Misplaced Pages

User talk:SarekOfVulcan: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:31, 17 November 2010 editMehdioa (talk | contribs)96 edits →Help← Previous edit Latest revision as of 17:11, 27 December 2024 edit undoSarekOfVulcan (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators51,687 edits rm signposts 
Line 1: Line 1:
] ]
]
'''''Note:''' if I've made a clearly bad block, such as something that appears to be vandalism at first glance but actually has a good explanation, please unblock without waiting for me to come back online. If it's something less clear, please at least get consensus on AN/I first. Thanks.''
{{troutme}}
{{archive box|auto=yes}} {{archive box|auto=yes}}
<center> <center>
{| id="toc" style="margin: 0 2em 0 2em;" {| id="toc" style="margin: 0 2em 0 2em;"
! align="left" style="background:#ccccff" width="100%" | Please add new comments in . Thanks. ] ! align="left" style="background:#ccccff" width="100%" | Please add new comments in . Thanks.
|} |}
{{User:TParis/RfX_Report}}
</center> </center>

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived.
If further archiving is needed, see ].


{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{atnhead}} |archiveheader = {{atnhead}}
|maxarchivesize = 64K |maxarchivesize = 128K
|counter = 27 |counter = 26
|minthreadsleft = 10 |minthreadsleft = 10
|algo = old(7d) |algo = old(7d)
Line 19: Line 20:
}} }}


== Triton and others ==


I see that you have declined Triton's unblock review and have locked Triton's talk page. Where was the discussion authorizing you to remove Triton's access to the user talk page? Considering your prior involvement in this area, I would recommend that you return Triton's access to the talk page.


== Wendy Carlos Reversion ==
You have made a number of blocks recently (LemonBoy, GiacomoReturned, Malleus) that were questionable and overturned quickly. Factocop possibly fits in there, too. You also have some questionable involvement with other blocks (TreasuryTag comes to mind), and Triton). Every admin makes a questionable decision once in a while, but you have quite a few in a short time. What's going on? ] (]) 13:03, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
:His prior unblock appeal was taken to the community, and after two days worth of discussion, was determined by an uninvolved admin with experience in ethnic conflicts to have failed. He then filed another unblock request that boiled down to "THE IRISH ARE OUT TO GET ME!" <s>You're goddamned right I locked his talk page.</s> He had been clearly told that it was a community decision, and that consensus would allow him to appeal in 3 months, but he nevertheless decided to continue posting huge walls of text claiming that it was everyone else's fault. For this reason, I felt that he was abusing the unblock process, and removed his talkpage access. --] (]) 13:09, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
:: And I disagree with your removal of Triton's talk page access. What about the other controversial administrative actions you have performed recently? ] (]) 13:27, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
::: <s>I don't know. What about them?</s> That's far too general a question. If you have specific issues on each action you'd like me to address, I'd be happy to. It might be better to do that at ] or a similar venue, to get a wider variety of opinion. --] (]) 13:37, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
:::: I was hoping you would show some understanding of the concern, which is not specific to each action, but to the overall pattern. Do you have any comment, here? ] (]) 02:54, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
::::: {{tps}} Both LemonMonday and Factocop were correct blocks overall (without looking at the others). Statistically speaking, when two of the four in your supposed "pattern" do not match, your generalization falls apart. (]<span style="border:1px solid black;">'''&nbsp;]&nbsp;'''</span>]) 09:27, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::: I did say "Factocop possibly fits in here", but LemonMonday's block was disputed and reversed. See also ]. I would appreciate a response from SarekOfVulcan. ] (]) 12:33, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
::::::: I told you I'd be happy to comment on any specific issues. "Your blocks suck" is not nearly specific enough. --] (]) 20:35, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::::: You've made a number of bad blocks recently, and bad interactions with other blocks. Do you have any explanation or comment? ] (]) 23:57, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


Hi SarekOfVulcan
I see you have not responded to this, yet. I do not see any discussion about removing Triton's talk page access. That's a rather serious step, and I don't think it's justified. First, will you, or won't you, reverse that action and restore Triton's talk page access? Second, will you, or won't you, provide any explanation for your series of questionable blocks? ] (]) 13:08, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
You reverted my research on Wendy Carlos based on ancestry.com and archives.com, however these websites are based on information from official US documents, so what's the issue? ] (]) 21:44, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
: The removal of TR's talkpage access in some ways is quite similar to ''my'' removal of Factocop's - acting as ] and ] while trying to get unblocked is an abuse of the process. TR's continued insistence that he was unable to discuss himself on ANI was pure unadulterated BS, Factocop's insistence that his 1RR block was invalid but even still not addressing the reasons for what was his ''current'' block are perfect disruption examples. Let's just emphasize the "I" in ] (]<span style="border:1px solid black;">'''&nbsp;]&nbsp;'''</span>]) 13:16, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
::Gimmetoo in fairness these are really strange questions coming from an admin (since Gimeetoo is an alt account of Gimmetrow). Have you seen what the position with Factocop turned out to be? And WRT to TR's talk page removals do you, as ''an admin'', stand over the TR's use of the talk space in clear violation of ], ] and ]? I'm asking because you suggest TR doesn't deserve his talk page disabled this inferring that his conduct on WP might be acceptable to you - am I wrong in this supposition?--] <sup>]</sup> 20:37, 12 November 2010 (UTC)


== Invitation to participate in a research ==
::: They are strange questions, especially as they are not really specific questions. They are, in the main, statements followed by queries of the form "what's going on?", "do you have any comment" etc.&nbsp;] 22:19, 12 November 2010 (UTC)


Hello,
== about your templating ==


The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this ''''''.
Please consider ] "Don't template the regulars". An excerpt:


You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
<blockquote>
These templates serve to explain the various rules to new editors. When novice editors break rules, it is quite possible (if we assume good faith, which we must) that they are unaware of it, and educating them is helpful. On the other hand, most editors who have been around for a while are aware of these rules. If you believe that they have broken (or are about to break) one, it is frequently the result of some disagreement over the interpretation of the rule, or temporarily heated tempers. In such situations, sticking to "did you know we had a rule against this" mentality tends to be counterproductive in resolving the issue, as it can be construed as being patronising and uncivil.
</blockquote>


The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ] .
About the Talk page formatting issues at ], please note that i opened a ] and have tried to discuss it there. I notice you have not, with your choosing to revert and communicate only by edit summaries. I appreciate that Blueboar had the decency to reply in the Talk page formatting section, and, by an edit further above, seems to accept the normal formatting that my edits restored. I don't happen to think your contributions in this have been helpful so far, and I do find your templating me as the last sentence in the quote above suggests. --] (]) 02:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC)


Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
: Have you read ]?? (]<span style="border:1px solid black;">'''&nbsp;]&nbsp;'''</span>]) 13:18, 12 November 2010 (UTC)


Kind Regards,
== Thanks ==


]
For the block. I'm in class and am supposed to be pretending to take notes, so you've made my day easier. ] (]) 15:39, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
:My pleasure. Wonder how long before he cycles his IP and starts again... --] (]) 15:40, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
::Dunno. Makes me reconsider applying for a banhammer, though (probably shouldn't). ] (]) 15:42, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
:::Well, he figured out how to reset his modem, and continues to evade his block by reinserting his ]-y crap. ]? ] (]) 17:42, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
::::Thanks. ] (]) 17:55, 12 November 2010 (UTC)


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 19:21, 23 October 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
== Mick MacNee ==
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins&oldid=27650221 -->


== Administrators' newsletter – November 2024 ==
I thought you would find this of interest . ] 18:38, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


] from the past month (October 2024).
== McCain ==


]
You just restored known forgeries, and you're complaining at Rd for misapplying BLPN? *boggle* --] (]) 21:29, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
:Yes , well the content has been there for some long time, and after looking at it, I was supporting the stable content and attempting to get the two users back to discussion. Forgeries, is cited forgeries, discussion was my objective, there is nothing boggle about that, it is wiki way. ] (]) 21:34, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


] '''Administrator changes'''
== Blanked it, gone ==
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}


] '''CheckUser changes'''
. FYI. Seems to be a common occurrence over there. Cheers, -- ''']''' (]) 21:35, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
:] ]
:Perhaps if you look up instead of at your own navel you will see where it is gone. ] (]) 21:36, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
::I see, gone from your talk page. ;) -- ''']''' (]) 21:37, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
:::Best is if you keep your eyes on your navel and away from my talkpage, you are not involved in this issue at all. ] (]) 21:40, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
::::O2RR likes a pretty talk page. Topics I've raised on his talk page have been moved to mine in exactly the same way. ] (]) 21:42, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::Yes, {{user|Nomoskedasticity}}, I have noticed this disturbing behavior pattern, as well. -- ''']''' (]) 21:44, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
::::::That is correct, I shift shit from my talkpage on sight, if you wanna talk about it, host it on your talkpage , is my position. ] (]) 21:45, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


] '''Oversighter changes'''
== You really do walk into these things, don't you... ==
:] ]


] '''Guideline and policy news'''
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. <font color="#A20846">╟─]]►]─╢</font> 08:34, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
* Following a ], the ] proposal that went for a trial to refine the ] (RfA) process has been discontinued.
* Following a ], ] is adopted as a policy.


] '''Technical news'''
== User talk:Ksaine ==
* Mass deletions done with the ] tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. {{phab|T366068}}


] '''Arbitration'''
I added some advice to ] without seeing you'd just warned for (essentially) the same thing. The "24 hours and 10 minutes" thing is probably something he needs to be aware of. However, feel free to remove my additional advice if you feel that we're bombarding him with too much information all at once. --] (]) 00:08, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
* {{noping|RoySmith}}, {{noping|Barkeep49}} and {{noping|Cyberpower678}} have been appointed to the ] for the ]. {{noping|ThadeusOfNazereth}} and {{noping|Dr vulpes}} are reserve commissioners.
:I don't think it's excessive, but I'd rather have my warning pulled than yours, since it's clearer on the no-gaming aspect of things. --] (]) 00:20, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
* Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate from 3 November 2024 until 12 November 2024 to stand in the ].
* The Arbitration Committee is ] for roles such as clerks, access to the COI queue, checkuser, and oversight.
] '''Miscellaneous'''
* An ] is happening in November 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{tl|Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. ]


----
== ''The Signpost'': 15 November 2010 ==
{{center|{{flatlist|
* ]
* ]
* ]
}}}}
<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 10:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1254686817 -->


== Revert question ==
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2010-11-15}}
</div><!--Volume 6, Issue 46-->
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''']''' &middot; ] &middot; ] &middot; ] (]) 01:20, 16 November 2010 (UTC)</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0087 -->


Hi, I was wondering if you go into a little more detail on why you reverted my edits on changing to outgoing rather than incumbent. The reason why I put those in is because a new president and vice president has just been elected so since they are leaving office soon, putting them as a lame duck seems to make the most sense. I'd be willing to hear your arguments on keeping the incumbent on both the president and VP pages. I'm not sure if there was a time that we used the term outgoing for politicians leaving office, but it just doesn't make sense to keep incumbent there. ] (]) 16:10, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
== Blocking before talking ==


:But they are the incumbents. We don't need any further editorializing. Leave that to the headline writers. --] 16:12, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Well, here I go for the 32495865347893420635th time (give or take), although I've grown tired of these energy-draining moments.


== Books & Bytes – Issue 65 ==
During my editing period here, I've encountered numerous editors who do nothing but "assign missions" to other editors, removing everything they can. I call them compulsive deletionists. They don't seem to care (I'm well past ] at this point, my apologies) about anything but "obeying rules" &ndash; only to feel good about themselves being valid Misplaced Pages members, but without realizing the very essence of those same rules and exceptions to such, hence the quotation marks. Sarujo could have easily found the sources himself, just as I just have. He could also listen to reason and understand that although ] is written about, well, film plots, it could apply in a different paragraph, provided '''a part of the plot is discussed''', and in this case, Cartman calls it "the LeBron James technique" and proceeds to a perfect parody of the commercial, including verbatim quotes. The reason Sarujo is doing what he does is that he, like many other South Park/Family Guy etc. regular patrollers, thinks mentioning the numerous cultural references and parodies (from which these kinds of shows derive much of their humor and general content) is "trivial" and "unnecessary". This is where the exhaustion technique comes in handy: make other editors run for sources, dismiss as many as you can by questioning their reliability, thus making the editors run and find other sources, and eventually dismiss the whole section for being "unencyclopedic". THIS IS THE AIDS THAT IS KILLING WIKIPEDIA. You can call it a personal attack, but I'm just blowing off steam because I'm pissed off and I'd like to see some change around here. This is why I refused to be the one who gives up on his opinion and starts "begging" the others for permission on the discussion board. I knew that by posting the {{tlc|3RR}} template on his talk page I'd encourage him to be the one who starts the discussion thread, to which I'm not generally opposed, but in such cases it's being extensively abused to drain energy out of editors that feel that cultural references and parodies constitute a valid and important part of an episode and should be listed as such, and when it's too obvious shouldn't be removed on sight, especially when such removals are the lion's share of a specific editor's contributions. At that point, instead of telling me that in your opinion I was wrong and would be blocked if continued to engage in such behavior (rest assured I'd reason with you instead of "bashing my head against the wall"), you abruptly blocked me. Please tell me why, hopefully after reading my entire reply. ] (]) 06:22, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
:I know it's frustrating, but edit warring is never the answer. There are other forms of dispute resolution -- for example, you could open an ] on his behavior, if you think it's spread over a large enough range of articles that discussion on any single one would not solve the problem. The reason I didn't warn you is that you had already warned him about 3RR, so you were aware of the rule, and that you have been warned (and blocked) before for engaging in edit warring. 3RR is a hard-and-fast limit, not an entitlement. I'd suggest you place yourself under a one-revert rule, to make sure you don't run up against it again. --] (]) 12:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr">
== hullaballoo and dekki, edit war on pornographic articles ==
<div style="font-size: 1.5em; margin: 0 100px;">
]</div>
<div style="line-height: 1.2;">
<span style="font-size: 2em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif">'''The Misplaced Pages Library''': ''Books & Bytes''</span><br />
Issue 65, September – October 2024
</div>
<div style="margin-top: 1.5em; border: 3px solid #ae8c55; border-radius: .5em; padding: 1em 1.5em; font-size: 1.2em;">
* Hindu Tamil Thisai joins The Misplaced Pages Library
* Frankfurt Book Fair 2024 report
* Tech tip: Mass downloads
<big>''']'''</big>
</div>
</div>
<small>Sent by ] on behalf of The Misplaced Pages Library team --12:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
<!-- Message sent by User:Samwalton9 (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=The_Wikipedia_Library/Newsletter/Recipients&oldid=27730094 -->


== Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research ==
yesterday hullaballoo and dekki edit warred on various article about japanese models, i reluctantly* stepped in and reverted HW once with a stern warning and spoke to him via my talk page, i haven't taken it further as its a day old but the edit war was quite wide spread, do we drag HW to ANI or do we wait to see if the war flares up again, since both sides don't want to surrender. *(i don't want to go back to those 'ahem' articles again as there em a bit dirty x_X) --] (]) 15:17, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


Hello,
== NFCC violation at ] ==


I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ].
We went through this already, back in July. As admin ] pointed out then, ''"But he was not mistaken. Once he challenged the material, it needed to be removed until there was consensus to readd, especially since it's a blatantly obvious NFCC#1 violation. His removal makes it clear that there was not a consensus to restore the material. Anyone could have taken the material to FFD. If somehow a consensus was achieved that this was one of the vanishingly rare exceptions to the general agreement that copyrighted pictures cannot be used to illustrate BLPs, it could be restored. Until that agreement is reached, the image can't be in the article. It was the restoration that was disruptive, not the removal.—Kww(talk) 17:52, 29 July 2010 (UTC)'' A test case was also run at FFD with a clear and strong consensus for deletion. There was lengthy discussion on the policy talk, without any resulting change in the policy language or enforcement practices. Over the last few months, I've reviewed thousands of nonfree images, removing several hundred using virtually identical edit summaries and rationales, and the only significant controversy has come from a small group of users insisting on special treatment for articles about Japanese porn, and who press the same arguments repeatedly despite community rejection. We don't need to rehash a settled issue every time an old NFCC violation turns up. ] (]) 20:01, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

:Then challenge the fair-use criteria on the image, not on the article.--] (]) 20:02, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Take the survey ''''''.
::That's not the process called for by NFCC policy, nor is it consistent with the established consensus. ] (]) 20:38, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

::Note on this, Sarek. WP's tolerance for HW's constant, non-stop edit-warring has caused me to stop contributing here. The "edit-wars" seen above were just demonstrations of HW's standard behavior for the benefit of ]. The real edit-wars were in the past. About the image, frankly, after a change in "policy" a few years ago, I've accepted their removed without complaint. This image removal was part of a mass-removal of sourced content over numerous articles I've worked on. Purely coincidentally, the removal was going on while I was criticizing HW at the RfC... ] (]) 20:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Kind Regards,
:::The image has a presumably-valid fair-use criteria for that article, HW. Therefore, it is usable on that article. If you think the fair-use criteria is invalid, the image page is the place to do it. --] (]) 20:49, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

::::There is no valid fair use for that picture to be in the infobox of her BLP representing her when t is quite possible to have a commons valid license, do you mind it I remove it from the article? ] (]) 21:01, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
]
:::::Yes, I mind. The Image page says it's valid to use there. Challenge it there, then it makes sense to remove it from the article. Until the NFUR is shown to be invalid, there's no reason to remove the link. --] (]) 21:03, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

::::::Well, we are advised in BLP to err on the side of caution, carry on as you feel, but usually say, if in doubt, take it out. ] (]) 21:33, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
::::That "presumably valid" justification was rejected by a clear and strong consensus several months ago, in the discussions I cited. Why do you believe it's necessary to waste editors' time going through the process ad nauseam? ] (]) 22:26, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins_(reminders)&oldid=27744339 -->

== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:05, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1258243333 -->

== Administrators' newsletter – December 2024 ==

] from the past month (November 2024).

]

] '''Administrator changes'''
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}

] '''Interface administrator changes'''
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
}}
:] ]

] '''CheckUser changes'''
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
}}


] '''Guideline and policy news'''
== Franz Lidz revision ==
* Following ], the ] has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the ] within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
* Following a ], a new speedy deletion criterion, ], has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.


] '''Technical news'''
Dearest Sarek,
* Technical volunteers can now register for the ], which will take place in Istanbul, Turkey. is open from November 12 to December 10, 2024.
Would you please explain your objection to my revision? The story referred to is no doubt "rollicking" -- it's quite comical and was rchly written by a journalist who specializes in satire. The use of the word "questionable" would also seem to be beyond question -- the entire point of the story was to ''question'' the ethics and claims of Garside, who openly admited to lying and cheating. I'm puzzled by your beef with these two rather benign adjectives -- they accurately convey the gist of the feature story. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:30, 17 November 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:When used here, they're uncited personal opinion relating to a ], and are therefore inappropriate. --] (]) 21:05, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


] '''Arbitration'''
== pic copyright ==
* The arbitration case '']'' (formerly titled '']'') has been closed.
* An arbitration case titled '']'' has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 14 December.


----
Please, accept that the pic has no good right to be inn the infobox, and it can be discuss, we don't have to keep it there if it is a violation, do we? ] (]) 21:13, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
{{center|{{flatlist|
* ]
* ]
* ]
}}}}<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 16:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1259680487 -->


== Help == == WP:ANI ==
Please, don't start an . If you have what to say, do it ], until the question is solved. --] (]) 17:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
Well what should i do? he(http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Edokter) is presenting sources that are not reliable, i try to discuss with him but he doesn't understand !—] (]) 22:29, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 17:11, 27 December 2024

Note: if I've made a clearly bad block, such as something that appears to be vandalism at first glance but actually has a good explanation, please unblock without waiting for me to come back online. If it's something less clear, please at least get consensus on AN/I first. Thanks.


Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26


This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.
Please add new comments in new sections, e.g., by clicking here. Thanks.
RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 17:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC).—Talk to my owner:Online


Wendy Carlos Reversion

Hi SarekOfVulcan You reverted my research on Wendy Carlos based on ancestry.com and archives.com, however these websites are based on information from official US documents, so what's the issue? Egrabczewski (talk) 21:44, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2024).

Administrator changes

readded
removed

CheckUser changes

removed Maxim

Oversighter changes

removed Maxim

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Revert question

Hi, I was wondering if you go into a little more detail on why you reverted my edits on changing to outgoing rather than incumbent. The reason why I put those in is because a new president and vice president has just been elected so since they are leaving office soon, putting them as a lame duck seems to make the most sense. I'd be willing to hear your arguments on keeping the incumbent on both the president and VP pages. I'm not sure if there was a time that we used the term outgoing for politicians leaving office, but it just doesn't make sense to keep incumbent there. Interstellarity (talk) 16:10, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

But they are the incumbents. We don't need any further editorializing. Leave that to the headline writers. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:12, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 65

The Misplaced Pages Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 65, September – October 2024

  • Hindu Tamil Thisai joins The Misplaced Pages Library
  • Frankfurt Book Fair 2024 report
  • Tech tip: Mass downloads

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Misplaced Pages Library team --12:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages 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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2024).

Administrator changes

added
readded
removed

Interface administrator changes

added
readded Pppery

CheckUser changes

readded

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

WP:ANI

Please, don't start an edit war. If you have what to say, do it here, until the question is solved. --Tamtam90 (talk) 17:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Category: