Yfever

Welcome!

Hello, Yfever, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Welcome

Hi Yfever, I saw your new article, Cameron Lindsay, and yes, you are doing it right. You didn't get everything right (there are so many things to get right, it would be utterly impossible to get everything right). I did some scaffolding around the article, but it would be great if you could find some references for it, everything on Wikipedia should be verifiable. We currently have a policy that all biographies on living people should contain at least one, and though I'm sure there are some to be found, I still tagged the article, identifying it as a biography currently without sources. One you put at least one reference to the article, just remove that tag. You can find some information on how to format and place references at WP:CITE, but don't swear it. It's far more important that you find the sources and get them into the article than to format them properly. I hope you like Wikipedia, and stick around! best, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:44, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Yfever (talk) 04:52, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

NZ profiles

Hi; rather than delete NZ football profiles from pages that still refer to the old nzsoccer site as you did to the Glen Moss article, could you instead find their current one at the new NZFootball site here. Thanks. Also, Cameron Lindsey is borderline for notability under subject specific notability guidelines as he has not actually played for Phoenix yet. I have tagged for now, but unless he plays in the next few weeks he is likely to be nominated for deletion. It wouldn't hurt to set about finding sources to back up notability. ps, I have added a welcome template up top which gives a few quick links you may want to get to as a relative newcomer. Cheers --ClubOranje^T 06:34, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! All advice much appreciated. Isn't Cameron an official member of the squad? I just assumed that anyone who made the squad qualified for a page, since everyone else, I think, has one. Yfever (talk) 09:07, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Yep, he is an official member of the squad, but hasn't played yet, which is why I pointed you at Wikipedia:NFOOTBALL#Association_football, which is the result of consensus after multiple discussions at WT:NSPORTS and WT:FOOTBALL. (search the archives if you are particularly interested in the discussions). WP:FOOTBALL is a wikiproject which you may like to join if interested in football; it is a good place to get help on football related subjects. BTW, I responded to your other query at my talk page. --ClubOranje^T 08:11, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

merge discussion

I started a merge discussion for an article you created, see Talk:James_R._Flynn#merge_Race.2C_IQ_and_Jensen_here. --Enric Naval (talk) 11:12, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

AfD/Merges, R/I arbitration, discretionary sanctions

Based on your responses in the merge/AfD discussions, it appears that you may not be aware that this topic area has been a morass for quite some time, and went to arbitration last year. This topic area has been plagued by single purpose editors coming here to present their agenda. If you're unaware of this, I suggest you review WP:ARBR&I. Of particular note is the fact that these article are subject to higher scrutiny, and discretionary sanctions can be applied for editing behavior which might go unnoticed in less controversial subject areas. This section discusses the discretionary sanctions which apply to this topic area. aprock (talk) 20:50, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Wow! That is a lot of stuff! Thanks for pointing it out, I think. ;-) Yfever (talk) 02:30, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Added an extra note for you

Hello, Yfever. You have new messages at FT2's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 21:02, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement

I have filed an enforcement request against you here Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Yfever asking that a notification of the arbitration decisions and sanctions imposed on editors in these involved articles is given to you by an administrator. Professor marginalia (talk) 06:01, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?

An editor has asked for a deletion review of How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. aprock (talk) 23:25, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I will definately participate. Yfever (talk) 11:18, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Accounts

This is not your first account. What is your earlier account? Hipocrite (talk) 13:06, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I have used Wikipedia for many years but never registered before. Does just using create an "account"? If so, I don't know how I would identify mine. Is there some tool for doing so? Yfever (talk) 11:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Race & Intelligence Arbitration Enforcement

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to Race and intelligence. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read in the Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and intelligence#Final decision section of the decision page. Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page.

--WGFinley (talk) 18:35, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I think. I like to think that I am behaving correctly. Have I done anything wrong? Please let me know. Yfever (talk) 11:17, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

When a case is closed on AE you can't continue to comment on it (as it states), I've removed your additional comments. No, you are not being sanctioned at this time, if you continue tendentious editing as listed in the report, you could be. Read the decision, read how editors in this topic area need to behave and use that information going forward. Violating it could lead to sanctions in the form of bans from the topic or blocks from editing. --WGFinley (talk) 15:05, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Page number check

I've requested the page number be provided for the citation you added here.[1] I tried to find it myself first but couldn't. Thanks. Professor marginalia (talk) 21:20, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Notification

I see nobody's notified you that you're being discussed in an arbitration amendment. It's common courtesy to notify editors about this, so I'm notifying you now. The amendment thread is here if you want to defend yourself from the accusations there. -Ferahgo the Assassin (talk) 01:43, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Cameron Lindsay for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cameron Lindsay is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cameron Lindsay until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:31, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. aprock (talk) 18:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Yfever. You have new messages at Mark Arsten's talk page.
Message added 16:32, 18 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mark Arsten (talk) 16:32, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

The thirty years paper

Hello Yfever. I noticed a few weeks ago there was an article about Jensen and Rushton's thirty years paper written by you, and I see it's deleted now. I think I understand why it was deleted: Wikipedia usually covers academic papers only if they're very famous, and this one must not quite qualify.

I wanted to make a suggestion, that you can take or leave as you choose. Even though the thirty years paper didn't merit its own article, I think there are other works by Arthur Jensen that probably deserve articles but don't have them. Jensen's book Bias in Mental Testing has almost 2,000 citations in Google scholar, but there seems to be no article about it here.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=835677067402023693&as_sdt=5,33&sciodt=0,33&hl=en

Jensen's book The g Factor does have its own article, but it's only one sentence long.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_g_Factor:_The_Science_of_Mental_Ability_(book)

If you are interested in writing articles about Jensen's papers or books, I think it could benefit the encyclopedia if you were to write/expand either of these articles. I could help with it, after I figure out how to use the tools here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeromus1 (talk • contribs) 01:19, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

SPI

I've opened a sock investigation involving you here. Professor marginalia (talk) 02:35, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Been away awhile. Sorry! Otherwise, I would have responded. I am no one's sock. Yfever (talk) 10:57, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

And yet you edited logged out from California[2] and not from from anywhere remotely near Wellington in New Zealand. Not very convincing. Mathsci (talk) 15:07, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Do you have an animus against California? Are socks more likely to be in California? I am confused. Yfever (talk) 15:25, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Zeromus1 (talk · contribs · logs · block log) is the main problem at the moment. A sockpuppet of a site-banned user who claimed to know you off-wiki as mentioned in the SPI report. Mathsci (talk) 15:59, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. aprock (talk) 04:34, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Your request for undeletion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that a response has been made at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion regarding a submission you made. The thread is Articles for creation/Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability. JohnCD (talk) 10:19, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Yfever. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Elimination of fraternities at Williams College

Per your helpdesk request, I've restored it and put it in the draft namespace Draft:Elimination of fraternities at Williams College. It needs a lot of work. It can't have all those pdfs linked in the body - though some of them can be cited as sources. When you think it's ready put {{subst:submit}} on it to send it through WP:AFC. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:51, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Yfever. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Personality and weeniness

You are a weenie, and should be aware of this. Weenie neener neenie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.68.174 (talk) 06:37, 22 August 2020 (UTC)