact you directly as well:
It is my understanding that leads are allowed to have citations, as seen by FA's Texas A&M (2 citations in lead), Duke (8 citations), and Ohio Wesleyan (8 citations). Do you object to this article's lead having citations or to the actual content or structure of the lead section?
I understand that you are a very experienced member of the wikipedia community and that I'm very new. I think I saw the same issue about citations in leads for Texas A&M's FAC. Please don't take my question as being confrontational, I'm just trying to figure out the "best practice" so that USMA's article is as good as it can possibly be. Thanks for your time. Ahodges7 talk 13:05, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
- First, I can't keep an eye on every article and it's lead, but I did see yours. I have not seen the others you mention. Leads can have refs but when I see more then 3 or so, that's a signal of one of two things:
- The lead is not a summary and has details that are not repeated in the body
- The lead is a summary that is expounded upon in the body and has refs that it really doesn't need
The problem with this lead is it sounds like a brief intro, it should be a summary of each major topic in body, then you won't need all that detail and refs. You have entire sections of the articel that are not mentioned in the lead.
So, if you want you can work on this yourself or if you want I'll fix it for you. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:03, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'd like to try to fix it myself so I can be better prepared for the next article I write. I'm working on a new lead in my Sandbox. I hope to have it done today. Feel free to stop by and look and/or offer suggestions. Thanks for the guidance on this one. Ahodges7 talk 19:10, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Very nice. Post it to the article and I'll support. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:54, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
National Scouting Museum
I believe this article needs to stand alone as an individual museum listing in Texas. I have been working on the List of museums in Texas, and this will better enable users to understand the museum and find it on Wikipedia. I have edited the main Boy Scouts article to link to the museum. As more museums are added, hopefully there will also be a category for Scouting museums, which will include Girl Scouts and other groups.Jllm06 (talk) 16:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
WikiCup Newsletter
| The WikiCup Newsletter | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
- 17:36, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Smile!
Here's the Empire State Building for you! The Empire State Building promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing! Acalamari 17:49, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
RFAR Elonka
Re "Decline. Totally agree with Vassyana. Also, posting an RFAR and reposting of ongoing clarification statements while an RFC is in progress was not the best way to handle this." -- I'm clearly missing something as I hadn't realised there was an RFC. Any chance you could supply the link? Thanks. •Jim62sch•dissera! 21:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
You recommend me to talk with him. I agree your opinion, because Wikipedia has many people who have different view. And I like conversation with diffrent viewers. Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs) forced me not to edit some topics, and he also told me like that you will immediately be blocked indefinitely, without further warning.[18] However, both Comfort women and Talk:Comfort women are my version 5 days until now.
Then, I sent my message.
- First I replyed in my talk page.[19], but he didn't reply.
- Second, I sent Future Perfect at Sunrise email, but he didn't reply.
- Third, I sent my message in his Talk page[20], but he didn't reply.
Rlevse, you are fair man. I respect you as fair Admin. Please, tell me what should I do.--Bukubku (talk) 02:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
If you can't work things out with the user you are involved with, see WP:DR. Keep in mind you need to not give any admin a reason to block you. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:23, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for Rlevse. Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs) replyed.--Bukubku (talk) 07:53, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
RfCU
Ok, apparently they've changed the whole thing, and I'm quite lost. (I guess this is what I get for allowing RL to intervene the last month or so...lol)
I can't even tell which "wizard" box I'm supposed to click on.
Anyway, I'm looking to do a checkuser on User:EstherLois, to see whether they are User:Pastorwayne. (See User:Jc37/Tracking/Pastorwayne, and the "active" section in particular.)
Any help would be most welcome. - jc37 03:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- See WP:SPI. If you have problems with the clickology, ask User:Tiptoety or User:Lucasbfr. I haven't even totally learned it yet ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 10:49, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Uh huh, that's what I was looking at.
- I'll drop them each a note : )
- As an aside, if you and I are having a difficult time of it, I wonder about others... - jc37 12:36, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
William D. Boyce and HARI
FAC comments addressed...
I think we've addressed all your concerns in the West Point FAC. If you would be so kind as to mark off everything you feel we have addressed and/or make further comments so we can fix them, it would be appreciated. Furthermore, if all of your concerns have been addressed, your Support !vote would be appreciated. — BQZip01 — talk 00:39, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- That was fast...
|
The Modest Barnstar | |
| given by BQZip01 for his feedback at an FAC on West Point. While we don't always see eye-to-eye, an improvement to an article is an improvement to an article and I'd like to reward such efforts to improve the encyclopedia no matter my opinion as to the significance of such a request for change. |
— BQZip01 — talk00:50, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Usurpation
Just to let you know, my usurpation of Download did not work. More info at WP:Changing username/Usurpations. Thanks, ElectricRush (talk) 02:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
note
- Wikipedia_talk:Sockpuppet_investigations#Page_name
- User_talk:Lucasbfr#Wikipedia:Requests_for_sockpuppet_investigation
- User_talk:X!#FYI
- User_talk:Jehochman#WP:SPI
Merely a note since I left you a note concerning this page previously. No need to respond in any way. - jc37 07:38, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
My Bot
Would you mind flagging my bot? Richard0612 approved it here but the bot could still use a flag. Thanks. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 22:43, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Just a hello and a nod towards old times...
Can you believe it's been a year since this? Also, I'd like to do a belated "gloat": I was right, you assumed good faith; bet you felt stupid after that, eh?! ScarianCall me Pat! 16:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi
I think I am leaving. Cheers PHG (talk) 13:54, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Rootology's RfA
Hi there Rlevse. I've seen that you've put this on hold, which is fine of course, but is there any chance I can find out the why and how long? Will there be a c-chat? Synergy 02:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- I put it on hold because of the nature of the opposes, the number of comments made in the last few hours, and to take my time to read it thoroughly to make the most informed decision I can. I do not see the need for a crat chat right now. I plan to be done 30 min - 1 hour from now. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- I just read your closing comment. I think you did a great job on that, weighting arguments, not numbers of !votes and I think even those who !voted against him will appreciate this. I just wish crats would do so on all RfAs that are not clear cut promotions, it would maybe diminish the "popularity contest"-prejudice a bit...so let's hope that was an example :-) SoWhy 22:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Jayjg day
Thank you for your kind note, it was much appreciated. Jayjg (talk) 03:31, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 31, 2009
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 5 | 31 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 21:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Spacebirdy changed user rights for Sade@enwiki from sysop to (none) with the following comment: per srp and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&diff=268155381 Kylu (talk) 01:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
...for the notice! NawlinWiki (talk) 01:43, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Questions about Oversight
Since I downscaled my editing time here, I am even more careful than ever about taking on duties and responsibilities.
I am flattered that you/the committee have nominated me for consideration for Oversight rights, but I have no intention of taking on more than I can digest, especially as I plan to remain a very active Bureaucrat... and even more so in the light of the recent unfortunate downturn in the numbers of active Crats. All in all, I take commitments seriously.
When considering the idea of running for Oversight rights, I'm struck by a problem, which is that I have idea how heavy the workload is likely to be. I've read the Oversight pages in the past when I had need to call for Oversight on edits and have refreshed my memory today. I can see the list of current editors with access to the tool, but for presumably obvious reasons, I can't tell what the likely workload is. Are the requests frequent? Is there frequently a backlog? I'd guess these may vary from time to time.
I guess in summary, what I'm trying to get at is: if I'm going to be a conscientious member of the team, pulling my weight with the workload, but also doing so in a scrupulous and thorough manner, roughly how much time in a day/week can I expect to need to commit? --Dweller (talk) 13:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Dweller, I think I can answer this one for you as I also hold oversight permissions. The total workload for all oversight requests on an average day is probably less than an hour, encompassing several requests at different times of the day. Most active oversighters will address maybe half a dozen requests over the course of a week, for probably less than an hour total during that week. Requests are handled on a "who's available at the moment" basis. Many requests do not need more than 10 minutes to address, including the return email confirming the action taken (which is often no action at all). Once in a while, a more complex request comes in (last night I dealt with one that was from an article's subject and ultimately was referred to OTRS after a bit of article cleanup, for example), but the more difficult ones only pop up once a week or so. Risker (talk) 15:08, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. Hmm. That doesn't sound onerous. As I understand it, the requests come in by to the Oversight group by email - is that correct? ie one needn't be logged in here to receive a plea for help... --Dweller (talk) 15:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, the requests are sent out to "all subscribers" on the oversight-L email list, and whomever is available will respond. One doesn't have to be logged in to Wikipedia to receive the emails, and on-wiki requests are discouraged - if the information is sensitive enough to require oversight, it's too sensitive for messages on noticeboards or talk pages. One does, however, usually have to log in to review a request, because the versions of concern are frequently deleted by admins to remove the offending material from public access until an oversighter can review the situation. Risker (talk) 15:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- OS is the most non-time consuming job there is on wiki. I would not worry if I were you. And yes, we need more crats. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Occasionally, stuff is removed by oversight that should not have been removed. (At least, it came up in some Arbcom case that this happened).
- (a) What precautions can oversighters take to be sure they have consensus?
- (b) Can oversighters see the results of each others' actions?
- (c) Can mistakes be undone?
- Thanks for any enlightenment, EdJohnston (talk) 20:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- The new OS interface is much easier to use than the old one. You can undo OS actions and selectively choose what to hide now. Make sure you follow the policy, if in doubt, get a 2nd opinion. Yes, you can view all OS actions. Jayvdb does more OS than I, he can tell you more. I'm more a CU person. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:08, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Occasionally, stuff is removed by oversight that should not have been removed. (At least, it came up in some Arbcom case that this happened).
- OS is the most non-time consuming job there is on wiki. I would not worry if I were you. And yes, we need more crats. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, the requests are sent out to "all subscribers" on the oversight-L email list, and whomever is available will respond. One doesn't have to be logged in to Wikipedia to receive the emails, and on-wiki requests are discouraged - if the information is sensitive enough to require oversight, it's too sensitive for messages on noticeboards or talk pages. One does, however, usually have to log in to review a request, because the versions of concern are frequently deleted by admins to remove the offending material from public access until an oversighter can review the situation. Risker (talk) 15:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. Hmm. That doesn't sound onerous. As I understand it, the requests come in by to the Oversight group by email - is that correct? ie one needn't be logged in here to receive a plea for help... --Dweller (talk) 15:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Confused (wrt. Rootology RfA)
You mention WP:FORGIVE in your closing statements. Could you please explain how it applies to that RfA? Giggy (talk) 12:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- In this particular case, it applies in the vein that while Rootology has a checkered past, he's worked hard to overcome it and put it behind him, which resulted in him having good (82% if you want to count !votes) consensus to have the tools. IOW, not to hold that part of his past against him forever. I don't know if you agree with Synergy, but you may want to see his 22:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC) post above here on my page. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Harry S. Truman can be unprotected
It's been over a month since you protected Harry S. Truman. Perhaps that's long enough? Thanks. 67.101.6.67 (talk) 09:53, 5 February 2009 (UTC).
- Request for unprotection posted at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for unprotection. Feel free to comment there if you think the "cousin stuff" you cited for the protection back then still applies. Thanks. 66.167.48.28 (talk) (f.k.a. 67.101.6.67 (contribs) 05:39, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Re: William Henry Harrison
I'd be happy to help. It's a pretty long article, so it might take a while, but it should be done within a couple days. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 21:57, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse, it looks like you are getting lots of takers for copyediting this article, so I'm going to drop out of the running for now ;) I don't edit on weekends and I'm working on getting a few of my own articles ready for an FAC run, so it would likely be a while before I got to this anyway. Good luck (and thank you for working on such an important article)! Karanacs (talk) 14:53, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- I've run through about half of the article. Looks good for the most part, and I hope to get the rest done tonight. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 19:38, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Also, that section should probably me merged somewhere else, if not deleted entirely. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 21:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
William Henry Harrison
I am curious why I was contacted on this issue.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Because you do a good job at copyediting and I need the help. I'm better at things like refs and research than writing. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Perhaps you meant to contact User:Tony1? Anyway, I'll give this one a look—great article for FAC. --Spangineerws (háblame) 23:37, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Reversion of valid information?
I don't fully understand this edit of yours. You removed information from the lead section of an article (correct) but didn't move it (despite its excellent cited sources) elsewhere. Help:Reverting says If only part of an edit is problematic, consider modifying only that part, instead of reverting the whole edit. It also says Generally, there are misconceptions that problematic sections of an article or recent changes are the reasons for reverting or deletion. If they contain valid and encyclopedic information, these texts should simply be edited and improved accordingly.
I've added the deleted information back into the article (but not in the lead section, of course), improving the citations and doing some minor copyediting. If you think that it still doesn't belong in the article, I'd be very interested in understanding why. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 17:00, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
- That is a) an item of detail and details don't go in the lead as the lead is supposed to be a summary and b) Gadget850 is precisely right to tag it as recentism and its historical context and importance in an overview article on BSA is questionable. It could even be argued this is POV pushing. I suggest you start a talk page thread on the BSA article on this. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:08, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for the detailed response; I'll continue the discussion on the article talk page. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 15:06, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Avril vandal returning?
User:SoiledDishcloth (Hagger vandal from this morning) references Avril Lavigne in edit summaries, and the account was created at about the same time as a bunch of Avril vandal socks that you blocked. I thought there was a hard IP block on the Avril vandal, but maybe it has expired. Since it doesn't look like I'm going to be able to check myself :<, would you mind looking at this for me? Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 18:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi!
Hi! Since you are an administrator, I would ask you someting. I suspect a disruptive user to have more sockpuppets and I reported him here, but I don't know how to open a case and I don't have much time to read the entire page about such things .... The reason for the report is this:
- Mttll (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Attlmt (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Panlatdelkwa (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- 78.146.79.227 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Res Gestæ Divi Augusti (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Shuppiluliuma (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
During the edits with the sockpuppets Panlatdelkwa and 78.146.79.227, Mttll was blocked to edit for 48 hours. Therefore, he broked his blocking. In the case of Attlmt, I suppose that he is trying to hide the his list of block logs. Without a justified permission, the using of more than 1 account is not allowed in Wikipedia.
Could you make a user check, please? I don't know how to open a case... The connection between Mttll and Attlmt is already known, but I don't know about the rest.
Best regards, --Olahus (talk) 20:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
- Contact User:Tiptoety, he's an SPI clerk and this case needs to be properly processed. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:04, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Please see User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise/Archive 15#Let's have a conversation. I tried to talk with Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs) in a way easy to understand. I provided many sources, and tried to clear up our misunderstanding. And I wait his reply day after day. But his only one time reply was
I'm sorry but I'm not sure what you want. This is not about different points of view. It's about me trying to make sure that people who have nothing else in mind here on Wikipedia but to push their national points of view don't spoil our articles.[21]
And he removed my explanation.[22] I think NYtimes and my other sources is not POV.--Bukubku (talk) 11:35, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Request for adminship... 3?
Hi Rlevse, it's now been over half a year since my previous request for the mop, and reviewing that RfA reveals that you were one of my opposers last time round. I was wondering if you'd like to comment on my current status in the Wikipedia community, and if you believe I would be ready to run for adminship again in future? Kind regards. Please respond wherever you feel it is most appropriate. Kind regards. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 16:25, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Assume good faith
Isn't that the Wiki policy? I've already admitted to knowing BurpTheBaby, so of course your checkuser is going to show the same IP address. I wouldn't admit it if I was trying to hide something or stack votes. User:Rschen7754 made a big stink about me using caps in my AfD statement. That report has since been closed with various users telling Rschen to have thicker skin. I also agreed to tone down the caps. I've also agreed to tell my husband to not be in my discussions. I showed him Rschen's wikiquette alert of me and he decided to stick up for me. Nothing more. This is merely a ticked off author who wants his article to make it to FA. And other users have agreed with my points. Even ones that Mitchazenia has not brought to the checkuser. Check out the article and discussion. My ideas aren't, "this article sucks", "the writer is lame", etc., I've documented sources, other topics within the article being too heavy, etc. Aren't I entitled to an opinion. Thanks!--GroundhogTheater (talk) 17:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
WikiCup Newsletter
| The WikiCup Newsletter | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
- 20:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by J Milburn, on behalf of the judges. 20:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
My day
Well, gosh - I've never dreamt of having my own day. Many thanks! Warofdreams talk 00:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey :-)
I saw this pic. And, I was like...wow! Hope you like it! miranda 01:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
moved from your userpage
Thanks
I Thanks for both. I am lazy, of course.
--Dore chakravarty (talk) 19:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 6 | 8 February 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:49, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Saw you working on this and helped out a bit. I'd be more than willing to handle the Astronauts on that list. All of them, even the ones who haven't flown yet have articles. Specifically Michael Foreman, whom you identified on the talk page. I noticed that the place you are referencing them from isn't completely up to date in terms of flights and assignments, it might be better to use their NASA biographies? -MBK004 03:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- I saw the help. Thanks! Sure, add to the astronaut section and I'll move elsewhere, there are about 40 odd more astronauts to go (see the USNA astro page). I plan to nom it for FL when done and to me that means no red links and every person has a good ref. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm hopeless with how to get those templates to work. Every time I think I've got it, they do something and erase more than 30 minutes of work. I'm not sure if I can get these done owing to the technical difficulties. I can still work on the verbiage, and I do have another suggestion. Since the individual bios of the astronauts are just straight copies of (sometimes older versions) their NASA biographies, just go direct to the source keeping the cref and instead of the USNA bio use this: [23]. -MBK004 22:45, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Just copy from "{{mem/a" to and including the }} at the end of the ref line, then change the appropriate parts. If you still have problems, let me know. If nothing else, I can do the parts you have trouble with and you do what you can, as I can really use the help. Also see post at WT:FLC I'm making in about 2 minutes on list order. — Rlevse • Talk • 04:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
←All of them are now on the list, and I have also added some images. You might want to tweak some of the notability a bit since I only mentioned their spaceflights. Also, I haven't switched the references to their NASA Bios instead of what comes from the academy (which is outdated and doesn't mention some of the newer missions which I have). -MBK004 12:34, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'll add the NASA refs later today. As for the question, I'll most likely start work on the Air Force list. -MBK004 12:53, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- And done. The verbiage of the astronauts could use a look-over especially since I only mentioned spaceflights, not military service. I'm off to work on the astronaut section of List of United States Military Academy alumni since it is smaller than the section at Graduates of the United States Air Force Academy. -MBK004 19:25, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
William Henry Harrison
If you don't mind, I would be glad to try and address some of the issues the reviewers are raising at FAC. I have several source books, and an excellent knowledge of Harrison. I have wrote several other articles about topics he was greatly involved in. Would that be okay with you? Charles Edward (Talk) 18:35, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
My day
In case you don't check back at my talk page, I just want to say it here: Thank you. I truly appreciate your kind gesture. Best, –Black Falcon (Talk) 05:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
members list templates
I don't know how I got involved with all of these templates, but I'm tired of trying to keep them straight. See {{mem}}. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 19:56, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hmmm. Interesting, but I don't feel like chging the USNA set now, too far into it. I may use this if I do West Point next. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:17, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- I started these from scratch instead of hacking the old versions. Alignment now works with or without images. I can update code quickly with Ultraedit. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 21:30, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rootology
Just noticed your closing statement for Rootology... excellent job.---I'm Spartacus! The artist formerly known as Balloonman 21:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
IRC
If you have time tonight, try to come on, and ping me. Thanks, iMatthew // talk // 22:21, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Harassment by User:Gwen_Gale
Rlevse,
What is going on with the admins around here? There is a highly disruptive, tendentious, single-purpose editor, Thunder-bird2, who drives everyone out of their minds. I gave a flippant, dismissive response to him and he started a WQA over it here. He claimed it was a “personal attack”, which is absurd. The last time I even looked at the WQA was five days ago (which is an eternity in Wikipedia time). Now Gwen appears to be stalking me. What is it going to take to get her to leave me alone? Do I have to say “OK, I’ll never use glib dismissive tone to refute a disruptive and tendentious editor and will always act like I’m dealing with kindergardners?” What is going on with this organization’s political correctness? It’s out of control.
You know what I wrote that made T-bird come whining to WQA? I wrote
T-bird. Perhaps you could go instead into the business of selling leprosy or something. With countries like North Korea and Iran, there would finally be at least a few buyers for what you’re selling.
Now I ask you: What does that *mean*? It means “we’re not interested; zero takers.” Is it a nice way of saying it? Not particularly; however, it is the sort of thing I could tell my programmer friend in real life if he developed some piece of software that I thought no one would be interested. He’d laugh at the analogy. It would be a way of saying “you wouldn’t sell a single copy.” So, is it a WP:Personal attack? (Racial, sexual, homophobic, ageist, religious, political, ethnic, or other epithets, etc.). Not even close. Is it WP:Uncivil? (“personal attacks, rudeness, and aggressive behaviours that disrupt the project and lead to unproductive stress and conflict”). Not even close. No sane person could possibly think I was seriously suggesting that T-bird go into the business of selling contagious bacteria to rogue nations. My message point was clear. And I used an idiom that included a disease—Leprosy—for which Wikipedia has an article. We’re not kindergardeners here. Further, the only person who is “disrupting the project” is T-bird, who is 100% a single-purpose account dedicated to no other purpose than promote the adoption of a guideline and practice on Wikipedia against a clear community consensus on the mater.
T-bird was just wikilawyering with his WQA because he wants to remove as many obstacles to his one-man holy war to force all editors on Wikipedia to use “mebibyte (MiB)” rather than “megabyte (MB)” as everyone else does on this pale blue dot. It’s just that simple.
And now, Gwen comes to my talk page and posts this: [24], I delete it with an edit summary about how she is too thin skinned, and she comes back with this [25] suggestion that I have some sort of obsession with “skin” (you see… “leprosy”, and now thin skin; get it?). This is outrageous. It is a freudian projection; an obsession with “skin” on her part. This is stalking and amounts to abuse by a overly-PC admin with way too much time on his or her hands. No one should have to put up with this. Greg L (talk) 01:56, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- Do we have an article for coriumophilia? Quand le jour se lève les ténèbres s'évanouissent. (talk) 02:15, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- Even if Gwen is wrong that you have some obession with skin, she's right that your comments were uncivil, aside from just plain rude. What you're doing above is what we call wikilawyering, I see that you're familiar with the term. You say you aren't kindergardners here, and yet, you can't seem to illustrate your point without being rude about it.
- An admin watching a user who had previously violated wikipedia's civility policy is hardly stalking. I suggest you retract this report, as the only thing you're doing is casting yourself in the spotlight. Gwen was in the right in this matter, and your failure to admit your fault is only going to make matters worse for you. I've seen it happen before, I won't be surprised if it happens again.— Dædαlus Contribs 06:58, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- Further, as to why your comment is uncivil, it is uncivil because it suggests the targeted user is aiding the vandals, I don't see how it could be taken any other way (re: selling contagions to rogue nations).— Dædαlus Contribs 07:00, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- Looking at your diffs, it looks like Gwen Gale gave you a polite, personalized warning. Then after you reverted her with a joke that didn't get close to working, she asked you a legitimate question. Outside of not getting your attempt at a joke, I don't understand what the problem is. Dayewalker (talk) 11:14, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- On top of that, you're essentially asking a sitting arb to get directly involved in a case that could end up at arbcom and hence put me in a COI situation and oh by the way you're also directly involved in an ongoing arb case. I defer this to the community for resolution, which seems to be a step in WP:DR for that you skipped. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:07, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- Looking at your diffs, it looks like Gwen Gale gave you a polite, personalized warning. Then after you reverted her with a joke that didn't get close to working, she asked you a legitimate question. Outside of not getting your attempt at a joke, I don't understand what the problem is. Dayewalker (talk) 11:14, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- Daedalus: You’re missing the point about Gwen. She is an admin and is not supposed to engage in the very behavior they are supposed to enforce. In her headlong dive volunteering her valued services to Wikipedia over old news involving an exceedingly disruptive editor, she tried to provoke me with a highly inflammatory suggestion [26] in what was a transparent attempt to incite incivility from me. It’s oh-so easy to do on Wikipedia; rather like posting “Why your seeming obsession with pre-pubescent children?” And then she would block me if I responded in the manner she anticipated (or hoped).
And to Dayewalker: No, it was not a legitimate question. Connecting the dots between leprosy (from a week ago) and “thin skinned” and wrapping it up in an exceedingly inflammatory insinuation (‘Oh dear Greg, I detect a fascination with skin now??’) is beyond wikidrama, it’s harassment.
Rlevse: Fine; hands off the admin. I will not respond to her on her talk page. I will not even even leave edit summaries when I delete her posts from my talk page. Greg L (talk) 13:13, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- Daedalus: You’re missing the point about Gwen. She is an admin and is not supposed to engage in the very behavior they are supposed to enforce. In her headlong dive volunteering her valued services to Wikipedia over old news involving an exceedingly disruptive editor, she tried to provoke me with a highly inflammatory suggestion [26] in what was a transparent attempt to incite incivility from me. It’s oh-so easy to do on Wikipedia; rather like posting “Why your seeming obsession with pre-pubescent children?” And then she would block me if I responded in the manner she anticipated (or hoped).
- Greg L, your quote of me ("...obsession...") never happened and is is wholly unsupported by the diff. Please either rm or refactor it, thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:51, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Can… not… resist… Must respond… Gwen, note the single quotes: I’m paraphrasing to highlight intent and effect (now revised to make that clearer). Everyone here has read the provided link and all know exactly what you wrote. Why this fascination with truth now? ;-)Greg L (talk) 17:14, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- In the spirit of putting all this behind us and putting a smile on everyone’s face, I offer you this ONN report on the FDA’s approval of Despondex. I wish you all happy editing. Greg L (talk) 17:24, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Re: Harrison
Checking... –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:10, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- Regarding "I pointed this out above. According to Owens, he was studying at Richmond, and there joined a Quaker society. A little while later, he was sent to Philadelphia to study at UPenn. Owens' chronology is rather clear. If some other source is being used, this should be better explained and reconciled with Owens. As I also pointed out above, the citation for this section is incorrect", do you have access to the source? –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
DYK update
Hello. The bot for updating DYK is broken and isn't updating, and an update is due. None of the regular DYK admins are around. Can you do it? The template should be updated with stuff from Queue 1. Instructions are at Wikipedia:DYK#Process, and at the bottom of the queue. Shubinator (talk) 01:32, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- Looks complicated for a first timer, like it mentions pix in archives but the archives don't have pix. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:43, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- I can do the archive part. Yeah, it isn't the easiest thing for a first timer, but there's gotta be a first time for everything. 7 hours ago there wasn't a DYK admin around and Rootology did the update for his first time, with my help. Shubinator (talk) 01:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
My Day
Thank you for recognizing my efforts. I think you should consider honoring User:Cbl62.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:38, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- Added him to my long list. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:43, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- Many thanks, you're very kind. Tim Vickers (talk) 00:31, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- Ditto to these people; thanks very much, R, you're a great guy. I'm truly honored to receive the 'Pedian of the Day Award from you. Stay well! GlassCobra 14:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
An arbitrator?? Well then…
Rlevse, please explain what you think about this appeal (‘Help! Please arbitrate’) posted on WT:ArbCommittee. In a nutshell, the issue is over how the the date delinking workshop now requires 198 “page downs” to go from top to bottom on my standard 1022-pixel-wide browsing window. It is monstrous. It takes ten page-downs on this laptop computer just to get through the index! Yet, there is a profound silence by the administrators. It’s like the jailers locked the prisoners in the courtyard to fight to the death while the jailers go to the break room to watch the game on TV. We posted a Proposal to end this all and in the section where the arbitrators are invited for comment, there is nothing; just (*sound of crickets chirping*). MOSNUM is locked down all this time. Not good.
What is it going to take to get this dispute resolved? I believe it is time for arbitrators to get arbitrating. If they’re thinking that the warring parties will make peace, perhaps *eventually*. If they think that some editors will sicken of the dispute and lose interest, no doubt some will. But if they think that all editors will lose interest and stop warring, not likely. You will note my “BTW” comment on WT:ArbCommittee. This is a proposal to greatly streamline the process to much more manageable proportions. Greg L (talk) 02:36, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- The community sees a mere 10% of the workload that goes into arbing. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:56, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- OK. Understood. It’s like people calling the receptionist at the fuel cell company where I was an R&D engineer. They’ say “You dumb bastards. You need hydrogen to power fuel cells. Well don’t you know that water is two-thirds hydrogen?” Golly gee, we missed that one; thanks Sherlock. So, you are saying that general public doesn’t understand your job. OK 10% of it is understood. Is the other 90% done in the open where it can be viewed? How much—if any—is done via e-mail? And can you be a bit more expansive on what the future holds for visible movement on the above issue? Greg L (talk) 03:14, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
WikiCup Newsletter
| The WikiCup Newsletter | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
- 23:22, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009
If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 07:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
It might be best to just split it up into a bunch of sub-lists, and make it a featured topic of its own. I'd be happy to help you with that (and with the other stuff like links). –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- You mean to make subs of the bigger sections (a full MOH list would be 73, CNOs 25 or so, etc)? And what do you do with say the MOH section? List none or few on the main list with a link to the sub list? — Rlevse • Talk • 02:59, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- I like the sublists idea. You could do it by date of graduation, by occupation or by alphabetical order (just a few suggestions). Dabomb87 (talk) 03:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- I like this suggestion. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 03:15, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- Also, before you bring lists to FLC, be sure to have their images vetted by an experienced image checker. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- I like the sublists idea. You could do it by date of graduation, by occupation or by alphabetical order (just a few suggestions). Dabomb87 (talk) 03:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
1 ?? OK, but if I do it by topic or whatever, do I leave a master page with links to each subpage? What about topics with only a few people? — Rlevse • Talk • 11:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Other things:
- Make the year and name columns sortable (use {{sortname}} for the names)
- Featured lists no longer start out as "This is a list of..." or something similar. Start out with a general description of the Academy (see List of University of Waterloo people for an example).
- I didn't see anything of the sort on first glance, but watch out for copyvio in the descriptions.
- The lead may need a general expansion, more summary of the list maybe. When did the first class graduate?
- An explanation of the notability criteria in the list would be nice (again, see the Waterloo list).
- 3 ?? don't see what you're talking about. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- I think Dabomb means the list needs an explanation of its inclusion criteria. Surely you wouldn't be able to list everybody. :) –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 14:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- 3 ?? don't see what you're talking about. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Dabomb87 (talk) 03:23, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- Left you a present at User:Rlevse/sandbox. The middle names MUST be fixed before you copy this over and some dabbed articles need a link parameter. I used an external editor to convert this in about two minutes. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 12:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Can you help?
Hi Rlevse. I have again and again problems with user Parishan, who never spends time to reach a consensus in the talk page, which many time results in edit-warring and move-warring. This user often reverts my edits, for which I had given an explanation in the talkpage, while he did not participated in that discussion. Like today, when he reverted my edits in the Nakhichevan article [27] with an edit-summary which gives the impression that he never read my explanations in the talk page (e.g. this or this). The problem for me is not who is right or wrong, but that he first gets what he wants by means of edit-warring, then he gives an explanation for it. Have you time to take a look at this problem or can you advise whom I can ask for help ? -- User:Vacio 12:12, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
I have tried WP:AE but with no result. In any case, thanks for your advice. Regards --Vacio 05:35, 19 February 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.217.248.4 (talk)
- Bureaucratic you are. Human no more. Home I'll be heading. --62.240.86.108 (talk) 20:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello<3
What makes my hands so dirty? --62.240.86.108 (talk) 15:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Nothing. It's a question of me being able to maintain neutrality in future arb cases. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oh my, this language of yours is so weird! Will I ever be able to master it completely? Now you guess what is my native language. I'll give you a hint. --62.240.86.108 (talk) 19:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- What does Rlevse mean? You know R'lyeh? Family you are? --62.240.86.108 (talk) 19:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Scouting FARC
You nom'd it, care to help fix it? — Rlevse • Talk • 03:01, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'd be glad to, but, honestly, I'm a little afraid to because I think you and I have different editing preferences and styles. I truly care about the Scouting articles and want to improve them, but it's not worth getting in edit wars over, which is kind of why I've just let it go. --Eustress (talk) 03:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Honestly, this would have gone off a lot better if you'd discussed it first rather than going straight to FAR. Now we're in real danger of losing our flagship article over what are truly minor issues as the commentary shows. The old real issue was fixing refs and that was done. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
I apologize for not bringing up issues on the talk page first, and I have requested that the FAR be withdrawn or closed. Thanks for your patience; I have tried to improve some problems with the article. Best regards --Eustress (talk) 19:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of List of United States Naval Academy alumni (Astronauts), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: List of United States Naval Academy alumni. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally moving or duplicating content, please be sure you have followed the procedure at Wikipedia:Splitting by acknowledging the duplication of material in edit summary to preserve attribution history.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 11:09, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Re:CNO list
Well, Full stop is generally used in the UK while in the US "period" is commonly used. Here on wikipedia, that's the name of the article to avoid disambiguation with other definitions of "period". --TRUCO 02:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Meant to look at your diff, but my Wii remote came over the wrong button and I rolled you back by mistake. I apologize, and I have reverted myself. →Dyl@n620 12:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Awesome Wikipedian!
I would like to know how you make the "Awesome Wikipedian" award. And do you accept nominations?-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 17:34, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
- I have a long list of candidates, most are people I came across on my own, some are nominated by others, just email me the names you want to nom or post them here. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:57, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
- Rlevse, I would like to thank you for the Awesome Wikipedian award. I signed on today to check the spelling of a word for my grant proposal, and found it on my talk page, it brightened my day :). DarthGriz98 01:15, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot! I would like to nominate User:Dr. Blofeld for being in the top 10 of the list of Wikipedians with most number of edits.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 04:24, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
WikiCup Newsletter
| The WikiCup Newsletter | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Patrick Haseldine
Please could you take a look at this edit where I feel Mr Haseldine is overstepping the mark by dragging a very old talk page discussion over his own POV/COI into the main article space by mentioning the two editors that discovered his socket puppetry in 2007. Note also his recent re-agreement to follow COI guidlines for editing this article, which he has not followed in this case. Thank you. Socrates2008 (Talk) 07:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Regardless of what any agreement says, [putting talk discussion into the article is drama mongering and very inappropriate — Rlevse • Talk • 10:55, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- In which case, I am tagging the "Flaws in theory" section as WP:OR which, as is clear from the above discussion, has been conducted by both Deon Steyn and Socrates2008.---PJHaseldine (talk) 12:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- FYI, I have opened a new case over Mr Haseldine's continued COI. Socrates2008 (Talk) 07:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- In which case, I am tagging the "Flaws in theory" section as WP:OR which, as is clear from the above discussion, has been conducted by both Deon Steyn and Socrates2008.---PJHaseldine (talk) 12:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Coordinators Working Group
As lead coordinator of WP:SCOUT, I imagine that Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Coordinators' working group would be of interest to you. -MBK004 20:16, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Question
Hey Rlevse. :) I've just a quick question regarding Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. Are users who are not listed as an involved party allowed to leave a statement/comment? Best wishes, — Aitias // discussion 20:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yes indeed. Input from the community is encouraged, it gives us a better view of the issues and evidence. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:20, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for the fast reply. :) — Aitias // discussion 20:30, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Re: Periods
Checking... –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Replied. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:29, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:
- Philosophers analyze Wikipedia as a knowledge source
- An automated article monitoring system for WikiProjects
- News and notes: Wikimania, usability, picture contest, milestones
- Wikipedia in the news: Lessons for Brits, patent citations
- Dispatches: Hundredth Featured sound approaches
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Islam
- Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 21:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
RE: Chergles
Thanks for the heads up, I'll look into it. GARDEN 21:47, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Coming under heavy anon vanadlizing. Can you semi-protect please. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 17:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello there. I just sent you an email, so just a heads up in case you miss it. Can you check it out and get back to me when you have a chance? Thanks.
Regards, NuclearWarfare (Talk) 00:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Re: Remark
Just curious. Didn't know who was second -- if it was Purdue, the Air Force Academy, or what. JKBrooks85 (talk) 03:14, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- Not a problem. JKBrooks85 (talk) 06:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- I have left a question regarding the source of this hook at the entry on the DYK page. Please respond there. Thanks, -Mitico (talk, contribs) 16:14, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Request.
May I ask a favor of you? I sent you email. Please check your email. Thanks.--Teamitemm (talk) 18:27, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
|
On February 28, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of United States Naval Academy alumni (Astronauts), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
re: happy your day
Hi, Rlevse. That's very kind of you. Thanks very much! --Rrburke(talk) 14:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much! :) iMatthew // talk // 00:18, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Good work
I'd just like to state how I think you're doing the user base a fine service with your "Wikipedian of the day" messages. Spreading goodwill is something that should really be encouraged here on Wikipedia; the work can sometimes be thankless and stressful and what you've been doing lightens the mood a bit. Great job. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
WikiCup Newsletter
| The WikiCup Newsletter | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:
- Books extension enabled
- News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
- Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Ping!
Ireland naming question
You are receiving this message because you have previously posted at a Ireland naming related discussion. Per Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names#Back-up procedure, a procedure has been developed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration, and the project is now taking statements. Before creating or replying to a statement please consider the statement process, the problems and current statements. GnevinAWB (talk) 18:18, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
our page-moving friend
If you get a chance, can you look at Special:Contributions/Daerlun and possibly Special:Contributions/VIMEE, and maybe nuke a proxy or two? Cheers! J.delanoygabsadds 22:17, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Iberian-Guanche inscriptions
Users and administrators were treated as referees for a paper.Editing (by me at least) was continiously dome.ADedletion Discussion (balanced) was closed together with the page by Fritzpoll and an altogether more complete and edited page "Iberian-Canarian" inscriptions was deleted straight away by Kwamikagani,who sent page to Arbitration Comitee.ation —Preceding unsigned comment added by Virginal6 (talk • contribs) 01:37, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Recall initiated against MBisanz
Brrryce (talk · contribs) has instigated an administrator recall request against MBisanz (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), alleging that his deletion of African Americans in Davenport, Iowa (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore) constituted an abuse of his admin tools. I have been asked to clerk this process, and am posting this notice here pursuant to MBisanz's recall policy. This policy stipulates that if five administrators meeting specified criteria endorse the recall request within 48 hours, MBisanz will either resign adminship or initiate a reconfirmation RFA. As I am posting this notice at a number of locations, I would suggest that all discussion be centralized at User talk:MBisanz/Recall. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:22, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Re: AF Astronauts
I'll get to work on that within 48 hours. You'll notice that I already took care of USMA. Also, thanks for the reminders. -MBK004 19:43, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Happy Rlevse's Day!
 |
Rlevse has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Cheers, |
Harrison
Congrats! –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 04:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Cheers!
|
The Indiana Barnstar | |
| For all your work on bringing William Henry Harrison, a very important article to WikiProject Indiana, through a FAC, I hearby award you, Rlevse, the Indiana Barnstar. Thanks for all you do here. Congratulations! |
For you
|
The WikiChevrons | |
| In recognition of your contributions to two MILHIST Featured Articles and two Featured Lists (with more on the way), it is my pleasure to present you with these WikiChevrons. Keep up the good work! -MBK004 00:31, 8 March 2009 (UTC) |
Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:
- News and notes: Commons, conferences, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Politics, more politics, and more
- Dispatches: 100 Featured sounds milestone
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Christianity
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:35, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
dfrench blocked
I am not using someone else's name, I am using my user name dfrench.
Dana French —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfrench (talk • contribs) 20:46, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Dana L. French article
Apparently the user "Tedickey", who I am having an editing war with, has removed the article "Dana L. French", can you restore this article please.
Please see the User:Tedickey#Dana_L._French discussion. He apparently does not read the articles before he applies edits.
Dana French —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfrench (talk • contribs) 20:49, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I have responded to User:Tedickey#Dana_L._French and the lie he is asserting on his talk page, in case you are interested. Dfrench (talk) 20:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Re: cats
My pleasure. If you're interested, HotCat is extremely simple to use and although I don't use it as much as I do Twinkle and Friendly, I consider it an invaluable piece of my toolbox. -MBK004 01:58, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I've went ahead and placed the template on the Academy page, alumni, Astronauts, CNOs, and Legislators. The see also can be trimmed. -MBK004 00:41, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
Thanks a lot for this, Rlevse. That was completely unexpected. Err... are you sure it wasn't meant for somebody else? :P Chamal talk 11:24, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Re: Orion_P._Howe
Doing... –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 04:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's what I was thinking, as well. It's probably best for the article to report on the conflicting records as it is now. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 04:09, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
- This has a very interesting quote about Howe, though I'm not sure if it's copyrighted. Thoughts? –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 04:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
- That also says he didn't graduate USNA and disappeared, but we know he went to dental school and moved to MO. I think several of the sources find the original Sherman book and use it as a base and don't do further research, leading to all this partial info. That quote would be from the Civil War, I don't see how it could be copyrighted. Also, I've seen several parts of that passage in other refs. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
- This says the same thing, oddly. Of course, if the USNA itself says he graduated, I don't see how it could by otherwise.
- The new info looks good, by the way. I added a bit of that quote last night after further research. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 14:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
- That also says he didn't graduate USNA and disappeared, but we know he went to dental school and moved to MO. I think several of the sources find the original Sherman book and use it as a base and don't do further research, leading to all this partial info. That quote would be from the Civil War, I don't see how it could be copyrighted. Also, I've seen several parts of that passage in other refs. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
My day
Thank you! :) NawlinWiki (talk) 19:56, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Re:Legislators
I don`t see anything wrong with it, why? --Scorpion0422 22:22, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
- Try reading the FLC instructions which say "each nomination will last at least 10 days". Anyway what's the hurry. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 22:25, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
- I assume you're talking about this one. It's only been open 9 days. The minimum is ten. -- Scorpion0422 22:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
←See my response on my talk page in case you missed it. -MBK004 03:05, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Smile!
Xclamation point has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! You do great work managing your crat work, your arbcom work, your article work. Nice job!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Rodeo - possible trouble
Hi Rlevse, I took a five day wikibreak. Bad idea. Sigh. The rodeo article got hit, bad, by an animal rights editor. I reverted it to the last clean version and made a good faith attempt to add in some of the material that was actually kind of useful and interesting, but the last time this happened, Dreadstar wound up blocking a user who got way too emotional. This article will need watchlisting for a while and neutral, cool heads to stay involved. I shall let you decide who to task with the job, but a cool head is needed. Thanks. Montanabw(talk) 05:49, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
- Buttermilk's unexplained deletions and not using the talk page are not good. I restored a full version and warned him/her. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:51, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
- I spent 5 days improving the article only to have it DESTROYED by someone on a Wikibreak. *sigh* you can't win around here. The place belongs to a few. Montana has used my sources inappropriately to validate her OR abd I reverted the article to the version that I found when I approached in the first place. The article is in poor hands under Monatanbw and needs the work of a skilled editor. The work I did had the approval of the only other editor who appeared to be interested. The article as it stands is not fit to wrap garbage in. The article truly needs a skilled editor and Montana simply is not the one to do it. Buttermilk1950 (talk) 12:19, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
- Don't get your knickers in a bunch over this. I don't want anything to do with the article. It's a mess and as long as Montanabw is "sitting" on it, it will never improve. (She wrote somewhere she was the "lead editor". Since when do Wiki articles have "lead editors"?) Ta! Buttermilk1950 (talk) 12:32, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
- You're the one in a bunch over this. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
- You didn't answer my question. Since when do WP articles have "lead editors"? Buttermilk1950 (talk) 13:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
- FYI, I see Buttermilk has now started Rodeo in the United States, which is just "asking the other parent." This is not going to improve the situation. Among other things, I reviewed some of the sources and Buttermilk, you are quoting them word for word without attribution, which is a copyvio. Montanabw(talk) 07:58, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- You didn't answer my question. Since when do WP articles have "lead editors"? Buttermilk1950 (talk) 13:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
- You're the one in a bunch over this. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
- Don't get your knickers in a bunch over this. I don't want anything to do with the article. It's a mess and as long as Montanabw is "sitting" on it, it will never improve. (She wrote somewhere she was the "lead editor". Since when do Wiki articles have "lead editors"?) Ta! Buttermilk1950 (talk) 12:32, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
- I spent 5 days improving the article only to have it DESTROYED by someone on a Wikibreak. *sigh* you can't win around here. The place belongs to a few. Montana has used my sources inappropriately to validate her OR abd I reverted the article to the version that I found when I approached in the first place. The article is in poor hands under Monatanbw and needs the work of a skilled editor. The work I did had the approval of the only other editor who appeared to be interested. The article as it stands is not fit to wrap garbage in. The article truly needs a skilled editor and Montana simply is not the one to do it. Buttermilk1950 (talk) 12:19, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
WikiCup Newsletter
| The WikiCup Newsletter | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009
— 16 March 2009- News and notes: License update, Commons cartoons, films milestone, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Manufactured scandal, Wikipedia assignments, and more
- Dispatches: New FAC and FAR appointments
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:43, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Yep, will do this afternoon. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 13:12, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
My happy day ...
... thanks to you! How nice! Slrubenstein | Talk 18:18, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you
How lovely...thank you...means a lot right now.(olive (talk) 01:48, 18 March 2009 (UTC))
Have you written more articles about minors? (Orion was 14 when he was a drummer boy) If you do, I could use your help in drumming up some interest in my proposed WikiProject/taskforce for articles about children. So far I have not gotten any feedback on it at all. Apparently the people who are interested in writing such articles were unaware of the discussion I was trying to start. - Mgm|(talk) 12:00, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
RfA closure
Sorry in case I stepped on your toes when closing my first RfA closure (that also took a moment to figure out). While a clear case of snow, I amended it the to withdrawn after I was pointed to a marginally preceding withdrawal request by the candidate. Let me know if you have any issues with that. --Tikiwont (talk) 21:43, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
SPI Checkuser
Please could you perform a checkuser on the accounts listed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/SE7. A clerk has endorsed the request. The person who is being accused has IP block exemption. GT5162 (我的对话页) 21:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
IBPE
What kind of timeframe are we looking at here - I generally would have at least an hour a day at school where I could browse wikipedia, and sometimes edit - indeed, if you were to observe my edits between the hours of 8 and 4 on any weekday, you would find entirely useful edits, bar the two pieces of known vandalism.South-East7™Talk/Contribs 01:57, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Lori Padilla
gone ...22:33, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
- I did not write that one, I wrote Orion P. Howe, which is also up for DYK. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:10, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Re: Happy Srikeit's Day
Thanks! I've been inactive for so long that I presumed I was long forgotten here. Nice to know that I'm not completely lost in the annals of wiki-history ;) Really appreciate it. Cheers
--Srikeit 10:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
USMA alumni astronauts
I just noticed that you are duplicating work I had already completed on List of United States Military Academy alumni. Look down the page, complete with references: List_of_United_States_Military_Academy_alumni#Astronauts_2 -MBK004 23:21, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
- I'll split out these to their own list later this evening. While I will take it to FLC, I will most likely need your help, but basing it off of the USNA Astronaut FL will most likely help extremely in that cause. -MBK004 23:31, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
- The sublist has been created. Any help with the extra referencing that will be required for FLC and expanding the lead would be appreciated. -MBK004 05:54, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
- Will look. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
- Also, do you want me to create a sublist of the Astronauts from the Air Force Academy? At 30+ that is probably large enough for a sublist as well. -MBK004 08:08, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
- It's borderline. Right now the whole AF page is only 52K and the Astronaut section is the only thing sublist-able. But I'm not totally done with it yet either. I asked the guy who's helped some there if he thinks more should be added. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
- After I put USMA Astronauts up at FLC, I'm going to split out the Air Force Astronauts. It is long enough and also just to preserve the whole formatting that we are keeping throughout all of these lists. A FT of just the Astronaut alumni is probably not out of the realm of possibility as well. -MBK004 18:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
- It's borderline. Right now the whole AF page is only 52K and the Astronaut section is the only thing sublist-able. But I'm not totally done with it yet either. I asked the guy who's helped some there if he thinks more should be added. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
- The sublist has been created. Any help with the extra referencing that will be required for FLC and expanding the lead would be appreciated. -MBK004 05:54, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
USMA
I created that list in 2005. I don't log on much anymore. Take the baton and run with it. Peace. 72.161.112.198 (talk) 01:11, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
You may wish to consider incorporating: Superintendents of the United States Military Academy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.112.198 (talk) 01:23, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey, can I start my own Today's Wikipedian thing?
I see that Bibliomaniac15 and Promethean have started their own, so may I? →Dyl@n620 03:55, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
FLC
Hiya. I'm sorry I was unable to return to the FLC. I've been away since the beginning of the week, and I expected to have good access to the internet. I don't. I saw that the list was promoted today, though. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 04:53, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
List of United States Military Academy alumni (Superintendents)
Please see talk:List of United States Military Academy alumni (Superintendents)#rename/move. Thanks. --rogerd (talk) 13:23, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Happy Rlevse's Day!
| |
Rlevse has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, |
For a userbox you can put on your userpage, please see User:Dylan620/Today/Happy Me Day!.
Thank you for granting me permission to initiate my own program. :) →Dyl@n620 16:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Image problem
I was just about to put up the nom at FLC for List of United States Military Academy alumni (Astronauts), when I remembered the fiasco about the images from the FLC for List of United States Naval Academy alumni. Upon checking the images, I have found two problems, one of which I replaced, but the other is crucial to all for this FT and needs help. Could you ask those who helped before with this? I am going to hold off on nominating until this gets fixed so there is not an oppose for it. File:West Point graduates' hat toss 2006-05-27.jpg -MBK004 05:46, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Ouch, good catch. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:49, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Found a rock solid one and uploaded it. No one will complain now. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help. The FLC is now live: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of United States Military Academy alumni (astronauts)/archive1 -MBK004 16:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Some issues have come up with the references that you added. Also, there are some issues with the formatting of the appearance which is consistent with some of your FLs which have already passed which may need to be rectified. Help would be appreciated with that. I thought this was going to be easy, now we've got to defend the format which has passed FLC many times already. -MBK004 20:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help. The FLC is now live: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of United States Military Academy alumni (astronauts)/archive1 -MBK004 16:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Found a rock solid one and uploaded it. No one will complain now. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
←Thanks so much for taking care of those issues. I'm going to have a tough next couple of days with school so I will be around only sparingly (I hate last-minute assignments, but they are to be expected when you are taking senior-level classes). -MBK004 02:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- Got your email, just busy. It seems someone didn't even look at the infobox on my userpage. To answer the question since I've already put it out there if one were to examine my userspace: Criminal Justice major and History minor at Sam Houston State University -MBK004 04:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Orion P. Howe
|
|
On March 23, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Orion P. Howe, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Suspected sock of User:Fredrick day
Hello! As you were involved with a checkuser of this editor, I am notifying you of this ANI thread. Respectfully, --A NobodyMy talk 20:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
questions about BettyPatrick
You seem to be involved with the strange "disappearance" of this account. It's being discussed on WR, would you be willing to participate? This is just a courtesy note--many people are curious about what happened. Thanks. Eric Barbour (talk) 21:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
: 23 March 2009
- From the editor: Reviewing books for the Signpost
- Special report: Abuse Filter is enabled
- News and notes: Flaggedrevs, copyright project, fundraising reports, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Alternatives, IWF threats, and more
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Re:PD review
This should go out to FAC regulars also. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- I like the idea. It'll certainly make dealing with images more efficient. –Juliancolton Talk · Review 01:09, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- Excellent suggestion. — ERcheck (talk) 01:50, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- Brilliant idea, I'm busy today but will keep tabs on that discussion over at Commons. Rambo's Revenge (How am I doing?) 11:23, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- Commons link
- commons:Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#PD_review — Rlevse • Talk • 01:16, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Re:USMA Astronauts
Could you please link directly me to his comment? -- Scorpion0422 20:54, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- I'll keep an eye on it. I am rather busy at the moment, and I'll comment on it later. -- Scorpion0422 21:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse, I wasn't expecting this to become such a contentious issue. Anyway, cut to the chase, I would appear to have misunderstood the nature of Sandy's objection so will strike that part. If only I'd known to tell User:Colin that ISO dates were OK when he raised the issue last October with me - I would have saved myself lots of bother! Regards, and happy editing. BencherliteTalk 21:09, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
FLC
I can't be bothered with this. I've been away for five months and the first thing I get back, from a fellow admin, and 'crat, is a bunch of nonsense over the capitalisation of Astronaut. Is this really what Wikipedia is about? If you have a problem with the way FLC is run then state it there but don't get personal with me. I'm just doing the best I can and spotting issues that, perhaps, others haven't. It's never personal, it's never with an agenda, it's simply to make lists as good as possible. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- Rlevse, what's wrong? You two are bureaucrats and excellent editors, don't get caught up in this. This "drama" is as lame as the dates case. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:14, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Just seen your message at the FLC, and thought I'd reassure you that I still have great respect for you as a contributor with words and tools to this project. I sincerely hope that all is well and look forward to seeing you around and about. Warmest wishes, BencherliteTalk 02:02, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you, but no, all is not well. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:06, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- Please take a few days and reconsider. If there are other issues email is your friend. Your contributions are extremely appreciated, especially within WP:MILHIST, we have so few Featured Lists that the few so far that you have brought through the process have greatly expanded our numbers. Also, without your help there won't be a Featured Topic for these. -MBK004 02:09, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Dong
You've got mail. --Dweller (talk) 17:31, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Edit summary
Hello, Rlevse, can you clarify your edit summary [28] to prevent any confusion? Thanks.--Caspian blue 23:57, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
R very sick
I am R's wife. He very very sick and ask me to let people know on his talk page. I am very worried about him. — JoJo • Talk • 02:02, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- I am very sorry to hear that and I hope he gets well quickly. - jc37 02:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- We all hope he gets better very soon, send him to a doctor, and if he resists, drag him! :) Ariel♥Gold 02:48, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- R - and the rest of your family - are in my thoughts. I have sent you an email, JoJo. I hope he is better soon. Best, Risker (talk) 02:54, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to hear that—may he have a speedy recovery. –Juliancolton Talk · Review 03:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, I hope he gets better soon too.--Caspian blue 03:11, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- Most troubling. I wish you a speedy recovery. Steve Crossin Talk/24 03:17, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hope he gets better soon. bibliomaniac15 03:32, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- Here's hoping for a speedy recovery. Get well soon R, Dabomb87 (talk) 04:10, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- Echoing what's been said above. Hope you get well very soon, best regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:13, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- +Support. Best wishes to both. Jack Merridew 06:21, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- Here's hoping he will be well soon. Best wishes, –Black Falcon (Talk) 07:45, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- And me too. Best wishes for a speedy recovery. BencherliteTalk 08:33, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- Please pass on my best wishes. The last time we interacted was unfortunate, I hope he makes a speedy recovery. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- My thoughts are with you both. I hope R gets well soon, Rambo's Revenge (How am I doing?) 10:45, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Wishing you a speedy recovery. FloNight♥♥♥ 11:17, 27 March 2009 (UTC) - Rlevse, I hope you feel better soon and can get back to editing. Take care, Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 11:20, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- Wishing you all the best, Rlevse. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 11:33, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
Oh. Rlevse, I wish you better; you're greatly valued as a personality, not just for your efforts round here. That's a rarity for a faceless Wikipedia ID. JoJo, my thoughts are with you too. As I discovered when I was very unwell a few months ago, it can sometimes be easier to be the sick person than the helpless-feeling partner. Very best wishes to you both and I look forward to hearing good news. --Dweller (talk) 12:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Hope you are a little better today, and will be completely well very soon. All very Best wishes to you and JoJo. (olive (talk) 16:31, 27 March 2009 (UTC))
Get well soon.--Tznkai (talk) 16:33, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Hope you're feeling better soon, R. Best wishes, Majorly talk 16:39, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm very sorry to hear this. I hope you get well soon. Take it easy. PeterSymonds (talk) 16:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I hope all will be fine with you buddy. Take care, both of you. --Kanonkas : Talk 17:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you so much all you guys, but R got worse. I very upset, it hard on me. But doctor say he should be okay in maybe 4 days. I read these talks and emails you guys send to him, it makes him happy. — JoJo • Talk • 22:54, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- 4 days? Excellent news. You make sure you both take care and get some rest. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 23:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you so much all you guys, but R got worse. I very upset, it hard on me. But doctor say he should be okay in maybe 4 days. I read these talks and emails you guys send to him, it makes him happy. — JoJo • Talk • 22:54, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Even if he will get better in 4 days, it still sucks that he's sick at all (especially if he's as sick as JoJo claims him to be). So...
→Dyl@n620 has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!
Spread the bubbliness of bubble teas by adding {{subst:bubble tea}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
→Dyl@n620 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
→Dyl@n620 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. 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. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
JoJo and Rlevse, take these as a token of my sympathy for you two. I wish you both the best of luck. :) →Dyl@n620 23:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- R, as my mentor here at Wikipedia, you are very much in my thoughts and prayers for a speedy recovery. My best wishes to the family, too. JGHowes talk 23:45, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- Best wishes for your recovery. Get well soon and hopefully we'll see you back on the front lines shortly :) Wizardman 23:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry to hear about your illness. Best wishes for a speedy recovery. Carcharoth (talk) 00:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Get well soon, Rlevse. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 01:14, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Dear Rlevse, I am also saddened to read this news and as with your many colleagues above I also wish you a speedy recovery as well. The best to you and your family! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 02:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Best wishes and get well soon from me. Acalamari 16:56, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- My best wishes to both of you. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:19, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- I'm so sorry to hear you're not doing well! I hope you feel better as soon as possible, and my thoughts are with you both. (Look down). iMatthew // talk // 20:52, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- My best wishes to you; I hope you recover quickly. NuclearWarfare (Talk) 21:02, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- Please get well soon; we need you! — Jake Wartenberg 23:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- I hope you are feeling better very soon. Sorry, I just found out. Synergy 23:51, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- Best wishes for a speedy recovery. Justin talk 23:54, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- Christ, man, best of luck on a quick recovery. We should really just shut down until you get back. :( — neuro(talk)(review) 23:58, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- Very sorry to hear this. Get better soon. Let us know if there's anything we can do. //roux 00:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to see that you're ill, Rlevse. You have my best wishes for a speedy recovery. Regards, —Anonymous DissidentTalk 00:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm back
Well, I'm mostly recovered now and wish to truly thank every single person who has posted on my talk page or emailed me about this. JoJo kept me informed. The diagnosis was "some bug". It was sort of like the flu but wasn't the flu. All the expressions of concern and support really meant a lot to me. In retrospect, I think this "forced wikibreak" did me a lot of good wiki-wise as I had reached wiki burn out. After returning from international travel in late March 2008, I edited wiki every day from Mar 30, 2008 to Mar 26, 2009 (except for Apr 05 2008)--almost a solid year. This bug apparently hit me about 18 hours before my last edit on Mar 26, but now I'm ready to return to editing. Thanks again everyone, I truly do appreciate it. Let me know if I can ever help any of you. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:07, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Great news. I am very glad it was just a nasty bug and not something nastier, as I was worrying. Welcome back but be sure to take some time to regain your strength! --Slp1 (talk) 22:11, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Glad you're feeling better. :) Steve Crossin Talk/24 22:12, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hurrah! :D So, how did you like that snack served with a smile? :) →Dyl@n620 22:15, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Good to hear that!! --Caspian blue 22:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Yay! After seeing your message on TRM's talk page, let me be the first to say that your self-imposed ban from FLC would be not be beneficial to Wikipedia. We all have our moments; I know that when I had a similar bug a month ago I was not in the best of moods. Please return. Thanks for all your work and dedication to Wiki. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:32, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thank god! :D iMatthew // talk // 22:36, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Phew! I worried this was something much more sinister. Good to have you back, mate. :) — neuro(talk)(review) 22:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- See TRM's talk page; I clearly fail all versions of WP:FL? through my inability to use even basic, let alone "professional", standards of writing... Apologies! BencherliteTalk 22:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Great to see you're doing better, Rlevse. Master&Expert (Talk) 03:08, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thank god! :D iMatthew // talk // 22:36, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Yay! After seeing your message on TRM's talk page, let me be the first to say that your self-imposed ban from FLC would be not be beneficial to Wikipedia. We all have our moments; I know that when I had a similar bug a month ago I was not in the best of moods. Please return. Thanks for all your work and dedication to Wiki. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:32, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Good to hear that!! --Caspian blue 22:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hurrah! :D So, how did you like that snack served with a smile? :) →Dyl@n620 22:15, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Glad you're feeling better. :) Steve Crossin Talk/24 22:12, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Good news : ) - jc37 04:15, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- Good for you! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 04:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- Please to see this — and right at '4 days'. Everyday for a year? Please take it a little easy once in a while, ok? Wiki-breaks, best when of one's own volition, are good for the wiki-soul. JoJo, best to you, too; I expect this was tough all around. Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:42, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- No more bugs for you! ;) Happy to hear you're better. –Black Falcon (Talk) 17:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Happy Rlevse/Archive 13's Day!
| |
User:Rlevse/Archive 13 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, A record of your Day will always be kept here. |
Pong
I have replied. KnightLago (talk) 22:54, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for making me smile
WOW - you really made my day! Thanks for the neat gift! God bless you and your family! NancyHeise talk 00:18, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
PS, I was going to put it on my awards page but it is too special so I put it right up front with my userboxes and my articles. Thanks again, that was so nice! NancyHeise talk 00:31, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Rollback abuse?
Is this rollback abuse? As far as I know, the rollback feature should be used only for reverting vandalism, not legitimate edits (unless an edit summary is provided) and my edit did not constitute vandalism. -- IRP ☎ 02:59, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- You are correct, but I'm curious about why you changed it in the first place. Post to the person's talk page and ask he why he used rollback. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- I have added an unsolicited explanation on IRP's talk page. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:47, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- No abuse. When somebody monkeys with a sockpuppet tag, I will normally roll them back. IRP, what pot are you stirring with all these questions about rollback? [29] Jehochman Talk 16:15, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Welcome back
Hi Rlevse and welcome back. I'm glad to hear that you're feeling better, and thanks for your message. I look forward to seeing you back to your best at FLC, it's a worse place without you. And our "discussion"? Ancient history. Onwards and upwards, I'm more than pleased to see you back around these parts. Take it easy. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:34, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:58, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- Oy, you slacker! Get back to work! {{:)|devil}} --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 10:30, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- Just to make my life a little easier (I have limited time right this moment), could you list out all the lists you would like me to review (or re-review) in order of importance to you? I'll get onto them as soon as I can. Best wishes. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:39, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- OK, I've reviewed the FLC as tightly as I can. I think a few of the comments (the Latin for instance) can be applied to the other FLs you've pointed me at. Review/respond to my comments, apply those you feel need to be applied to the other four FLs, and give me a shout for a final look over them all. And then, let me know when you head to FT. Deal? Deal. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:18, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- Just to make my life a little easier (I have limited time right this moment), could you list out all the lists you would like me to review (or re-review) in order of importance to you? I'll get onto them as soon as I can. Best wishes. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:39, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- Oy, you slacker! Get back to work! {{:)|devil}} --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 10:30, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I think we've hammered out a good revised Featured List criteria here. If this passes, there will be quite a few FLs that could soon be delisted just because of 3b. With that in mind, I'd like to get comments and opinions from all FLC regulars and everyone else who has participated in the discussion before it's implemented. Thanks, Scorpion0422 17:47, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Unblock request of Bdb0005
Hello Rlevse. Bdb0005 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, Sandstein 18:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
: 30 March 2009
- From the editor: Follow the Signpost with RSS and Twitter
- Special report: Community weighs license update
- News and notes: End of Encarta, flagged revisions poll, new image donation, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Censorship, social media in schools, and more
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:29, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
WikiCup Newsletter
| The WikiCup Newsletter | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
- 21:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Delivered for the WikiCup by GARDEN at 21:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC). Queries to my talk.