User talk:L235/Archive 8
 | 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 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
Please comment on Talk:Nikola Tesla/Nationality and ethnicity
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Nikola Tesla/Nationality and ethnicity. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Another Sockpuppet Case
Hi, thanks for your assistance at SPI Omnipum. Would you possibly have a moment to look over SPI Theweditor and give a second opinion on it? Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz (talk) 18:11, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 2 May 2016
- In the media: Wikipedia Zero piracy in Bangladesh; bureaucracy; chilling effects; too few cooks; translation gaps
- Traffic report: Purple
- Featured content: The best ... from the past two weeks
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I wanted to let you know that the sock suspect in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cassist has confessed to socking. CLCStudent (talk) 17:42, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
- @CLCStudent: Thanks, responded there. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 21:04, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Special:Preferences
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Special:Preferences. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Page mover
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Page mover. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello
Newbie here. I noticed you are one of the clerks for the recent Arbcom case for Wikicology. I saw that Wikicologyhad created a bunch of username subpages (I think thats the name) and was wondering if they should be deleted as well. Etimena (talk) 14:38, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Words to watch
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Words to watch. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Revision deletion
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Revision deletion. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 17 May 2016
- Op-ed: Swiss chapter in turmoil
- In the media: Wikimedia's Dario Taraborelli quoted on Google's Knowledge Graph in The Washington Post
- Featured content: Two weeks for the prize of one
- Traffic report: Oh behave, Beyhive / Underdogs
- Arbitration report: "Wikicology" ends in site ban; evidence and workshop phases concluded for "Gamaliel and others"
- Wikicup: That's it for WikiCup Round 2!
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Japan-related articles. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Glossary of video game terms
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Glossary of video game terms. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Template talk:Rfd2
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Rfd2. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Merger discussion for Decentralized autonomous organization
An article that you have been involved in editing—Decentralized autonomous organization—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 17:35, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Deonis 2012
the banned and sockpuppet editor is back under an armenian persona Լրագրող i have opened an investigation against him.Alhanuty (talk) 11:18, 23 May 2016 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Deonis_2012
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:IP block exemption
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:IP block exemption. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:In the news/2016 RD proposal
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:In the news/2016 RD proposal. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 28 May 2016
- News and notes: Upcoming Wikimedia conferences in the US and India; May Metrics and Activities Meeting
- Special report: Compensation paid to Sue Gardner increased by almost 50 percent after she stepped down as executive director
- Featured content: Eight articles, three lists and five pictures
- Op-ed: Journey of a Wikipedian
- Arbitration report: Gamaliel resigns from the arbitration committee
- Recent research: English as Wikipedia's Lingua Franca; deletion rationales; schizophrenia controversies
- Traffic report: Splitting (musical) airs / Slow Ride
Please stop stifling my question.
A sentence in WP:CIVIL says, "Editors are expected to be reasonably cooperative, ... to work within the scope of policies, and to be responsive to good-faith questions. You say my request "appeared to be sufficiently actioned," but according to whom? Do you dispute that it's still unclear whether (admins/arbcom/Doug Weller, Courcelles, or Callanecc think) the prohibition extends to the talk pages? I made it clear I think it does, but asked for clarification, AND HAVE NOT RECEIVED IT. Why are you not responsive to good-faith questions, e.g. "Why avoid fulfilling my clarification request?" Please revert, thereby allowing my question to be answered, rather than stifling it. --Elvey(t•c) 19:47, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
- Good evening, Elvey. At the risk of violating WP:A(A)GF (WP:AAAGF?) myself, you should be cognizant of the fact that mentioning a perceived failure to assume good faith does not excuse – and may be itself – a failure to assume good faith. Anyway, I directly answered your questions; the authority and specific arb authorizations. To clarify further, it's standard procedure to archive clarification requests when requested by an arbitrator; your request was left open 24 hours on clerks-l for any arb objections to archiving before being archived. Clarification requests may be archived even when questions remain pending where they have been sufficiently answered by arbs or for other reasons.
- As a personal interpretation (not for the Committee), the clarification provided by the Committee seems clear: there exists a
fairly clear prohibition against anonymous editing
within the scope of that remedy, i.e.substantial edits to any Scientology-related articles or discussions on any page
. To me, that seems like a pretty clear go-ahead to request any uninvolved admin or RFPP, as an AE action, semi-protect any Scientology talk pages as a page containing solelyScientology-related [...] discussions
. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 04:25, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Courtesy vanishing
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Courtesy vanishing. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Any reason my user name is templated and no one elses?
I don't really need a notification on every page you post a decision especially since blue link callout of shame seems unique to me. thanks, --DHeyward (talk) 03:45, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- @DHeyward: Apologies, I copied verbatim from the remedies section of Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Proposed decision. I'm happy to revisit our notification procedures; in fact, the entire clerks' procedures probably needs some updating. Shoot me or the clerks an email at l235
l235.net or clerks-l lists.wikimedia.org (respectively) if you have any suggesitons. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 03:49, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
EOTW Transition
I just spent the last 45 minutes typing up a beautiful entry to begin the process and then lost it before I could "save". I'll try again later. Buster Seven Talk 12:54, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
- My comp seems to have a mind of its own this morning and is behaving like a "bad pet". Will "wacking it with a rolled-up newspaper" work? Slow, stubborn and sadistic. GRRRRRR!!!!!. Buster Seven Talk 13:15, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
- First, let me personally thank you for accepting the role as facilitator.
- Second, If you take a look at my contributions of yesterday you will see some of the stuff that gets done in the middle of the week. I think I will still be creating and dispensing the eddyboxes. At User:Buster7#WER you'll find many of the pages that are used through-out the process. As time goes on maybe we can find other volunteers to take over some of the steps. Jim Carter and Isaccl have been a big help over the years and I would ask that the add any insight into what has been a successful product.
- Third, Do your own thing . Historically, the Award has been dispensed on Sunday. Feel free to change it if Sunday is not good for you.
- I usually cut-n-paste that weeks accepted nomination to the "template" at my sandbox in preparation for awarding. There are most likely better simplified ways of doing things. Feel free to upgrade and make it easier to transist into your replacement in September. Buster Seven Talk 11:21, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
- First, let me personally thank you for accepting the role as facilitator.
Missing decision, message left on my talk page, from case
On my talk page, the message titled Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others closed does not include this decision from the case section 4.3.7 Community encouraged (April Fools Day), which passed 10 to 0. Is there a reason? — Neonorange (talk) 04:33, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Decision missing from message left on my talk page: case "Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others"
On my talk page, the message titled Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others closed does not include this decision from the case section 4.3.7 Community encouraged (April Fools Day), which passed 10 to 0. Is there a reason? — Neonorange (talk) 04:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- @Neonorange: Hello, that was my mistake. See Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration.2FRequests.2FCase.2FGamaliel_and_others_closed. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 11:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks. And thanks for your work keeping the gears meshing. — Neonorange (talk) 03:21, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Legobot (talk) 04:31, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 05 June 2016
- News and notes: WMF cuts budget for 2016-17 as scope tightens
- Featured content: Overwhelmed ... by pictures
- Traffic report: Pop goes the culture, again.
- Arbitration report: ArbCom case "Gamaliel and others" concludes
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Video Games
A question
Hello L235? I was wondering, could you perhaps review this SPI case whenever you have time? I'm asking you this as because otherwise, regarding the "usual pace" of matters regarding SPI cases with some more extensive behavioural evidence, it takes at least a month to be reviewed. This one should be very easy though for you. Bests and thanks - LouisAragon (talk) 02:40, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Colombiabeauty c.s.
I like to sincerely thank you for your efforts in this case. It was rather frustrating to see that the rules protected the bad guys in a number of earlier cases I have filed. With the time you have spend on it, you have unravelled a lot of misery. Thank you, thank you, thank you for that!
My only regret in this case is that I did not add "Dosmil2011" to the case. He is also a long time suspect. For instance, to keep it recent, his activities on Draft:Miss Earth 2016.
But still, you gave me a massive handle to work with with! The Banner talk 09:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
- @The Banner: You're welcome.
Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 21:55, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
SPI/Vodkapoise
Yes, I'd appreciate a sleeper check for this prolific and persistent vandal. Thanks. I usually add a comment that CU is requested for sleepers, but depending on the clerk they seem often to ignore the request anyway. I don't minimize the work involved, but I think it's justified here. General Ization Talk 02:42, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 15 June 2016
- News and notes: Clarifications on status and compensation of outgoing executive directors Sue Gardner and Lila Tretikov
- Special report: Wikiversity Journal—A new user group
- Featured content: From the crème de la crème
- In the media: Biography disputes; Craig Newmark donation; PR editing
- Traffic report: Another one with sports; Knockout, brief candle
Kevin, I mean this criticism constructively, but I will be blunt. Your approach to this case was wrong. I'm not talking about the fact that you didn't recognize that the two puppets belonged to another master. That just comes with experience and recognizing masters and their trademarks. Even assuming the master was as identified and the puppets were related, you don't offer a free pass to a master and three puppets if they'll admit to the sock puppetry. The correct approach is to block the socks indefinitely and if you think the master deserves it, impose a lesser sanction, even as low as a warning, on the master. You can't depend on a "promise" not to use the sock accounts. No matter what else you do, you must block the puppets. The only exception I can think of offhand is when what happened doesn't qualify as socking, meaning the other accounts are legitimate, in which case you have a lot more latitude to work out an arrangement. That wasn't true here. Even if I hadn't identified the real master, and many, many more of their puppets, I would have objected to your handling of the case.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:53, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
- Understood, Bbb23. It felt much less serious based on the filer's statement; it didn't look like evasion of scrutiny on first look. Thanks for your resolution. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 18:59, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry to be a pest, Kevin, but it's not clear to me that you do understand. Your inference that these accounts were not editing abusively is fairly cramped in my view, but even assuming you're right, your solution was unreasonable. There's no reason for that many new sock accounts to be created at the same time. So, if you think it was "innocent", then you block the socks and explain to/warn the master about our policy regarding multiple accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Philippines v. China
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Philippines v. China. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/April Fools' 2
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/April Fools' 2. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:In the news/2016 RD proposal
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:In the news/2016 RD proposal. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 04 July 2016
- News and notes: Board unanimously appoints Katherine Maher as new WMF executive director; Wikimedia lawsuits in France and Germany
- Op-ed: Two policies in conflict?
- In the media: Terrorism database cites Wikipedia as a source
- Featured content: Triple fun of featured content
- Traffic report: Goalposts; Oy vexit
Editor of the Week nomination
Regarding this nomination: the key issue is that it's a distraction. It gives fuel to critics who think the initiative is unduly singling out specific editors. I think a personal note of appreciation or a suitable barnstar is better for any of those who have been instrumental in the development and administration of the recognition. isaacl (talk) 16:21, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- I agree. While I truly appreciate the thought, I would rather not give WER naysayers any ammo that can be used to attack the project. EotW has kept WER alive and well as it awaits revitalization. And I feel honored just to know that I was an important "player" in that regard. In the paraphrased words of LBJ, "If nominated, I will not run and if elected, I will not serve". But thanks for the kind words. Buster Seven Talk 19:30, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- Kevin, there is a reason why I posted my response here and not on the nomination discussion page: there are critics of the Editor of the Week initiative and (without going into detail) your prospective nominee in particular who could easily express their dissent and trigger a noisy discussion that would be counterproductive to your intent of recognizing Buster7. I strongly counsel you to not prolong the discussion on the nomination discussion page. isaacl (talk) 05:08, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
No time
You don't need much time to look at the candidate's contributions in the discussion which many opposes mentioned, - check them for civility, please. If you don't have the time, just read the response to oppose 3 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:58, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: I appreciate the note, but this kind of feels like canvassing. (You didn't do anything wrong, I just won't be changing my vote. I hadn't read any of the supports/opposes/nomination statement/anything at all, so I also feel uncomfortable giving any sort of opinion on this RfA.) Regards – Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 22:39, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- I will be more blunt then (sorry, especially as you are away and have no time.) I didn't come to change your section of vote. (I don't go to the neutral section. If I feel like opposing a candidacy, I don't even show up in a RfA, so don't understand the need for any neutral vote.) I would like you to change your vote within the section. After the Reizwort infobox was already dropped in the RfA, I don't think we also needed the other one, incivility, but if mentioned, please with at least one diff of supporting. I supplied a diff in my support. I may add another one, the candidate describing the two points of view in a discussion evenly and with civility, not without showing his own leaning. That's what I want in an admin. They can learn other things on the job. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:28, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hobit, do you have a diff for any incivility? (I noticed your vote only after I wrote this.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:14, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Good question. Civility was not what I should have written and I've updated. Rather "rubbing people the wrong way when not needed". The PC issue and the FAC issue were both situations where a bit more care/thought would have been really useful. There is a reason I'm a weak oppose by the way--I acknowledge that most of my objections are coming from my gut. Something just feels wrong here. I feel like this person's temperament just isn't well suited toward being an admin and the sock concerns push it over for me. No one thing, but just lots of small things, each minor, that add up to me feeling this won't go well. I started out in the neutral column and perhaps should have stayed there. But I'd be willing to take a small bet that we're going to have a lot of problems with this person as an admin over the next couple of years. And once I realized I really believe that, I felt I needed to be in the oppose column. Hobit (talk) 13:04, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you. Nothing wrong with an oppose, - just the word "incivility" - often abused as it is - needed explanation or - as you did - a change, - thank you! - I don't quite know what you mean by "the FAC issue" but never mind. When I commented in Zeta Jones, it was not a FAC yet - or I missed it. I don't know about Rob. The question if editors who improve the quality of an article can also remove the accomplishments of former editors which were intended to serve readers, is open (in case of the actress decided by the community, but there are others), - but has nothing to do with the RfA, or shouldn't ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:02, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- ps: I checked the dates: the FAC was opened June 3, all May edits (including the one mentioned above) were made before it became a FAC. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:06, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Good question. Civility was not what I should have written and I've updated. Rather "rubbing people the wrong way when not needed". The PC issue and the FAC issue were both situations where a bit more care/thought would have been really useful. There is a reason I'm a weak oppose by the way--I acknowledge that most of my objections are coming from my gut. Something just feels wrong here. I feel like this person's temperament just isn't well suited toward being an admin and the sock concerns push it over for me. No one thing, but just lots of small things, each minor, that add up to me feeling this won't go well. I started out in the neutral column and perhaps should have stayed there. But I'd be willing to take a small bet that we're going to have a lot of problems with this person as an admin over the next couple of years. And once I realized I really believe that, I felt I needed to be in the oppose column. Hobit (talk) 13:04, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: I have stricken parts of that comment. Is that satisfactory? Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 14:32, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
It's been three years since your first edit
|
Hey, L235. Just stopping by to wish you a Happy Wiki-Birthday from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 01:29, 7 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
I finally got around to replying
Hey, I just saw this, and yes I can get you either. I'm so sorry I hadn't seen it, I hope it's not too late! Kharkiv07 (T) 17:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 21 July 2016
- Discussion report: Busy month for discussions
- Featured content: A wide variety from the best
- Traffic report: Sports and esports
- Arbitration report: Script writers appointed for clerks
- Recent research: Using deep learning to predict article quality
Please comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton email controversy
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton email controversy. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of User:Incorrigible Troll
A tag has been placed on User:Incorrigible Troll requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria 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 "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, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Blake Gripling (talk) 00:12, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Sorry
that I didn't do a better job on Summer's Award nomination, if I consider nominating another editor I will run it past you first. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 18:15, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Mass message sender granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "massmessage-sender" user right, allowing you to send messages to multiple users at once. A few important things to note:
- Messages should only be sent to groups of users who are likely to be interested in the topic.
- For regular mailings such as those for WikiProjects, localized events, or newsletters, users should be informed of how they can unsubscribe from future mailings.
- The mass messaging tool should never be used for canvassing with the intention of influencing the outcome of discussions.
For information, refer to the guidance for use. If you do not want mass message sender rights anymore, just let me or any other administrator know and we will remove it. Thank you and happy editing! — MusikAnimal talk 04:22, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
CheckUser
I have some evidence re the WordSeventeen sock case which I would like to send via email. My email is enabled but yours doesn't seem to be. Oculi (talk) 06:22, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 04 August 2016
- News and notes: Foundation presents results of harassment research, plans for automated identification; Wikiconference submissions open
- Obituary: Kevin Gorman, who took on Wikipedia's gender gap and undisclosed paid advocacy, dies at 24
- Traffic report: Summer of Pokémon, Trump, and Hillary
- Featured content: Women and Hawaii
- Recent research: Easier navigation via better wikilinks
- Technology report: User script report (January to July 2016, part 1)
The Signpost: 18 August 2016
- News and notes: Focus on India—WikiConference produces new apps; state government adopts free licenses
- Special report: Engaging diverse communities to profile women of Antarctica
- In the media: The ugly, the bad, the playful, and the promising
- Featured content: Simply the best ... from the last two weeks
- Traffic report: Olympic views
- Technology report: User script report (January–July 2016, part 2)
- Arbitration report: The Michael Hardy case
Please comment on Talk:Jill Stein
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jill Stein. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:29, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Gamergate controversy
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Gamergate controversy. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
EotW
My health is not the best and my focus is elsewhere. Thanks for guiding the transition and I hope someone steps out of the crowd that you can hand the keys to. Buster Seven Talk 14:21, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:1
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:1. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Arbitration statement redacted
Hi Kevin.
I'd like you to understand, please, that as a matter of principle, I conduct my Wikipedia business on-wiki (with the possible exception of the occasional use if a public mailing list). There is no question of me conducting any dialogue with you or the Arbs on a mailing list which is not public, and - as a long-standing editor with a spotless record for transparency - I actually find it offensive that you should suggest I do otherwise.
Appeals that could not possibly contain private information are best dealt with in the first instance by informal dialogue with the other editor taking the action, and failing that, by notice on a public board. I'd be grateful therefore if you would refrain in future from posting suggestions to use a back-channel private mailing list on my talk page. Thanks in advance. --RexxS (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- @RexxS: Apologies, in the future, when privacy is not an issue, I will not ask for emails to clerks-l on your talk page. Feel free to trout me if I do. WT:AC/C is the on-wiki place to get clerk attention and appeal a clerk-issued sanction, although it's not very high-traffic. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 19:51, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Arbitration statement redacted
Hi Kevin.
I'd like you to understand, please, that as a matter of principle, I conduct my Wikipedia business on-wiki (with the possible exception of the occasional use if a public mailing list). There is no question of me conducting any dialogue with you or the Arbs on a mailing list which is not public, and - as a long-standing editor with a spotless record for transparency - I actually find it offensive that you should suggest I do otherwise.
Appeals that could not possibly contain private information are best dealt with in the first instance by informal dialogue with the other editor taking the action, and failing that, by notice on a public board. I'd be grateful therefore if you would refrain in future from posting suggestions to use a back-channel private mailing list on my talk page. Thanks in advance. --RexxS (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- @RexxS: Apologies, in the future, when privacy is not an issue, I will not ask for emails to clerks-l on your talk page. Feel free to trout me if I do. WT:AC/C is the on-wiki place to get clerk attention and appeal a clerk-issued sanction, although it's not very high-traffic. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 19:51, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 06 September 2016
- Special report: Olympics readership depended on language
- WikiProject report: Watching Wikipedia
- Featured content: Entertainment, sport, and something else in-between
- Traffic report: From Phelps to Bolt to Reddit
- Technology report: Wikimedia mobile sites now don't load images if the user doesn't see them
- Recent research: Ethics of machine-created articles and fighting vandalism
Please comment on Help talk:Hidden text
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Help talk:Hidden text. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Heyo
How are you, L235? It has been a long time since I was active on this site and I hate the fact that I am unable to continue giving the amount of time that I previously did. Anyway, I see that you have taken up the work Buster7 used to do in delivering the EoTW message to the recipients. I just noticed that the bot archived the content from the talk page but I have restored the changes for now. Perhaps the nominations on the talk page should be moved to the accepted nominations' page? I am not sure as to how involved you are, or plan to be with the project. Since you were delivering the EoTW messages, I thought that it was best to talk to you about this. I could be an aid to you in the process if you feel that you have too much at your hand. Let me know what you think. Regards, Yash! 20:18, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- @Yash!: Hey, nice to see you! Yes, please help with EotW. Please. Please! PLEASE!! I need help!et
- I would like to transition the whole awarding process to someone else, but I get that you probably don't have time for that. So how's this: Can you help with the "eddybox"es? The ones at Template:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Project main page/sandbox. I'm really behind with them. Would making them be something you'd be interested in helping with? Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 01:36, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I would love to make them! And I will get around it very soon. I spend a lot of time going through discussions and GA reviews because I am not motivated enough to indulge in the activities I used to (maybe because it requires a lot of efforts and life has become pretty stressful in itself). However, when it comes to EoTW, I believe I have enough spirit left in me to work for months, if not years (since I understand the importance of the project and I would much rather work at EoTW than go through dramatic discussions). I am in the clinics right now and I will get started with the templates when my shift ends. If you want to transition the awarding process to someone else, I would be more than happy to take over! Regards, Yash! 04:53, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (music)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (music). Legobot (talk) 04:31, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Cut and paste merge
Hi! I noticed that you cut the content from WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Toyota97 (diif) and then pasted it into WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Skyline201 (diff). That is the wrong way to do it because the edit history remains split between two pages. What should be done in such cases is the WP:history merge that can only be done by administrators. In sich cases, you should request administrator's assistance. We only allow cut and paste merges in cases when a part of the page needs to be cut and merged into another page (history merge is possible in such cases too, but is very complicated as only the part of the edit history needs to be merged). But, when the whole page needs to be merged into another page, then history merge is always preferred. I am going to perform it soon, I just wanted to let you know. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:07, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks Vanja, you're right, sorry. I used to request proper merges, but I was away for a bit and am kind of rusty. Thanks for your work. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 18:14, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- No problem! By the way, you also forgot to merge the archive page, leaving the archive at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Toyota97/Archive. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:20, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Laibwart#24 September 2016. We need a better solution for this. ZH8000 (talk) 22:18, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Please Comment on Draft:Durgesh Tripathi
I need suggestion to get it accepted soon as it has been waiting to approved for more than 15 days Sandy.yadav.0211 (talk) 20:40, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 29 September 2016
- News and notes: Wikipedia Education Program case study published; and a longtime Wikimedian has made his final edit
- In the media: Wikipedia in the news
- Featured content: Three weeks in the land of featured content
- Arbitration report: Arbcom looking for new checkusers and oversight appointees while another case opens
- Traffic report: From Gene Wilder to JonBenét
- Technology report: Category sorting and template parameters
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you!
Thanks for the Editor of the Week recognition. It is an honor, and I appreciate it. Eddie Blick (talk) 02:52, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you!
Thanks for the Editor of the Week recognition. It is an honor, and I appreciate it. Eddie Blick (talk) 02:52, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Can you please let me know why you reverted your close of this RfC. I found your closure to be a very accurate reading of the consensus. The RfC is now well over a moth without closure and is holding up the next step (fixing the criteria), and the NPP software development with the WMF at WP:NPPAFC (where you are also more than welcome to help out). Cheers, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:35, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Kudpung: Thanks for reaching out. I reverted my closure because I hadn't noticed the AN thread until after the close, but didn't have much time to really read the AN discussion (I did, though, notice calls for a panel of admins to close the RfC) so I played it safe rather than sorry. I did plan on reinstating my close if no editor objected; we will see if Callanecc (who would like to co-close) agrees with my reading of consensus or would like to change it. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 00:11, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- There is absolutely no need for a panel to close such an RfC and it's not even commonplace for far more complex debates. As far as I'm concerned, closed is closed and Callanec is just one of several who said they might want to close it (he's used to the extremely long and complex process of Arbcom). At the end of the day, the first one there gets first bite of the apple and we don't need a further debate on the closure which IMO nobody could improve on. We do have a sense of urgency here as it's holding some other stuff up and while we have the Foundation's attention we don't want to lose it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:33, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- To be fair, even you said the closer must be
really competent, neutral, and who knows how to read a split-objective debate
– a standard I'm not sure I meet. I do understand your urgency, however. If Callanecc doesn't get back within a day or so, I'll be glad to reinstate my close. (And, for what it's worth, I'm also used to the long and complex process of ArbCom – I've clerked there since Feb 2015.) Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 02:41, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- To be fair, even you said the closer must be
- There is absolutely no need for a panel to close such an RfC and it's not even commonplace for far more complex debates. As far as I'm concerned, closed is closed and Callanec is just one of several who said they might want to close it (he's used to the extremely long and complex process of Arbcom). At the end of the day, the first one there gets first bite of the apple and we don't need a further debate on the closure which IMO nobody could improve on. We do have a sense of urgency here as it's holding some other stuff up and while we have the Foundation's attention we don't want to lose it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:33, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- Kevin, I'm quite sure you are
really competent, neutral, and who knows how to read a split-objective debate
. Thank you Callanecc too, for lending your endorsement to the close. Now we can move on and get the rest of this sad NPP business advanced. You guys seen the backlog? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:53, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Can you please let me know why you reverted your close of this RfC. I found your closure to be a very accurate reading of the consensus. The RfC is now well over a moth without closure and is holding up the next step (fixing the criteria), and the NPP software development with the WMF at WP:NPPAFC (where you are also more than welcome to help out). Cheers, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:35, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Kudpung: Thanks for reaching out. I reverted my closure because I hadn't noticed the AN thread until after the close, but didn't have much time to really read the AN discussion (I did, though, notice calls for a panel of admins to close the RfC) so I played it safe rather than sorry. I did plan on reinstating my close if no editor objected; we will see if Callanecc (who would like to co-close) agrees with my reading of consensus or would like to change it. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 00:11, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- There is absolutely no need for a panel to close such an RfC and it's not even commonplace for far more complex debates. As far as I'm concerned, closed is closed and Callanec is just one of several who said they might want to close it (he's used to the extremely long and complex process of Arbcom). At the end of the day, the first one there gets first bite of the apple and we don't need a further debate on the closure which IMO nobody could improve on. We do have a sense of urgency here as it's holding some other stuff up and while we have the Foundation's attention we don't want to lose it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:33, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- To be fair, even you said the closer must be
really competent, neutral, and who knows how to read a split-objective debate
– a standard I'm not sure I meet. I do understand your urgency, however. If Callanecc doesn't get back within a day or so, I'll be glad to reinstate my close. (And, for what it's worth, I'm also used to the long and complex process of ArbCom – I've clerked there since Feb 2015.) Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 02:41, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- To be fair, even you said the closer must be
- There is absolutely no need for a panel to close such an RfC and it's not even commonplace for far more complex debates. As far as I'm concerned, closed is closed and Callanec is just one of several who said they might want to close it (he's used to the extremely long and complex process of Arbcom). At the end of the day, the first one there gets first bite of the apple and we don't need a further debate on the closure which IMO nobody could improve on. We do have a sense of urgency here as it's holding some other stuff up and while we have the Foundation's attention we don't want to lose it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:33, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- Kevin, I'm quite sure you are
really competent, neutral, and who knows how to read a split-objective debate
. Thank you Callanecc too, for lending your endorsement to the close. Now we can move on and get the rest of this sad NPP business advanced. You guys seen the backlog? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:53, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (music)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (music). Legobot (talk) 04:30, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for notification
Appreciated. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:49, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 14 October 2016
- News and notes: Fundraising, flora and fauna
- Discussion report: Cultivating leadership: Wikimedia Foundation seeks input
- Technology report: Upcoming tech projects for 2017
- Featured content: Variety is the spice of life
- Traffic report: Debates and escapes
- Recent research: A 2011 study resurfaces in a media report
WikiConference North America
Hey Kevin - it was nice to meet you in San Diego, albeit briefly. See you around. II | (t - c) 19:28, 16 October 2016 (UTC) (Ben)
Arbitration Request
It is a conduct dispute. He or she hasn't tried any other method of settling it. In particular, since it has to do with American politics, it should go to Arbitration Enforcement. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:27, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
NPP RfC phab task
I created phab:T149019. When I added it to the RfC, I reread the end of your close where you said that you would do it. Sorry for stepping on your toes. — JJMC89 (T·C) 21:31, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
NPP RfC other tasks
Thank you for your closure and listing the task at Phab.
- A newsletter has been prepared for all former and current patrollers and a mass mailing list needs to be complied. I have a list of the different sources that will compile this list but someone with a knowledge of Quarry will need to write the search regex (or whatever) and extract the data. from SQL.
- A new page also explains what has happened. This is a sub page of NPP at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers
- The content of the page at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers can also be used as the basis for he policy page.
- The content of the page at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers can also be used as the basis for he system at WP:PERM
Also pinging MusikAnimal. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:22, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
A brownie for you!
|
Thanks a ton for all of your diligent SPI work. I should be able to clerk some more now. GABgab 03:18, 27 October 2016 (UTC) |
Please comment on Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC for patroller qualifications
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC for patroller qualifications. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 4 November 2016
- In the media: Washington Post continues in-depth Wikipedia coverage
- Wikicup: WikiCup winners
- Discussion report: What's on your tech wishlist for the coming year?
- Technology report: New guideline for technical collaboration; citation templates now flag open access content
- Featured content: Cream of the crop
- Traffic report: Un-presidential politics
- Arbitration report: Recapping October's activities
New Page Review needs your help
Hi L235,
As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).
Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.
Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.
It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.
(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, L235. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, L235. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
New Page Review - newsletter
- Breaking the back of the backlog
If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
- Second set of eyes
Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.
- Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote
With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation.
Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC) .
Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:30, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 4 November 2016
- News and notes: Arbitration Committee elections commence
- Featured content: Featured mix
- Special report: Taking stock of the Good Article backlog
- Traffic report: President-elect Trump
Please comment on Talk:Star Wars expanded universe
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Star Wars expanded universe. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Assume good faith
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Assume good faith. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected
New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))
New Page Review - newsletter #2
- Please help reduce the New Page backlog
This is our second request. The backlog is still growing. Your help is needed now - just a few minutes each day.
- Getting the tools we need
ONLY TWO DAYS LEFT TO VOTE
Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:54, 11 December 2016 (UTC) .
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Thanks for the gold! Here's a kitten!
Please comment on Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 22 December 2016
- Year in review: Looking back on 2016
- News and notes: Strategic planning update; English ArbCom election results
- Special report: German ArbCom implodes
- Featured content: The Christmas edition
- Technology report: Labs improvements impact 2016 Tool Labs survey results
- Traffic report: Post-election traffic blues
- Recent research: One study and several abstracts
Extended confirmed protection policy RfC
You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob13Talk (sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC))
Please comment on Talk:Deadmau5
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Deadmau5. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected
AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Seasons Greetings!
.jpg)
.jpg)
Hello L235: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, -- Dane talk 08:26, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
,_cropped.jpg)
- Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message
Yo Ho Ho
Doug Weller talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec16a}} to your friends' talk pages.
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Copyrights
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Copyrights. Legobot (talk) 04:34, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Glossary
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Glossary. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
ARBCOM clarification/amendments
Hi Kevin. You recently helped clear up my request over at the ARBCOM clarification/amendments page. Thanks very much for that. You suggested I use the template. I actually did try to use the template, but it was leaving content in like | (pipes, I believe they are called). Perhaps the ease of using this template needs to be looked at sometime. Once again, thanks for your help. DrChrissy (talk) 20:51, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Editor of the Week seeking nominations (and a new facilitator)
The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.
The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?
Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!
In addition, the WikiProject is seeking a new facilitator/coordinator to handle the logistics of the award. Please contact L235 if you are interested in helping with the logistics of running the award in any capacity. Remove your name from here to unsubscribe from further EotW-related messages. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Words to watch
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Words to watch. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Editor of the Week
It appears that there are currently no accepted nominations waiting to be awarded. Is that correct? Also, I hope I haven't been overly bold in the edits I made on the project pages. I'd very much like to help out at such a worthy project. Lepricavark (talk) 04:37, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Lepricavark: Thanks for your help! Yes, there are currently no accepted nominations, a problem that needs to be remedied. I haven't seen the edits, but the project has been in a state of disrepair, so you're probably fine. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 15:30, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
End of term
Regarding this edit: for cases, as I recall, arbitrators will finish up any that they started before the end of their term, and new arbitrators are free to join any cases in progress. Would the same not apply to other pending business such as motions? isaacl (talk) 06:05, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Files for discussion
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Files for discussion. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:35, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Administrators
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Administrators. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:User categories
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:User categories. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indonesia
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indonesia. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
You have mail
Hi Kevin.
You have mail.
Please comment on Talk:Bronze Wolf Award
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bronze Wolf Award. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 13 January 2017 (UTC)