Wikipedia

User:The ed17/Archives/56

< User:The ed17‎ | Archives

WikiCup 2012 August newsletter edit

 

The final is upon us! We are down to our final 8. A massive 573 was our lowest qualifying score; this is higher than the 150 points needed last year and the 430 needed in 2010. Even in 2009, when points were acquired for mainspace edit count in addition to audited content, 417 points secured a place. That leaves this year's WikiCup, by one measure at least, our most competitive ever. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:

  1.   Grapple X (submissions) once again finishes the round in first place, leading Pool B. Grapple X writes articles about television, and especially The X-Files and Millenium, with good articles making up the bulk of the score.
  2.   Miyagawa (submissions) led Pool A this round. Fourth-place finalist last year, Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, and has reached the final primarily off the back of his massive number of did you knows.
  3.   Ruby2010 (submissions) was second in Pool B. Ruby2010 writes primarily on television and film, and scores primarily from good articles.
  4.   Casliber (submissions) finished third in Pool B. Casliber is something of a WikiCup veteran, having finished sixth in 2011 and fourth in 2010. Casliber writes on the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. Over half of Casliber's points this round were bonus points from the high-importance articles he has worked on.
  5.   Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came second in Pool A. Also writing on biology, especially marine biology, Cwmhiraeth received 390 points for one featured article (Bivalvia) and one good article (pelican), topping up with a large number of did you knows.
  6.   Muboshgu (submissions) was third in Pool A. Muboshgu writes primarily on baseball, and this round saw Muboshgu's first featured article, Derek Jeter, promoted on its fourth attempt at FAC.
  7.   Dana Boomer (submissions) was fourth in Pool A. She writes on a variety of topics, including horses, but this round also saw the high-importance lettuce reach featured article status.
  8.   Sasata (submissions) is another WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist in 2009 and 2010. He writes mostly on mycology.

However, we must also say goodbye to the eight who did not make the final, having fallen at the last hurdle:   GreatOrangePumpkin (submissions),   Ealdgyth (submissions),   Calvin999 (submissions),   Piotrus (submissions),   Toa Nidhiki05 (submissions),   12george1 (submissions),   The Bushranger (submissions) and   1111tomica (submissions). We hope to see you all next year.

On the subject of next year, a discussion has been opened here. Come and have your say about the competition, and how you'd like it to run in the future. This brainstorming will go on for some time before more focused discussions/polls are opened. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:25, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012 edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:16, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

GOCE September activities edit

Reminders from the Guild of Copy Editors
 

A quick reminder of our current events:

  • The August 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the discussion and voting stage until midnight September 14 (UTC).
  • The September 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the submissions stage until midnight September 30 (UTC), when discussion and voting begin.
  • The September 2012 Backlog elimination drive is now underway! The event runs until midnight September 30 (UTC). The goal is to copy edit articles with the oldest tags and complete all requests placed before September. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who participates, with special awards given to the top five in the following categories: "Total articles", "Total words", "Total articles over 5,000 words", "Total articles tagged longest ago", and "Longest article". – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Message delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 04:34, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Op ed edit

You're OK with me doing the op ed this week, yeah? The draft that I'm working on (might be finished by the time you're up) is here. Regards, Szhang (WMF) (talk) 11:50, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Tweaks edit

I tweaked the Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost page that you were just editing. Feel free to revert if you don't like my changes. Pine✉ 10:58, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I changed the video size back because it severely messed with the page's formatting, but otherwise they look good. Thanks! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 11:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 September 2012 edit

Signpost and the WikiCup edit

Hi there; just gonna get this request in early. Would it be possible for me to write an article on the WikiCup for the first issue of the Signpost in November? I'm thinking a full page thing with some details about what the competition is, this year's competition, the history of the WikiCup and perhaps some stats. Is this something that you think will fit in? J Milburn (talk) 13:18, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

We can fit that in. I may have someone like Tony1 work with you so it doesn't look like we're allowing people to write about their own projects (e.g. say we allowed the WMF to write a feature about the Education Program), but that's certainly something we'd be looking to cover. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:23, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1) edit

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

 
Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

  • Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
  • Research: The most recent DR data
  • Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
  • Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
  • DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
  • Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
  • Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:34, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

My user page edit

Thanks! Is it possible to do the same with my Talk page and all its archives? It has my old personally identifiable username all over it and probably many mentions of personally identifiable information. I would like to keep the current string, in particular so it's viewable by anyone who discovers me from my COI account. Corporate Minion 20:34, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I can't, per WP:TALKCOND. My apologies. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:24, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Highlights from July 2012 edit

Highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation Report and the Wikimedia engineering report for July 2012, with a selection of other important events from the Wikimedia movement
 
About · Subscribe/unsubscribe · Distributed via Global message delivery, 18:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

In honor of your service as a Milhist coordinator edit

  The WikiProject Barnstar
In honor of your service as coordinator for the Military History Project from September 2011 to September 2012, I hereby award you this WikiProject Barnstar. - Dank (push to talk) 03:32, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Dank! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:21, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

resource request - war history of the USS Pennsylvania edit

Hi Ed,

I've emailed you a scan of the book per your request at the resource exchange. Please let me know when you've downloaded it successfully.

Best, GabrielF (talk) 19:44, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Timeshift9 (2nd nomination) edit

Hi The ed17. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive714#User talk:Timeshift9#Your userpage 2, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Timeshift9 (2nd nomination). Cunard (talk) 06:06, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Military history coordinator election edit

The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 10:00, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Op-ed on help pages for The Signpost edit

Hi Ed,

Tony contacted me saying there was some interest in my fellowship work on help pages. I've just finished up an op-ed on the topic. Realise it's quite a late submission, but if this could be in this week's Signpost it would be fantastic. I've prodded a couple of people on IRC to take a look at copy-editing it. Thanks. the wub "?!" 16:43, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that he did. :-) We have a ton of content this week, even beyond the whole Internet Brands-WMF fight, so would next week be okay? Also, to run under the op-ed slot, I'd like to see more of an argument made – why don't you tell us where we are (good), why this is bad (good), and what we are going to do to change it (not clear; tutorial? Interactive .. what? Redesigning how [an image would be good here]). Thanks very much! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:04, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
I would prefer this week if at all possible, since there's only about a month left to go on the fellowship and I would love to get some more attention on this final stretch. Will have a go at beefing up the changes section a bit. If you want to run it in a different (non op-ed) slot that's fine too, I only really picked op-ed because that's where Steven Zhang's was last week. the wub "?!" 19:38, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks so much for getting it in there. I see what you mean about a ton of content this week! the wub "?!" 17:29, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
You're welcome. Nine total features this week. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:30, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Footnoting archival images edit

Hi Eddie, I wanted to run something by you. Recently, I have been working on a proposal (with mock-up) for citing historical imagery in articles with regular footnotes, rather than having to click through to the image description page. The idea came about during meetings with several Library of Congress staff recently, which I could talk more about—but I thought I would just show you first. The explanation of the rationale is at User:Dominic/Image citation and the mock-up is at User:Dominic/Image citation/Sample. The idea of changing the manual of style or WP:CITE and editing thousands of articles to add these is pretty daunting, but my eventual goal right now is just to make sure that this is deemed an acceptable practice that people won't revert for being non-standard. Before bringing it the broader community, I'm curious to hear any thoughts you have on that implementation or the idea in general. Thanks! Dominic·t 21:16, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not a huge fan of using footnotes there – I'd rather just cite it in the caption. Then again, I'm biased towards the Chicago Manual of Style, and it's not like Wikipedia follows one of the three major guides. ;-) Chicago provides guidance on this sort of scenario in 3.28 and 3.34, but admittedly this is design for print, not a system of clickable thumbnails.
As you're probably aware, the practice of citing images is widely – universally might be a better word – used in academic writing. Typically these come in captions or in lists either after the table of contents or at the end of the article/book. I don't see a reason that we shouldn't do this; while past practice says "it is assumed that this is not necessary to fulfill attribution requirements of the GFDL or Creative Commons licenses as long as the appropriate credit is on the image description page", I don't think this has been seriously reconsidered since being was written. I don't think you'll have many issues in implementing these sorts of citations, but I don't think you'll find support for the mandatory addition of these to articles; my bet would be on something similar to the current state of alt text, where it's possible and sometimes encouraged, but not required. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:07, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 September 2012 edit

Hi, thanks for notifying me about the article on Roth's complaints about WP. Did not see my name, so that's okay. I'm concerned that this article does not accurately reflect the public discussion at the time of the book's publication; the article on the novel was more than "technically correct" before Roth wrote to The New Yorker. It reflected part of the wide discussion when the book was published. Because of the topic and the stature of Anatole Broyard in the literary world, there were numerous suggestions by literary critics (which Roth later characterized as nothing more than "literary gossip") of associations/inspiration/and other connections, "accurate or not", as Lorrie Moore wrote, of the parallels between certain aspects of the character Coleman Silk and Broyard. The talk page of the article includes more than 15 references in RS about this. It does not mean the critics could speak for Roth; I included references to these writers because it was part of the public discussion at the time the book was published - really, a larger discussion about race in American society that went beyond the book. I also noted that Roth said Broyard did not inspire the novel, based on a 2008 interview.
To my knowledge, there is no evidence that Roth complained in writing to the NY Times or other publications at the time that published those reviews. The 2008 interview was the first public reference to his disclaimer about Broyard that I came across. I believe his 2012 open letter is the first time he has publicly told the story of his inspiration. The Nobel Prize-winning poet Eugenio Montale published essays on literature under the title "The Second Life of Art". That's what literary criticism is about. To narrow it down to whether or not the critics' speculations about Roth's source of inspiration was correct, or to allow it all to be characterized as "literary gossip", is to misrepresent the public discourse. The reviews generally went well beyond the parallels between Silk and Broyard, and fully acknowledged Roth's creativity in creating his character and plot. Most also addressed the larger issues in American life of race, creation of identity, political correctness, and other topics which Roth explored.Parkwells (talk) 16:39, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
You're welcome. You are mentioned in the sentence "The article was edited again six minutes later by Parkwells (talk · contribs), who over the next two hours added a significant amount of content to the article." The wording was a bit touchy, but I've clarified it to explicitly say that the article was correct... because it was. I do wonder if he was angry because the claim took up one to two sentences in a stub article (before you expanded it, that is), meaning that he saw it as having more weight? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 16:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: August 2012 edit

 


Headlines
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 17:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/September 2012 edit

Just as a friendly reminder, you are one of five people who are listed as serving on the current coordinator tranche of the Military history Project that have not yet indicated whether you will be standing for reelection in the upcoming election. The deadline to clarify is 23:59 today, and having an answer from you will help us determine with a greater degree of certainty who will be returning and who won't, so if you can spare a moment please drop by and amend your status in the table accordingly. Thanks in advance, TomStar81 (Talk) 08:42, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

On an unrelated note, in the event you decide you are not gong to run, to you have anyone in mind that you would entrust The bugle to? We'd need someone to ensure that the newsletter got a little tlc before delivery, hence the question. TomStar81 (Talk) 08:42, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Would be nice to have you back on the team again, Ed. - Dank (push to talk) 20:38, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
I've reupped. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:36, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Newsletter design inspirations edit

Hi Ed,

Hope you don't mind me contacting you, as I appreciate that you may be busy. I was wondering if I could possible ask you for some inspirational design ideas for a project newsletter that I have been helping to edit on a monthly basis. I've tried all sorts to make it simple, but effective to the eye - and I'm still not satisfied with the current result. The newsletter for WP:ESC is produced monthly (the draft version can be seen here). Would you mind having a look and let me know if you think it could do with some tweaking improvements. Thank you ever so much in advance. Wesley♦Mouse 22:42, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd go even simpler. Find a color that isn't so distracting – remember that it's simply a background. The Signpost and Bugle use white, and that's my personal preference, but YMMV. I'd go for a light, maybe tan-ish, color if you want one. I'd also go for a front page logo with a separate content page, so you can blow up the logo and links on page one ... that way you aren't distracting the reader nor detracting from your 'brand'. Related: you don't have a brand at the moment. ;-) "Eurovision WikiProject newsletter" is pretty generic; it's not always easy, but try to think of a creative name for it! Last, having a prominent Eurovision-related image on the content page is preferable to a wall of text.
On smaller items, I'd sign the editorial so that there's a designated 'point-of-contact' for a random person who reads it. I'd also change the font, but that's because I'm just not a big fan of Eurostile. ;-) I'd find old newspaper typesets -- the ubiquitous Times family is one, but there are more. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:36, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
Oh Ed, thank you for the good pointers there - most kind of you. I think I can agree with the background color, white is probably best. The project newsletter was only revived in June this year after a two year absence. The old version used grey, blue, and white; while the revival used a different color each month. And then I went for the colors for the 2013 host nation (Sweden: blue/yellow). Do you think using a pastel shade of those would work better?
Now the larger front page idea sounds perfect. The way newsletter have been stored recently are like Wikipedia:WikiProject Eurovision/Newsletters/October 2012. I suppose that could be the larger front page, and then do additional content pages branching off from that URL by adding extra /. And I agree a brand name would be good, but there are that many already in use by similar blogsites/fan pages across the web that we'd have to think smart without stealing an already thought of brand. Perhaps "Eur Vision" ('Eur' being a play on the word 'Your') and replace the V in vision with the Eurovision heart motif. Or even Eurovision Express!
As for font, Eurostile is the generic font used by the Eurovision Network, hence why that has been used on the current newsletter, although I am open to new ideas. I have recently found the font type Foco very simple but appealing.
All I need to figure out now is some good HTML coding for layout of the revamp newsletter, I'm not that good at designing latout using codes, and tend to find something similar and just sample that idea. Anyhow, once again thank you it truly is much appreciated. Regards, Wesley♦Mouse 10:35, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
What are you going to do when 2014 comes around? I'm like a regular color scheme.
Think creatively, or ask the project for ideas. That's how Milhist got the Bugle!
It's your choice really, that was just me nitpicking. ;-)
Feel free to copy/paste code from other newsletters. That's how I got the general idea for the Bugle before Kirill came in and cleaned it all up and added more. It's much easier than teaching yourself to code!
Re: a cover photo, I'm going to ask people for ideas in the Signpost this week, and hopefully they'll like and post on the page. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:26, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
You have been a good help Ed. I have now opted for the same color scheme throughout, and not going down the road of color swapping on a month-by-month basis. A simple tan/pale mustard seems to work, with a gold boarder. The brand name Eurovision Monthly seems to work too (having the word Eurovision in purple Foco font, and Monthly in pastel red Segoe Script. I will take you advice on copy/paste code from other newsletters and use my sandboxes to test them out so that I don't end up creating sub-pages that are not needed. It should keep me busy for a few days at least. Regards, Wesley♦Mouse 02:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
Good luck! Let me know if I can help in any way. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Update: I've done some tweaking to the project's newsletter, changing the color scheme to a more softer tone - Wikipedia:WikiProject Eurovision/Newsletters/October 2012. Also used the same scheme on the small urgent news version which would be used via the project for urgent project notices that need to be sent out outside the monthly newsletter cycle - Wikipedia:WikiProject Eurovision/Newsletters/16 September 2012. I've kept the format for October newsletter in the same collapsible version, but working on implementing the ideas that you suggested into the November/December editions (gives me more time to figure out the HTML codes etc). Thank you again for the help Ed. Wesley♦Mouse 19:56, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

GOCE mid-drive newsletter edit

Guild of Copy Editors September 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter
 
  • Participation: Out of 37 people signed up for this drive so far, 19 have copy-edited at least one article, about the same as the last drive. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!
  • Progress report: We're almost on track to meet our targets for the drive. Great work, guys. We have reduced our target group of articles—August, September, and October 2011—by about 44%, and the overall backlog has been reduced by 58 articles so far, to around 2600 articles. The biggest difference between this drive and the previous one is a stronger focus on large articles, so total word counts are still comparable.
  • Don't forget about the Copy Edit of the Month contests! Voting for the August contest has been extended through the end of the month. You don't have to make a submission to vote!
>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 22:23, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Roslyn edit

I quite like what Roslyn has done and am a bit shocked that you haven't received any support yet.

As an observation, Ed, it may be a combination of the short answers and a userpage that acts more like a sandbox. Now to be fair nothing says that the answers have to be infinitely long, nor do we have any policy mandating that a user page have one's entire life story out on it for everyone to see, but in the absence of information most people do what comes easiest to them, and that is usually some iteration of the concept of nothing; in this case, it appears to be taking the form of waiting to see if anyone will 'vouch' for the candidate. In my case, I have looked at the answers given, the short statement, and the user page, and still feel like I don't know Roslyn well enough to make an informed decision, and that bothers me a little since I feel like its part of my duty to ensure that I get to know a candidate enough to obtain a feel for what s/he is like and what they will do if elected. Your vote has me leaning toward a support, but at the moment I am still on the fence. (Incidentally, for what it is worth, this is also the reason I feel that Knight of Gloucestershire and Johnsc12 have not inspired much support among the voters either, though I do note that in the latter case there are preexisting conduct issues that are most likely keeping supports away.) TomStar81 (Talk) 21:20, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm happy with my non-vote, but I'm also happy with Ed's vote. Encouragement is good. - Dank (push to talk) 22:24, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 September 2012 edit

Wikimedia Highlights from August 2012 edit

Highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation Report and the Wikimedia engineering report for August 2012, with a selection of other important events from the Wikimedia movement
 
About · Subscribe/unsubscribe · Distributed via Global message delivery, 19:35, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year Questia online library account is approved ready edit

Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!

  1. Go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
  2. Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code. Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
  3. Create your account by entering the requested information. (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
  4. You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID. (The account is now active for 1 year).

If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia).

  • A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
  • Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
  • Show off your Questia access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Questia_userbox}} on your userpage
  • When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi EdwardsBot (talk) 05:14, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

WP:CUP edit

Requesting judge input at User_talk:J_Milburn#DYKs_held_for_November. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:20, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Newsletter question edit

G'day, Ed. On my talk page, a member has asked me a question about delivery of the The Bugle. Would you mind popping over to my talk page and checking that my advice is correct? Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 21:30, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 September 2012 edit

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-09-24/News and notes edit

Hi Ed, I've got serious concerns about this article, which I've explained at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-09-24/News and notes. The use of an anonymous source to criticise the WMUK board is particularly concerning. Nick-D (talk) 10:02, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nick, I've read your post and Tony's reply and generally agree with Tony. We had a significant viewpoint from someone who is familiar with the internal workings of WMUK, but they did not wish to be named; given that WMUK members would almost certainly not want to be named, we determined that using an unnamed source would be more accurate than finding someone else. Sorry Nick. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:54, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ed, Given that WP:BLP applies to all pages, I'm really uncomfortable with the use of an unnamed source to criticise individuals (especially as the criticism touched on their legal responsibilities as the board of a registered charity). However, I don't have a dog in that fight and WMUK can look after itself, so I'll butt out. Good work closing that WP:AN thread by the way - I sort-of feel that I should refer the matter to ArbCom, but I have better things to do with my weekend ;) Regards, Nick-D (talk) 02:20, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
BLP is always a concern, but it's also not a blank license to disallow all criticism of (a) individual(s). :-) Thanks, I wouldn't want to eat up the rest of my weekend with Arbcom either. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:01, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
It appears that other people have more spare time than I do: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Professionalism and civility Nick-D (talk) 00:25, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I was notified below because I was mentioned in the opening statement. The section header made for a severe scare before I actually read the message. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:30, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

File:IMCMEX 2012 area of operations.jpg edit

Ed17, hope all is well. I am currently employed at a new job, and I have been dabbing in things Wikipedia. I uploaded this map at Wiki Commons, and there is this bizarre deletion effort. Can you look into this? I think entire effort is a rush to judgment. Thanks! Marcd30319 (talk) 18:08, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

You have the right idea to contact the Navy's Public Affairs office, but I suspect you'll find that the background is from Google Maps, which would make the image a copyvio. I would ask the Graphic Lab people at Wikipedia:GL/MAP to see if they can duplicate the map with a free background; I assume it would be pretty simple. :-) Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:54, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations edit

 
Coordinator of the Military history Project, September 2012 – September 2013

In recognition of your election as a co-ordinator of the Military history project for the September 2012 to September 2013 period, please accept these co-ord stars. Thank you for standing and I hope it will be a fruitful year. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 05:04, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Note edit

Can I borrow you on IRC for a short while? Ta, - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 20:25, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

A edit

Hi!

Ok, here are my thoughts. I have greatly enjoyed this interview series so far and hope it has added constructively to the ongoing dialogue about paid and COI editing. I don't see that issue going away any time soon--in fact I think it's likely to become even more relevant and timely in the near future. So while I don't see the need to continue regularly interviewing people in very similar positions to those already covered, there will likely be episodic opportunities to talk to key players in major events. For example, I would love to interview Roger Bamkin and Does Wikipedia Pay seems an ideal forum in which to do that.

Relatedly, I am interested in sharing a development which I have been involved in, a set of ethical principles and practices that paid/PR/COI editors might sign on to. It's fully detailed at WP:COI+. There is an RfC pending in the next month or so, and I would truly appreciate the opportunity to present that document in the signpost, either as part of Does Wikipedia Pay? or a separate op-ed.

As for what to say in the introduction, I think an easy solution is just to take out the word 'ongoing' and otherwise not shut the door completely. That's my preference. Let me know what you think. Ocaasi t | c 21:25, 29 September 2012 (UTC)


Arbitration edit

Hi Ed. You are not named as a party but your are mentioned at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Professionalism and civility FYI. Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:16, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Good lord, that section title was a scare. ;-) Thanks for the note. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:18, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:The_ed17/Archives/56&oldid=1083648869"