User talk:Lankiveil/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Christianity and Sexuality

Hi, in response to your message on behalf of ArbCom about the above case, two things. First, my very brief response to the initial case request will be my "evidence". Second, I request removal as a party. My involvement was almost non-existent. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:23, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Can you extend the deadline for evidence phase and other phases? I'm sure that others will bring in more evidence. --George Ho (talk) 04:23, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Bbb23:: Done. @George Ho:: I have brought this to the attention of the drafting arbitrators to make a decision. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 10:24, 28 January 2015 (UTC).

Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:29, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Can you extend the deadline of the Workshop phase? We involved users were not notified about the deadline. --George Ho (talk) 00:49, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Esoglou has not proposed anything; he merely made comments at the Workshop subpage. Can you do something about this? --George Ho (talk) 21:20, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

@George Ho:: I've made User:Esoglou aware of the workshop page and time limit, and he is obviously aware of it given that he has posted on the talkpage. He is not obligated to participate however, if he does not wish to. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 04:42, 16 February 2015 (UTC).

Easter

Re this Talk:Easter#Christianity and sexuality arbitration there appears to be agreement that this article should be unprotected and I should be grateful if you could do this. 156.61.250.250 (talk) 13:04, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm reluctant to go and do this simply because I don't know the context of why it has been semiprotected. Note that the article is not full protected, so anyone with an account who has been around a little while should be able to edit it as if it were open. Paging User:Courcelles here, who was the one to actually s-protect the article in the first place. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:18, 21 February 2015 (UTC).

The problem is that every year at Easter time vandalism on this article picks up to unacceptable levels and the vandalism is constant even throughout the year. I cannot see unprotecting this article to be a good idea at any time but especially not during Lent Courcelles (talk) 04:07, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

In 2013 Easter was 31 March and it was protected on 25 March. However, in 2012 it was 8 April and Courcelles protected it from 18 March for three months. There was no significant vandalism for the rest of the year. Courcelles protected Valentine's Day (14 February) for two months from 8 January. So maybe we could revisit this in two months' time, by which time Easter will have come and gone. 156.61.250.250 (talk) 10:01, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter

One of several of Godot13's quality submissions during round 1

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.

In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:

• Cwmhiraeth (submissions) took Bumblebee, a level-4 vital article, to Good Article;
• AHeneen (submissions) worked-up the Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 article, also to Good Article status;
• Rodw (submissions) developed an extremely timely article to Good Article, taking Magna Carta there some 800 years after it was first sealed;
• And last but not least, Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points) worked up a number of Featured Pictures during round 1, including the 1948 one Deutsche Mark (pictured right), receiving the maximum bonus due to the number of Wikis that the related article appears in.

You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!

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. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)

Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:54, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter

One of several of Godot13's quality submissions during round 1

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.

In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:

• Cwmhiraeth (submissions) took Bumblebee, a level-4 vital article, to Good Article;
• AHeneen (submissions) worked-up the Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 article, also to Good Article status;
• Rodw (submissions) developed an extremely timely article to Good Article, taking Magna Carta there some 800 years after it was first sealed;
• And last but not least, Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points) worked up a number of Featured Pictures during round 1, including the 1948 one Deutsche Mark (pictured right), receiving the maximum bonus due to the number of Wikis that the related article appears in.

You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!

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. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)

Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Brook Ziporyn deletion query

Hi Lankiveil;

Apologies, but I have a question about the Brook Ziporyn deletion. I appreciate that you moved it to somewhere rather than deleting it completely, but I don't know what that means. Can I access it and edit? If so, how? If I add enough material to justify reconsideration, what do I do? I see that there is a deletion review procedure. Cheers in any case.ch (talk) 18:07, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

@CWH: You can access (and continue to edit) the text of the article at Draft:Brook Ziporyn. I don't have time to look into it in detail and offer specific advice, but the usual procedure is to correct whatever issue it was that caused the article to be deleted in the first place, and then resubmit to somewhere like Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Good luck! Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 23:21, 2 March 2015 (UTC).

Thanks! ch (talk) 02:24, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight/2015 CUOS appointments

Please note the nominations have been posted, and there are standard questions to be answered. Members of the community may also ask questions, so please monitor your nomination(s) until the comment period is concluded on the 18th. Those who are running for both flags have two sections, and two copies of the standard questions -- the first two, at least, are likely to have different answers, so this isn't redundant. (The third one, well, it does.) Thanks for your willingness to serve. Courcelles (talk) 06:35, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 10

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 10, January-February 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

• New donations - ProjectMUSE, Dynamed, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, and Women Writers Online
• New TWL coordinator, conference news, and a new guide and template for archivists
• TWL moves into the new Community Engagement department at the WMF, quarterly review

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Restricted from making no more...

Hello Lankiveil. Regarding your recent post of the Arbcom decision. The wording 'Restricted from making no more than one revert..' should presumably be 'Restricted from making more than one revert..' i.e the word 'no' should be removed. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 02:55, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Good pickup, thanks. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 03:21, 7 March 2015 (UTC).

Discretionary sanctions involving articles related to Christianity and sexuality

I've already notified Roscelese and Dominus Vobisdu about sanctions placed upon them. Besides Talk:homosexuality and Roman Catholicism, are there any other talk pages that I can add "discretionary sanctions" template into? Also, how do restrictions work for those not yet blocked? Will their privileges be affected by this? --George Ho (talk) 02:05, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

The decision can't be read there

Hi, Lankiveil. The link to the Christianity and Sexuality decision in the notices you've sent out today doesn't work. Bishonen | talk 16:13, 7 March 2015 (UTC).

I think it's also standard practice to link to the discussion page for the case in the messages? If so, the version at WP:AN doesn't have such a link. I also wonder if it might be useful to mention User:Roscelese's restrictions may be appealed after a year/12 months. I found the current version slightly confusing since this is mentioned for the other 3, but not for Roscelese so I was wondering if there was no set date for when they could appeal. Cheers. Nil Einne (talk) 17:40, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

@Bishonen: Thanks, I'll look into and correct it at the earliest possible opportunity. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 05:16, 9 March 2015 (UTC).

Request for comment

There's a request for comment opened on the "Involuntary Celibacy" article, with the same editor trying to restore it as the one who tried to do so previously with the latest Deletion Review. I thought you might be interested in this because of your previous involvement in the subject. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 20:35, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Voting on functionary candidates

This is occurring at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions. Courcelles (talk) 19:32, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Revdel at Draft:Billy's Cult

I notice that you deleted most of the revisions with copyright violations from this page. Thank you.

However, the first and last revisions in the range I tagged (648978692 and 650639509) are still visible with copyright violations. I hope you can delete these revisions as well. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 01:18, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Anon126: Done. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 10:17, 28 March 2015 (UTC).

A new reference tool

Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I believe my Article was notable enough this time

Hello. I believe my Article was notable enough this time however it is deleted without giving me any satisfactory explanation. The procedure i have followed: Make draft, join chat and spend 1 whole day to edit and compose excellent article based on suggestion and edits by experts at the chat, submit draft, draft accepted, draft reviewed and edited by WikiProject_Video_games editor and completely published. Then i ask chat again about isn’t this too much edit? then primefac opens speedy delete then it is deleted without giving me any explanation in matter of minutes. If you check the issue i appreciate ty very much : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MonsterMMORPG . And there were not any discussion it was deleted immediately. One more notice: I checked same genre games articles and majority of them have way more less authority references and even some have 0 references. Thank you very much for your help. OnlineGamesExpert (talk) 12:37, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

For the benefit of talk page stalkers or those fascinated by user talk archives, this user posted the above message to a number of administrators completely uninvolved with the matter. Further discussion is available on their talk page. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 13:49, 14 April 2015 (UTC).

I'm Concerned With Your Delete-Happy Trigger Finger Recently

I agree with the person above me. The "Comedy Dynamics" page wasn't in need of deletion either, and especially without explanation from you. The organization HAS attracted the notice of reliable sources unrelated to the organization or product, including The New York Times. Notability is not synonymous with fame or importance and the organization has had significant or demonstrable effects on culture and entertainment. Just because large organizations and their products are likely to have more readily available verifiable information from reliable sources that provide evidence of notability doesn’t mean smaller organizations and their products can’t be notable. Arbitrary standards should not be used to create a bias favoring larger organizations or their products. ComedyGuy15 (talk) 22:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

For the record, there was a discussion on whether to keep the article in question which came to a pretty clear consensus that the article didn't meet our criteria, with yourself as the only dissenter. There are avenues to appeal this, but the aggressive tone and insults in the above message are unlikely to assist with ~demonstrating that you're acting in good faith. As far as our standards on notability and the like, they are arrived at through a consensus of all editors and are much bigger than I am. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 13:53, 14 April 2015 (UTC).

Beat you to it?

Huh? I didn't do anything. -- Euryalus (talk) 11:12, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Hillary Rodham Clinton - Move Discussion

Hi,

This is a notification to let you know that there is a requested move discussion ongoing at Talk:Hillary_Rodham_Clinton/April_2015_move_request#Requested_move. You are receiving this notification because you have previously participated in some capacity in naming discussions related to the article in question.

Thanks. And have a nice day. NickCT (talk) 18:44, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

AfD

Hello, I've reopened a AfD re. Nicholas M. Loeb which you seemed to have pushed for in 2013 without consensus. Perhaps you can weigh in? Bdbdd (talk) 01:49, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 May newsletter

C/2014 Q2 (Lovejoy) is a long-period comet discovered on 17 August 2014 by Terry Lovejoy; and is one of several Featured Pictures worked up by The Herald (submissions) during the second round.

The second round one has all wrapped up, and round three has now begun! Congratulations to the 34 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our second round. Leading the way overall was Cas Liber (submissions) in Group B with a total of 777 points for a variety of contributions including Good Articles on Corona Borealis and Microscopium - both of which received the maximum bonus.

Special credit must be given to a number of high importance articles improved during the second round.

• Coemgenus (submissions) was one of several users who worked on improving Ulysses S. Grant. Remember, you do not need to work on an article on your own - as long as each person has completed significant work on the article during 2015, multiple competitors can claim the same article.
• Cwmhiraeth (submissions) took Dragonfly to Good Article for a 3x bonus - and if that wasn't enough, they also took Damselfly there as well for a 2x bonus.
• LeftAire (submissions) worked up Alexander Hamilton to Good Article for the maximum bonus. Hamilton was one of the founding fathers of the United States and is a level 4 vital article.

The points varied across groups, with the lowest score required to gain automatic qualification was 68 in Group A - meanwhile the second place score in Group H was 404, which would have been high enough to win all but one of the other Groups! As well as the top two of each group automatically going through to the third round, a minimum score of 55 was required for a wildcard competitor to go through. We had a three-way tie at 55 points and all three have qualified for the next round, in the spirit of fairness. The third round ends on June 28, with the top two in each group progressing automatically while the remaining 16 highest scorers across all four groups go through as wildcards. Good luck to all competitors for the third round! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) 16:35, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 11

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 11, March-April 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - MIT Press Journals, Sage Stats, Hein Online and more
• New TWL coordinators, conference news, and new reference projects
• Spotlight: Two metadata librarians talk about how library professionals can work with Wikipedia

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:27, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dinnerbone

I don't think it makes sense to redirect this to Mojang when the topic is not mentioned in the article. If his contribution to the project (Bukkit) is even mentioned in the article (in the future), it won't be by this individual's name or individual contribution (based on the sourcing about it). The policy-backed comments do not appear to have been given proper weight in the close. czar ⨹ 21:32, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

There seems to be quite a bit of chatter online about this person, even though none of it is in reliable sources that would justify retaining a standalone article. It's therefore not beyond the realms of reasonable possibility a reader will search for that particular headword, and it's best to give them something that is relevant. I'm not particularly married to the selected target, so feel free to point it somewhere else if you think that's more appropriate or useful for our readers. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 09:59, 6 May 2015 (UTC).

New question raised regarding Talk:Hillary Rodham Clinton/April 2015 move request

Some opposers of this move have now contended that there is a "Critical fault in proposal evidence", which brings the opinions expressed into question. Please indicate if this assertion in any way affects your position with respect to the proposed move. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:37, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Spa tags at AfD

I reverted the addition of some of the spa tags that you placed on editors at the AfD for Robert H. Richards IV. The only ones I removed were the ones that did not deal with the user being tagged, for example, you had tagged Ankit255 with both a spa tag for him (which was appropriate) and with one for Joshuafraiser (which was not appropriate). In addition, you tagged an editor who has apparently been on wikipedia for 8 years with both of the above tags.

If you believe them to be socks, you should take the issue to SPI, not tag them with other people's spa tags. You're an admin and arbcom clerk, you should know better. Regards, GregJackP Boomer! 13:56, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

My apologies. I just went through the diffs one by one, and realized that the inappropriate tags had been added by the spas, probably in a effort to depreciate the tags value. I had based my initial comments on the edit summaries, which I should have known better. Anyway, I apologize. GregJackP Boomer! 14:13, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

@GregJackP: No problems, and thanks for your vigilance. One of the SPA accounts ripped off my custom signature too. It's unfortunate that Reddit meatpuppets are flooding the discussion, but I'm sure that the closing admin will be able to look at it and make an appropriate call on what to do. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:27, 11 May 2015 (UTC).

You've got mail!

Hello, Lankiveil. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is [Clerks-l] Resignation.
Message added 16:29, 22 May 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Please see this, from the clerks' list. Due to recent events, would you be willing to clerk for OZ+others? More details in the email. Thanks. --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 16:29, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

WMAU Symposium on MassMessage Usage

You are invited, to a conference at the University of Eucla, to discuss how MassMessage might be more effectively used to organise events in Australia. Please indicate your acceptance of this offer via the usual method (carrier pidgeon). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:17, 23 May 2015 (UTC).

Comedy Dynamics Page Deletion

Hi. I went to work on the Comedy Dynamics page and I see it has been previously deleted. Why was it deleted and what can I do to make it okay for Wikipedia? Thanks!

Dynamics15 (talk) 02:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

@Dynamics15: Firstly, are you in any way associated with the company? If so, you need to be familiar with the section of Wikipedia's WP:TOU concerning paid contributions. Then, you need to be sure that the company in question is notable, as defined by the criteria at WP:42. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:15, 24 May 2015 (UTC).

Case closed

Don't you think that the standard "Discuss this ..." to a user whose talk page access is revoked is kind of bitter irony? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:50, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Lankiveil. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

CookieMonster755 ^(talk) 00:51, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

@CookieMonster755: I'll reply here for the sake of transparency. The background and reasoning can be found at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/OccultZone and others. I hope that OccultZone is able to successfully appeal once given leave to do so and returning to editing without the disruptive sockpuppeting. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 23:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC).

Hotel Okura Amsterdam

Hi, I am deeply unhappy with your decision in the AfD about Hotel Okura Amsterdam. I have never seen the discussion, otherwise I would have weight in. Is there any chance to change the outcome from "merge" to "delete"? After all, it would be rather strange to let the hotel article point to just one of the four well known restaurants (three with stars, one with Bib Gourmand). And reviewing the present article about the hotel, the most useful part is the address and this is/will be in the articles about the Michelin starred restaurants.

An other point is that mixing two subjects in one article (restaurant and hotel) is not the best idea. Hope to hear soon. The Banner talk 10:15, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

@The Banner: I think that the consensus was pretty clear for Merge, although I'm happy for you to exercise whatever discretion you like in deciding what to merge, and picking additional targets like Yamazato if you wish. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 10:48, 8 June 2015 (UTC).

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

The Wikipedia Library

Call for Volunteers

The Wikipedia Library is expanding, and we need your help! With only a couple of hours per week, you can make a big difference in helping editors get access to reliable sources and other resources. Sign up for one of the following roles:

• Account coordinators help distribute research accounts to editors.
• Partner coordinators seek donations from new partners.
• Outreach coordinators reach out to the community through blog posts, social media, and newsletters or notifications.
• Technical coordinators advise on building tools to support the library's work.

Sign up to help here :)

Delivered on behalf of The Wikipedia Library by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012–13 Hyde F.C. season

I'm surprised that you deleted 2012–13 Hyde F.C. season given that there was no refutation of my argument that the article met WP:GNG and the case against it was on other grounds. I'm even more surprised that you didn't address that in the closing statement. Can you please expand on your closing statement? Nfitz (talk) 11:15, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

@Nfitz: I feel that User:Number 57 fairly conclusively refuted your argument. I also took note of the fact that you were the only one dissenting in a fairly well attended discussion from the proposal to delete the article. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:35, 8 June 2015 (UTC).

• How did User:Number 57 refute my argument at all, let alone conclusively? My argument is that based on the references in the article, and other provided, that the subject meets WP:GNG. User:Number 57 didn't even attempt to refute that, but simply repeated other claims - which aren't relevant, because WP:GNG trumps those claims. In addition, after I pointed to sources that supported the WP:GNG claim, no other editor even commented - other than User:Number 57. As such, I think the closing statement needs more detail. And the more I look at this, it looks like a bad close, that should be going to DRV. Nfitz (talk) 15:27, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Nfitz: Your record at AfD and of deprodding articles (look at your deleted user contributions) suggests that you do not understand GNG, or have a rather different interpretation of it to the majority of other editors. I suggest that rather than continue to waste editors time by forcing AfDs or DRVs when the outcome is fairly predictable, you accept the apparent consensus that certain topics are not deemed notable by other editors, and instead concentrate on topics that are notable. Although your behaviour in this sphere has been regarded as a problem for years, it really looks like you now appear to be little more than a WP:SPA dedicated to removing prods and arguing keep at AfDs – I can't see a single edit in your last 50 (since mid-May) that isn't in some way related to doing this. Number 57 15:53, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Hang on. That's a completely unnecessary personal attack. Also the link you provided is broken (for me at least). Please provide a version I can review. I can't recall DRVing an article in a long time - I'm not sure what's that in reference too. The last couple I can think of were simple restoration requests that were done without much debate. Many of the articles I've deprodded that ended up in consensus that the articles should exist; some haven't. I'd suggest that User:Number 57 is completely out-of-line here with WP:AFG violations. It also completely fails to address the argument that this particular article does indeed meet WP:GNG. In addition #57 implies I'm a serial DRVer; I can only find 2 DRVs I've raised in the last 5 years. One was quickly overturned (article restored), and the other was withdrawn and the article restored as the player got a professional start. Going further back I raised a single DRV in 2009 that was overturned (article was returned to AFD and subsequently kept). I did raise some in 2008 ... is that relevant though? Nfitz (talk) 16:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
      • @Nfitz: I'm not sure how stating the facts constitute a personal attack; you are not a serial DRVer (I never said you were), but you are a serial deprodder (your contributions history clearly show you do little else these days; your last edit not related to an AfD or prod was on 4 May, since which you have made 85 edits, including removing prods from seven articles that were subsequently deleted at AfD) and have forced tens of pointless AfDs. I wasn't aware that non-admins wouldn't be able to see that link, but basically it shows all the articles you deprodded (often claiming GNG) that were subsequently deleted. Your behaviour has even previously been reported on ANI. Number 57 18:39, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
        • That doesn't seven make sense. 7 articles deleted at AFD since May 4th but 10s of AFDs? That suggests that many were kept after going to AFD. And off-hand I can see about 10 in that time that didn't even go to AFD, because no one thought it was worth deleting after my deprod comments. Sure, I make mistake some times, but more of the articles I deprod are kept, then deleted. I've certainly had plenty of edits that aren't deletion-related ... though certainly less lately now that the soccer season has started ... I'm not sure why you are focussing only on the last few weeks ... I've got a decade of editing, with some very long breaks, and only a few edits in recent weeks. Though even since May 4th, I've done some article clean-up after it's clear an article won't be deleted; But none of this has any relevance to this discussion, for which you've done everything but refute the claim that the article in question meets [[WP:GNG]. Perhaps we should for the moderator to comment, rather than you persisting in WP:AGF violations. Nfitz (talk) 19:16, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
          • @Nfitz: Read again and check where parts of sentences are in parentheses. This has been a problem since at least 2008, so any GF was lost many moons ago. Number 57 19:28, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
            • This is all very interesting, but I think I've answered the original question sufficiently, and anyone who thinks I have erred is welcome to go to DRV. In the meantime, it would be good if you could take this new discussion off of my talkpage. Thanks, Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 23:34, 8 June 2015 (UTC).
• Back to original question. Can you point to where anyone refuted WP:GNG argument? Sorry to belabour this, but I'm perplexed by all the chaff, but no substance. Nfitz (talk) 00:43, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Again, all I have to offer is that obviously every other participant in the discussion did not agree with your assertion that the topic met the GNG. These things are subjective, and it is possible to disagree on them. However, the consensus in this one was pretty clear I thought. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 14:13, 10 June 2015 (UTC).
    • I thought decisions were made on strength of argument, not number of votes. I'm not actually seeing anywhere in the debate where anyone challenges the WP:GNG claim I made after I provided references. Nfitz (talk) 03:38, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
      • Also note that Wikipedia guidlines such as Wikipedia:Guide to deletion#Closure say that during closure "A good admin will transparently explain how the decision was reached" - surely then there is an expection of some kind of closing statement in an AFD, where no one contested the Keep argument after it was made. I'm not asking you to revert; I'm simply asking you to complete the closure as per Wikipedia guidelines. Nfitz (talk) 16:34, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
        • As I said, if the article was a slamdunk GNG case, then I'd expect that more than a single participant would have pointed that out. I think your argument is a lot weaker than you think it is. There was no way that anyone was going to close a case with such a strong consensus for delete in any other way, sorry. As for explaining it, no admin gives a detailed rationale for every discussion, I have met the guidelines by responding to you here. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 01:22, 13 June 2015 (UTC).
          • I'd always assumed that guideline applied to the closing statement, rather than post-closing discussion - but you have fulfilled the guideline. I don't think it's a slamdunk GNG case either - but I think there is a case, and the debate is worth having, as I'm not aware of much debate on this (GNG) aspect of 5th tier clubs that operate on a national level (though I'd be happy if someone was to point me one - the ones that I've pointed too have made no claims of GNG). No, I don't think it would have been closed as a keep either, based on the debate - I'd have assumed it would have been relisted for further debate. Only one editor commented after I provided references supporting GNG - and they never mentioned the GNG aspect of this. In addition, no attempt was made at any time during the process to contact any of the stakeholders (anyone who has ever edited the article) - WP:DGFA notes that If the major stakeholders have not been notified of the proposed deletion or given time to respond, reliable consensus determinations will rarely be possible; finally at about midnight BST on June 8th, I contacted a single stakeholder [1] however you closed the discussion about 8 hours later at 8 AM BST without any participation (or probably any knowledge) of the stakeholder. I'd have thought that the discussion should be relisted for further debate. Though it's presumably too late to do this at this stage; so I assume we are looking at DRV (which isn't a place I really want to go - mostly from a time perspective) - though I wonder if perhaps debating subject in another forum might be appropriate. Nfitz (talk) 16:12, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism by User:Samee

One Vandal namely User:Samee nominated article namely Rehmat Aziz for deletion. After consensus the decision was strong keep. Now the Vandal Samee removed all content from article Rehmat Aziz, deleted all references, all photos, all sources, all external links for his personal enmity with the renowned personality Rehmat Aziz. It is pertinent to mention here that he is the confirmed vandal in urdu wikipedia and the administrator of urdu wikipedia revoked his admin rights due to his vandalism in Urdu Wikipedia and his username has been banned. He is a confirmed sock puppet of User:Farhad Uddin, User:Deepak Chitrali and User:Najaf ali bhayo and they have moved article Rehmat Aziz Chitrali to Rehmat Aziz without any reason. The three users are the same person. User:Samee has been blocked for his vandalism by the administrator of Urdu wiki. Please blockUser:Samee and remove his adminship access and block him for abuse of admin access. I don't think he is qualified for admin or any access in Wikipedia. Please revert all his edits done by the vandalUser:Samee and restore all article to their original position--Abdulqayyumfsc (talk) 13:34, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Initially for the support, despite not knowing you, and now for the guidance I will follow. CtrlXctrlV (talk) 14:17, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

aBan appeal and other issues

Hi, Lankiveil - first I want to thank you for reviewing my case at AN. I realize it is not an easy case considering I've been unable to change the focus from the short duration of the aBan to the events that led up to it, and of course there's Callan who is a well-liked, highly respected admin. I have no animosity toward Callan, but I do believe his bias and preconceived notions are a detriment where I'm concerned. I don't consider my request to be unreasonable. I also understand your perspective since you also work as an ARBCOM clerk which I do appreciate. I can only imagine it being a tedious and thankless job. I looked into applying as a clerk, but the selections had already been made. I now try to help at DRN when time permits, and I close at AN/I from time to time. Back on point - I actually tried my best to not include diffs that were overly incriminating because my purpose was not to get anyone in trouble. I just want the aBan removed from the log and for Callan to recuse himself from future admin interactions against me because of his bias, perceived or otherwise. I truly like Callan, and once trusted his judgment without question but I believe he has the wrong impression of me and that isn't going to change. I have also taken a lot of abuse from Guy and mistakenly believed he would somehow suddenly become more collegiate in his demeanor, but I see now that he will never change. He is who he is and because of his tenure, he will continuously be allowed to get away with things the rest of us will be banned for doing, even if it's to the detriment of the project. That's just how it goes and quite frankly, it's wiki-wide. We're losing editors by the droves - there's an article about Gender_bias_on_Wikipedia, and another article about the Criticism_of_Wikipedia, and we even have a very active project with the hopes of ending the systemic biases. Does that not speak volumes? Editors aren't supposed to be righting great wrongs but that is exactly what is happening when we see pods of editors (cabals) tag-teaming and justifying what they do citing WP:IAR. What we end up with is WP:BRD_misuse and also malleable WP:MEDRS which are now being applied as needed, and yes, it's truly a sad state of affairs.

Based on your response that the arguments used in the appeal were rather unimpressive, I decided to add a few of the more incriminating diffs at AN. You were wise to say that my "continuing to assert bias from those who say you don't want to hear is only going to make people dig in even further." You will get no argument from me in that regard. In retrospect, it appears I stepped right in the middle of what looks very much like a skeptic's advocacy group when I tried to expand the Griffin BLP, not knowing it was intended to be and will remain a coatrack despite the attempts of several experienced BLP editors to correct it. The issues are numerous, some of which clearly reflect both a skeptic and political bias, [2], [3], [4]. Following are more examples of the attacks against me, [5], despite the science, [6], the latter of which also demonstrates the parallels with some of the same editors at the Kombucha article that resulted in my aBan. Guy has never tried to hide the fact that he is a skeptic. He has received accolades from the Guerrilla Skeptic advocacy, the latter of which I actually have no problem with at all. I truly believe they serve a good purpose in their fight against quackery and snake-oil cures. I believe they are trying to do the right thing but as with any organization there will always be the "overzealous" members and it appears GS may have more than their share. In light of it all, I made the decision to not take the behavioral issues to ARBCOM but I am now having second thoughts. I'm not the one who won't drop the stick, Lankiveil. I'm the one who is getting beaten by it no matter where I go and I just want the beatings to stop.

The sad part is that none of the allegations made against me are true, not one, but when a lie is repeated enough times, it becomes the truth, and that is exactly what's happening. It's also what I believe is the root cause for Callan's bias against me. I am not convinced that he has actually taken the time to analyze content or the root cause of the arguments. Few admins actually have the time to do so, therefore it is not inconceivable to think they pick sides and take whatever they are told at face value. Another very useful tactic is the age old attack and discredit deployment as the diffs I just uploaded to AN will evidence. I've also provided a few here:

• [7] was rewarded with this [8], [9].
• [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], and there are numerous others, none of which reflects an ounce of accuracy and are full of misinformation which is why diffs never accompany the allegations. I've AGF, wrote an essay about what I perceive some of the problems to be, WP:AVDUCK, was attacked for writing it, and the attacks continue. Some of the same editors are now preventing me from expanding and improving the essay I created and co-authored, and have made false accusations against me. What is fair about any of this, Lankiveil? My edits are reverted by some of the same tag team members who reverted me at Griffin and Kombucha. One would have to be blind to see it's clearly a matter of "gaming of the system", and fooling admins into believing I'm the bad guy like what just happened to me with Callan. Atsme^📞📧 20:03, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I've thought for a few days about how to respond to this. I guess that your reply though exemplifies what I see as the problem; a whole bunch of people are saying, without a whole load of attitude or bitterness, that something you did wasn't ideal, and you persist in trying to argue the point. These things happen, you can't win them all, but you're not doing yourself any favours, or going to get closer to what you want, by continually bringing it up. Wear it, and move on so that the whole thing is forgotten in fifteen minutes, is my advice. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:04, 12 July 2015 (UTC).

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Dylann Ceriani is a very good contribution that also solved an unpleasant problem. Thank you very much for your work on it. BDD (talk) 16:31, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

And true to my word, I'll give US$ 10 to a relevant charitable group. Do you have a preference? --BDD (talk) 16:34, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

@BDD: No real preference, and no real need to donate the money at all if it's any hassle whatsoever. If you insist, then any local charity in your area that provides relief for neglected children will do nicely. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:05, 12 July 2015 (UTC).

 Done Thanks again. --BDD (talk) 13:13, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 12

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 12, May-June 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - Taylor & Francis, Science, and three new French-language resources
• Expansion into new languages, including French, Finnish, Turkish, and Farsi
• Spotlight: New partners for the Visiting Scholar program
• American Library Association Annual meeting in San Francisco

Read the full newsletter

The Interior 15:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Time's Arrow and tagging for Notability

I'd appreciate it if you could offer an opinion on this discussion given your participation at the relevant AFD. Thanks! DonIago (talk) 14:51, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Community desysoping RfC

Hi. You are invited to comment at RfC for BARC - a community desysoping process. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:09, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

nudge

• Political_positions_of_Ann_Coulter

you saw my message didn't you, it was three minutes before your last edit - please reply Govindaharihari (talk) 07:08, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

@Govindaharihari: For whatever reason I didn't get a notification, but assuming you are talking about this, I don't agree with your reasoning. I don't see any particular hurry, and once we're over the seven day mark it can be closed by anyone as soon as there's consensus. Other than that, I think my reasoning is explained by my relist comment. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 09:09, 25 July 2015 (UTC).

it has already been open ten days, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Political_positions_of_Ann_Coulter there is and was already a clear consensus when you re-listed it Govindaharihari (talk) 23:19, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

You need to accept, apart from conflicted wp:coi wikipedia editors no one is interested· - a few people commented - its over, close it down, reopen it for nothing, no one is coming - as for your claim of explanation in your relist comment, you were wrong also, you should have just created the redirect and closed the discussion. Govindaharihari (talk) 23:28, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

There is no consensus, there is nobody asking for a redirect except you. Perhaps people will go for that, perhaps they won't. Your coming here to my talkpage and aggressively insulting me is unlikely to change that view. I think you need to consider your own desire to be rid of the page is clouding your assessment of the discussion. I'm not willing to enter into further discussion of this type here, take it to WP:AN if you feel you must. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 04:21, 26 July 2015 (UTC).

Request to Lankiveil for adjudication

I am seeking your valued judgment in pursuit of correcting a gross misrepresentation and in my view totally unjustified blocking/deletion action by a fellow Wikipedian under code name ScrapIronIV. The issue is as follows: In Wikipedia's "Hungarians in Australia" website there is a "Also see" portal which follows the article proper. Under that portal, my recent entry contribution was a subject of interest to Wikipedia readers but more so to Hungarians, Hungarian descent ones and to ethno-social researchers in future. ScrapIron IV arbitrarily deleted this contribution, the subject title of which was "Hungarian Immigration in Australia". As required, my entry was properly cross-referenced to the specific website of the Australian Dictionary of Biography, administered by the Australian National University History Department. The subject is important enough to be a source of information in line with Wikipedia guidelines. So why the deletion? What is the problem? I sought his argument and ScrapIron's response in verbatim was:

" This article is not your website. Whether it is of interest to anyone but you is questionable at best. It is an unvetted, unsourced, and personal essay - by you personally - that you are attempting to insert into the article. Please see WP:COI as you have a clear conflict of interest in attempting to push it into a list-class article. You need to find another place to promote your essay; Wikipedia is not that place. Scr★pIronIV 04:37, 23 July 2015 (UTC)".

My contention is that far from promoting myself thus violation of WP: Conflict of Interest rules as the author of the article alleges, instead I wish to spread the knowledge of the history of Hungarian immigration in Australia in the appropriate Wikipedia site (not my name for mentioning there)to those interested and prepared to access my research based, thoroughly vetted and sourced article/essay. Naturally every scholarly work has its author and I make no apologies for my article published online at The Australian Dictionary of Biography's "Essays" portal, under:http://adb.anu.edu.au/essay/13. Thank youAttilaurm (talk) 08:59, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

@Attilaurm: I'm sorry to say that while I do think that User:ScrapIronIV was slightly unkind in the way he put it, I'm afraid I do find I agree with the substance of their argument. There's nothing wrong with your essay, and congratulations are in order for getting it published somewhere reputable like the ADB. But there's just something a little off about linking to your own essay. I think it'd be best to wait for someone independent and unrelated to make the call about whether it should be included as a source or an external link. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:08, 24 July 2015 (UTC).

The post to which I responded on my talk page was a shouted "UNJUSTIFIED DELETION" header with accusations of my edit being arbitrary, accompanied by threats to report me to Wikipedia administration. So, if my response was less than perfectly kind, then all I can say is that one catches more flies with honey than with vinegar. Scr★pIron^IV 13:31, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, that's a good point too that User:Attilaurm should take account of. A little less haste to pull the trigger and a little more kindness and understanding might have stopped the situation getting unpleasant. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 09:10, 25 July 2015 (UTC).

Thanks Lankiveil for your reflection. It is pleasing to see that you agree on the merit of the article that I tried to cross-reference into Wikipedia, mentioning as secondary, the august institution A.D.B. that already published it for the benefit of the Australian public. I was naturally more than annoyed as in this case the messenger was shot under false accusations with the deletion of the User: ScrapIronIV. My warning to him was not a threat but I concede that it should not have intimated the High Court of Wikipedia when I sought justice, when in fact I referred the matter for your adjudication as a first step. Now that the situation has been clarified, the test of genuineness will be seen when the deletion is restored. Thank youAttilaurm (talk) 02:17, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day

Happy First Edit Day, Lankiveil, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Anastasia [Missionedit] (talk) 00:55, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

REQUEST TO LANKIVEIL FOR ANOTHER NEW ISSUE FOR ADJUDICATION

Emboldened by your advice to me when responding to my earlier Request to you for adjudication, on 12 August 2015, ScrapIronIV saw to fit to delete once more arbitrarily and in wholesale fashion, this time the entire Reference Section which had been designed by Wikipedia to provide space for valuable general supportive information about content matters in the Article concerned. In this instance listed Notable Hungarians, Hungarian Immigration in Australia etc., are all directly relevant reference literature contributed by Wikipedia Users in good faith and for the benefit of all Wikipedia readers. Thank you.Attilaurm (talk) 01:32, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Jason McLean

Hi I'm new and I wrote the page on jason mclean I have now added the disclaimer to his weebly. http://jasonmclean.weebly.com/biography.html I made his wiki site for his bday present, and now you deleted it. I am really disliking wikipedia right now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jlfraser37#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Jason_McLean this is an awful experience. Jennifer Fraser

@Jlfraser37: I'm sorry your experience has not been positive, but Wikipedia absolutely cannot under any circumstances hold onto copyrighted text. I note that the page on Weebly now has an explicit licence release (this is good, it means we can hold onto it for now), but the tone of the article is still no good for a neutral encyclopædia article. I'll chip away at it to see what I can do this afternoon, but it may still attract some negative attention from other editors. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 06:09, 16 August 2015 (UTC).

please give me a few days I will be editing it. He should have a wikipedia page. and what I am posting is what I have written. No this is not a good experience at all. Also, I have permission to use the images I am using. it is 2am where I am, I don't want to fight with editors on wikipedia right now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlfraser37 (talk • contribs) 06:13, 16 August 2015 (UTC) and thank you for editing the page. Can you ask reddogsix to stop deleting things too? Woah!! wikipedia is out of control. I added a picture I took and gave it free to wikipedia, but editor be cray cray. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlfraser37 (talk • contribs) 06:31, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration case opened

You may opt-out of future notification regarding this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 8, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:43, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the support

...on my recent unblock request. I promise I won't make you end up looking foolish. See you around the project. Useitorloseit (talk) 19:48, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

You're invited! Women in Red World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Leadership

You are invited! → World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Leadership ← Come and join us remotely!

World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Leadership Dates: 7 to 20 September 2015 The Virtual Edit-a-thon, hosted by Women in Red, will allow all those keen to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Women in Leadership to participate. As it is a two-week event, inexperienced participants will be able to draw on the assistance of more experienced editors while creating, translating or improving articles on women who are (or have been) prominent in leadership. All levels of Wikipedia editing experience are welcome. RSVP and find more details →here← --Ipigott (talk) 10:14, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Anita Jacoby at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 18:27, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 September newsletter

The finals for the 2015 Wikicup has now begun! Congrats to the 8 contestants who have survived to the finals, and well done and thanks to everyone who took part in rounds 3 and 4.

In round 3, we had a three-way tie for qualification among the wildcard contestants, so we had 34 competitors. The leader was by far Casliber (submissions) in Group B, who earned 1496 points. Although 913 of these points were bonus points, he submitted 15 articles in the DYK category. Second place overall was Coemgenus (submissions) at 864 points, who although submitted just 2 FAs for 400 points, earned double that amount for those articles in bonus points. Everyone who moved forward to Round 4 earned at least 100 points.

The scores required to move onto the semifinals were impressive; the lowest scorer to move onto the finals was 407, making this year's Wikicup as competitive as it's always been. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:

1. Cas Liber (submissions), who is competing in his sixth consecutive Wikicup final, again finished the round in first place, with an impressive 1666 points in Pool B. Casliber writes about the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. A large bulk of his points this round were bonus points.
2. Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points), second place both in Pool B and overall, earned the bulk of his points with FPs, mostly depicting currency.
3. Cwmhiraeth (submissions), first in Pool A, came in third. His specialty is natural science articles; in Round 4, he mostly submitted articles about insects and botany. Five out of the six of the GAs he submitted were level-4 vital articles.
4. Harrias (submissions), second in Pool A, took fourth overall. He tends to focus on articles about cricket and military history, specifically the 1640s First English Civil War.
5. West Virginian (submissions), from Pool A, was our highest-scoring wildcard. West Virginia tends to focus on articles about the history of (what for it!) the U.S. state of West Virginia.
6. Rodw (submissions), from Pool A, likes to work on articles about British geography and places. Most of his points this round were earned from two impressive accomplishments: a GT about Scheduled monuments in Somerset and a FT about English Heritage properties in Somerset.
7. Rationalobserver (submissions), from Pool B, came in seventh overall. RO earned the majority of her points from GARs and PRs, many of which were earned in the final hours of the round.
8. Calvin999 (submissions), also from Pool B, who was competing with RO for the final two spots in the final hours, takes the race for most GARs and PRs—48.

The intense competition between RO and Calvin999 will continue into the finals. They're both eligible for the Newcomers Trophy, given for the first time in the Wikicup; whoever makes the most points will win it.

Good luck to the finalists; the judges are sure that the competition will be fierce!

Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 11:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Lakeside, Montana

Hello. When you rev-deleted recent edits at Lakeside, Montana some fairly heinous BLP vandalism slipped through the cracks. I've reverted it, but you might want to delete it as well, as it's pretty horrible. Thanks a lot. Grayfell (talk) 04:00, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

@Grayfell: Thanks for the headsup. I think I've got it all now, can you check to see if there's anything left. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 04:04, 6 September 2015 (UTC).

Looks good, thank you! Grayfell (talk) 04:06, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Anita Jacoby

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 6 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Retired out page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:16, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of El Morabba3

Uhm, the reason for the deletion of this page was the lack of references which I have provided in the newer article... --Makeandtoss (talk) 08:45, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss: Of the two references added, one is dead. The other one is in Arabic and I can only read with Google Translate, so I don't feel qualified to comment on whether it's suitably reliable. Either way, a single new source doesn't really mean that the article is not "substantially identical". If you like I'd be happy to move this into the draft space so someone who knows about this area (the participants in the AFD perhaps) can have a look and see if their concerns are addressed. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 10:08, 8 September 2015 (UTC).

Ok, but I can of course add more links--Makeandtoss (talk) 15:24, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss: Done, and sent to Draft:El Morabba3. Note that the issue that came up at the discussion is not "more links", it's a matter of "better links". Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:05, 11 September 2015 (UTC).

@Lankiveil: I made another similar article with the previous one, called Akher Zapheer if you could kindly help me restore it into a draft page. --Makeandtoss (talk) 11:59, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss: Done, Draft:Akher Zapheer. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:11, 11 September 2015 (UTC).

E-cig case

Sorry bout that, I thought it was still open. GregJackP Boomer! 04:58, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

@GregJackP: No drama! Hopefully the arbs will get a PD up soon so we can move the whole affair to a conclusion. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 05:06, 12 September 2015 (UTC).

Thanks...

for tidying my G7. That was my dumbest typo ever. Bazj (talk) 12:30, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by 15 December

This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.

As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are beginning the transition to the new policy.

An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.

The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that anyone with access to nonpublic information sign the new confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 22 December 2015) to retain their access. You are receiving this email because you have access to nonpublic information and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy.

Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. The general confidentiality agreement is now ready, and the OTRS agreement will be ready after 22 September 2015. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign

If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 22 December 2015) to retain your access to nonpublic information. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.

Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 23:33, 15 September 2015 (UTC) • Translate • Get help

Trent Zimmerman

Please reconsider the deletion of this bio. Given the comment in this yesterday's Sydney Morning Herald (below) I'm sure many people will be looking for information on this notable political figure.

"The current NSW Liberal Party president, Trent Zimmerman is the front runner to replace Mr Hockey in the seat of North Sydney, with the moderate faction claiming a strong hold on the numbers in local branches.

No date has been set for a byelection yet but insiders were not ruling out a factional battle over the preselection, with predictions the Right faction would resist Mr Zimmerman taking the plum seat.

Mr Zimmerman is a long time mover and shaker in the so called 'wet' faction of the Liberals both in state executive and behind the scenes. He has worked for Mr Hockey as a staffer and is currently a senior policy adviser at the lobby group, Tourism and Transport Forum (TTF). He is openly gay and is the current state president of the party."

14:49, 5 February 2015 Deor (talk | contribs) deleted page Trent Zimmerman (per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trent Zimmerman)

Castlemate (talk) 23:03, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

TUSC token 0b59228b9d55f658b15a2fa9c42d1fdd

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Could you tell me what a TUSC account is? Otr500 (talk) 16:40, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 13

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 13, August-September 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - EBSCO, IMF, more newspaper archives, and Arabic resources
• Expansion into new languages, including Viet and Catalan
• Spotlight: Elsevier partnership garners controversy, dialogue
• Conferences: PKP, IFLA, upcoming events

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joanne Faulkner

I am curious as why you closed it when it had only been relisted for one day. LibStar (talk) 14:22, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

@LibStar: Because in that time a rough consensus to keep the article arose. It is not required to keep the discussion open for any particular length of time after a relist, so long as the discussion has been open for the requisite seven days all up. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 14:51, 3 October 2015 (UTC).

Article moved to draft

On 31 December 2014 you closed a deletion discussion as a redirect to Treaty of 1818. I had came on the scene deep into the discussion and saw value in the article, as content not covered or actually related to the specific redirect, except as a by-product after the fact. I expanded the article with references and commented at the discussion. Another editor, the only one to reply after my improvements, made recommendations concerning the name. I contacted you and this resulted in you restoring the article to Draft:Pembina Territory.

A naming problem was evident and I suggested "Pembina Region" but another editor stated it should be "Pembina region". Other articles such as Pembina Valley Region, Black Dirt Region, Calumet Region, and other namings like Columbia Basin capitalize "Region" and there is a source for Pembina Region.[17]

I can move the article to article space and change the name.

Here is what I need to know:

• I still feel that, with the example articles and source, "Region" should be capitalized.
• The move states there is a talk page associated and it will be moved but it shows a redirect. Would it be moved to the new article over redirect?

I am not sure how busy you are but I need to move (restore) the article under the appropriate title and have not done one of these yet. Otr500 (talk) 18:49, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I moved the article (after a screw up) so if you could check it I would be most appreciative. Otr500 (talk) 20:55, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

@Otr500: The article does seem to be at the correct title now, so there's no problem there. However, was there a discussion and consensus about moving this article back into the mainspace under a new name? Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 09:57, 30 September 2015 (UTC).

Your statement to me (above): "@Otr500:: I don't feel I can restore the article so soon after the AFD as-is, but I have restored the article to Draft:Pembina Territory, which you can rename as you see fit and add references to try and address the issues that came up during the discussion. ", concerning our discussion above (when I contacted you). I did not know I was suppose to have a discussion before moving it to another title as I have never done this before. That is why I stated that "I can move the article" but was unsure about certain aspects.

• The talk history still shows a redirect and I was wondering about the naming.

NOTE: I see the revision history is there and that was what I was concerned about more than talk page history. Otr500 (talk)

Since apparently I screwed up what is the solution? If you move the article (as named) back to draft you would need to tell me where this discussion should take place. Also, the lone editor that replied after I made improvements here did not sign his comments, nor did a bot include it.

If you leave it for now, where would I bring up a discussion as that would prevent a possible re-listing.

• In other words--- what is the best way to go with this as I did not bring the article out of draft (after 8 months), to article space, to circumvent any protocol or policy. I thought the issues were solved, the name is correct, the information is encyclopedic, and more specific than adding relevant content to Treaty of 1818 or another article would justify, and that I could just do this. Thanks, Otr500 (talk) 16:37, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

@Otr500: I've gotten rid of the redirects in the "Wikipedia" space, as they were created by accident and not useful. As for the discussion; after having a bit more of a think about it, I think it's fine. There are .gov sources describing it as a capital-R Region, and the original redirect still remains in place per the AFD discussion. In other words, nice work! Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 10:02, 3 October 2015 (UTC).

Thank you. I am sort of upset with myself that I didn't know, but should have considered, about having a discussion prior to making a move and consensus. At the very least a discussion would have been a "stamp of approval" of sorts. I have actually been preparing for such a discussion in case you moved the article back. I was also thinking that it wouldn't have met with any objections. Thanks for your help. Otr500 (talk) 16:46, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Request for undeletion

As per guidelines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Instructions I am asking you to reverse your deletion of this page: [[18]]

John Fairbairn is a prolific author and translator of books on Oriental strategy games.

I am unconnected and unaffiliated with this author.

Works as translator

http://www.abebooks.co.uk/Golden-Opportunities-John-Fairbairn-Yutopian-Enterprises/9031354370/bd

Golden Opportunities is a translation of a work by Japanese 9-dan Rin Kaiho. Published by Yutopian.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Katos-Attack-Kill-Masao-Kato/dp/4871870278

Kato's Attack and Kill is a well-known book in the Go community and has recently been reprinted by Ishi Press.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Appreciating-Famous-Games-Shuzo-Ohira/dp/4871870251

Appreciating Famous Games is a revered and sought-after book in the Go community which reviews 10 famous games from the Edo period in Japan. Originally published by Ishi Press and unfortunately out of print.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Better-Moves-Shogi-Sam-Sloan/dp/4871879992

Better Moves for Better Shogi is a bilingual book translated by Fairbairn and is considered one of the 5 premier reference works on Shogi in the West.

http://www.amazon.com/Direction-Play-Intermediate-Advanced-Books/dp/4906574262

The Direction of Play is a translation of a popular Japanese Go book. Published by Ishi Press.

Works as co-author

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Go-Fundamentals-Everything-Popular-Strategy/dp/4805310707

Go Fundamentals is published by Tuttle and is a popular introduction to the game.

Works as author

This is not an exhaustive list. Other books have been published by this author, these may be the main ones.

Books (print)

http://www.slateandshell.com/SSJF007.html

Old Fuseki vs. New Fuseki John Fairbairn has produced a number of books for independent American-based publishing company Slate and Shell, who, alongside Yutopian, Kiseido, Ishi Press, Hinoki Press, Oromedia and Baduktopia, can be considered the main Western Go publishers.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Shogi-Beginners-John-Fairbairn/dp/4871872017

Shogi for Beginners, alongside Better Moves for Better Shogi, is considered one of the 5 premier reference works on Shogi in the West. Published by Ishi Press.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Intation-Go-v-i-Vol-i/dp/0486433560

Invitation to Go is another popular introductory manual to the game. Published by Dover.

http://www.slateandshell.com/SSJF002.html Kamakura is a collection of game reviews.

http://www.slateandshell.com/SSJF006.html The Meijin's Retirement Game is another collection of game reviews.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Meijin-Meijins-Times-Honinbo-Shuei/dp/1508843058 Meijin of Meijins: The Life and Times of Honinbo Shuei is a recently-published biography of a famous Go player. This is the start of a run of books that John Fairbairn is publishing through Amazon.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/books/dp/1514668297/ Peerless Pioneer is a collection of games from famous historical player Yasui Senkaku. CreateSpace through Amazon.

Books (digital)

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Commentaries-Honinbo-Shuei-John-Fairbairn-ebook/dp/B00BFZ81CS Commentaries of Honinbo Shuei

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Inoue-Genan-Inseki-GoGoD-Vintage-ebook/dp/B005WDEFNS Inoue Genan Inseki

John Fairbairn has also published a 4-volume e-book on games of Honinbo Shuei amongst several other e-books available through Amazon.

Multimedia

http://gogodonline.co.uk/faq/ The GoGoD collection of 80,000+ professional games spanning the last 1,000 years is the best-known collection of professional Go games outside of East Asia. It is the equivalent to the databases published by ChessBase in the chess community.

Journals

John Fairbairn has contributed to many Go journals over the years such as the British Go Journal and Go World Magazine, including 11 years' contributions to Shogi Association Magazine.

As a player

John Fairbairn reached the rank of 3 Dan and has played in several British Go Championship Candidates Tournaments, although never challenging for the title. Ashleylester (talk) 11:10, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

@Ashleylester: I don't think it's in dispute that he's written widely about the subject, but is there anything written about him? Our notability guideline specifies that there should be significant coverage published in reliable sources before an article is created. Is there anything like that you can point me at? Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:34, 9 October 2015 (UTC).

There are articles out there that attribute him as a Go historian, also some articles from the American Go Association. Unfortunately as Go is not the type of thing which is widely discussed outside its own circle, apart from 'unacceptable sources' such as Internet forums, it can be difficult to independently verify someone. I'm pointing you to these links:

"An Interview with John Fairbairn" https://plus.google.com/+Gogameguru/posts/W4MUpyYkdzM "New In Print 2011" http://www.usgo.org/news/2011/08/new-in-print-2011-a-mixed-bag/ "Fair Ball & Farewell" http://www.usgo.org/news/2010/05/go-quiz-fair-ball-farewell/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashleylester (talk • contribs) 16:20, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

CoverHound - Deletion

Please reconsider the deletion of the CoverHound page, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lankiveil&action=edit

The company has “significant new information has come to light since a deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page,” including media coverage in publications like Yahoo Autos, San Francisco Business Journal, New York Business Journal, Insurance Journal, Re/code and Forrester, a very well respected analyst firm. Additionally, CoverHound partnership with Google Compare has been widely discussed and analyzed. We believe this information meets Wikipedia’s Notability requirement and would like to discuss further. KatherineMoura (talk) 20:12, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

@KatherineMoura: Can you link the two best sources here, assuming they clearly and unambiguously meet our WP:Reliable sources criteria? Also, I have to ask because of your use of the word "we", are you affiliated with the firm in any way? Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:53, 7 October 2015 (UTC).

Here’s a link to to two of our best sources.

http://blogs.forrester.com/ellen_carney/15-01-07-is_google_buying_coverhound_the_curious_case_of_the_california_insurance_license

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2015/09/22/382326.htm

I’m happy to share additional coverage at your request. CoverHound was also included in a recent Forrester report.

Yes, I am the Director of Digital Marketing for the company. KatherineMoura (talk) 18:02, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

@KatherineMoura: Thanks for the information. I should first direct you then to Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure which may apply to your situation. I'll also page @Piotrus, SwisterTwister, Kudpung, and FoCuSandLeArN who participated in the original deletion discussion to ask if they feel the above sources make a good case for the notability of your firm. As an encyclopaedia, not every firm or company can or should have an article, and it may be that CoverHound does not yet have the level of coverage yet that will allow us to write a neutral and fair article about it. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:29, 9 October 2015 (UTC).

The article was written in a blatantly promotional tone - that doesn't necessarily mean "Buy from me, I'm the best', though, but it is a good example of Yellow-Pages like company spam. I'm always amused by the sheer insistence of companies and/or their agents to get the company 'listed' on Wikipedia; 'Oh, its not promotional!' they cry. What is it then? They are so persistent with their attemts to appear in our encyclopedia that they obviously believe that their presence here will enhance their image and exposure and ultimately increase their sales. There's no covering up therefore, that Katherine firmly believes Wikipedia to be a valuable venue for showcasing her (or her clients) wares. That's marketing, I'm afraid, and that is strictly not what Wikipedia is for. There is a common misunderstanding also that a plethora of sources automatically adds up to notability. The additional sources cited above do not add to the importance r significance of the article and I'm fairly sure that if the article were brought to WP:DELREV for further discussion the outcome would still be for deletion. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:06, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello there. I think there isn't enough substantial coverage to merit an article at this time. Most mentions are minor, even though they come from reliable sources. The company might garner enough coverage for it to pass general notability in the future, but I feel it hasn't attained that status as of yet. While I might share some of Kudpung's thoughts, I also think businesses are just not used to working with Wikipedia, and a bit of guidance might be in order. Katherine, please don't take it personally; we're trying to build a quality encyclopaedia, and having an article about the company does not contribute towards that goal at present, as deemed by our policies and the community. I suggest you wait it out. Give it a year or two, where we might be able to review sources in a better light. Best, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 12:48, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Also, please study Wikipedia:Notability (companies). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:33, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. We’ll work on growing our footprint and try again next year.KatherineMoura (talk) 18:24, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks much

Thank you for your detailed and well-written close rationale, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Last Voyage of the Starship Enterprise.

Much appreciated,

— Cirt (talk) 03:30, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration case proposed decision posted

Hi Lankiveil. A decision has been proposed in the Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration case, for which you are on the notification list. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 20:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC) (via MediaWiki message delivery (talk))

Deletion of the page Benji e Fede

Why have you deleted this page?? Why isn't it credible? I clearly wrote that their album "20:05" has been the most sold in Italy for three weeks, and the biography was complete. Should I list my sources? Albert de Giusan (talk) 18:10, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

@Albert de Giusan: The article didn't say anything about it selling well in Italy (there was a cryptic and unclear sentence about it being the "most sold", but it didn't say where). In any case, do you have a reliable source that confirms the fact that I can look at. It doesn't matter if it is in English or in Italian. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 02:40, 3 November 2015 (UTC).

Ok,thank you very much,there are a lot of sources in italian,so I'll write them more clearly. I only wanted to specify that they are very famous and not only locally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albert de Giusan (talk • contribs) 16:41, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

@Albert de Giusan: I've restored the text and moved it to Draft:Benji e Fede; feel free to add your references in there to support the claims made. I'd ask you to please get someone to review the finished article before moving it back out of the draft space, unfortunately I'll only be around extremely sporadically for the next week or so, so if you get it done before then you might need to ask someone else. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 04:51, 4 November 2015 (UTC).

WikiCup 2015: The results

WikiCup 2015 is now in the books! Congrats to our finalists and winners, and to everyone who took part in this year's competition.

This year's results were an exact replica of last year's competition. For the second year in a row, the 2015 WikiCup champion is Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points). All of his points were earned for an impressive 253 featured pictures and their associated bonus points (5060 and 1695, respectively). His entries constituted scans of currency from all over the world and scans of medallions awarded to participants of the U.S. Space program. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came in second place; she earned by far the most bonus points (4082), for 4 featured articles, 15 good articles, and 147 DYKs, mostly about in her field of expertise, natural science. Cas Liber (submissions), a finalist every year since 2010, came in third, with 2379 points.

Our newcomer award, presented to the best-performing new competitor in the WikiCup, goes to Rationalobserver (submissions). Everyone should be very proud of the work they accomplished. We will announce our other award winners soon.

A full list of our award winners are:

• Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points) wins the prize for first place and the FP prize for 330 featured pictures in the final round.
• Cwmhiraeth (submissions) wins the prize for second place and the DYK prize for 160 did you knows in the final round (310 in all rounds).
• Cas Liber (submissions) wins the prize for third place and the FA prize for 26 featured articles in all rounds.
• West Virginian (submissions) wins the prize for fourth place
• Calvin999 (submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
• Rationalobserver (submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
• Harrias (submissions) wins a final 8 prize and the FL prize for 11 featured lists.
• Rodw (submissions) wins the most prizes: a final 8 prize, the GA prize for 41 good articles, and the topic prize for a 13-article good topic and an 8-article featured topic, both in round 3.
• ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the news prize for the most news articles in round 3.

We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2016 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · logs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · logs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · logs) 18:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

not test this time

ok this time this is not a "Editing test" am removing "controversial" per WP:WP:LABEL and that source because the source has nothing to do with that word 95.128.118.58 (talk) 18:00, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Gay Asians of Toronto Revert

Hi! I appreciated your input. However, I was actually trying to delete the some of the information on that section, since some of the editors think its coattracking. Let me know if this is a good idea or not, but for now, I want to leave it off and just provide the most essential part of the section which relates to the article itself. Good day. Looking forward for your response! Jana.borras (talk) 02:11, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

@Jana.borras: No problem, since nobody else has reverted I'll leave it be. I suggest making sure that you make sure you use meaningful edit summaries for all such reverse to reduce the chances they'll be mistaken for vandalism as in this case; there should be a setting in your preferences menu somewhere that'll pop up a warning if you forget to enter one. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 10:31, 15 November 2015 (UTC).

Next Meetup Brisbane

Could you arrange a reminder about our next meetup Wikipedia:Meetup/Brisbane/9 this Saturday please.Kgbo (talk) 02:33, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

@Kgbo: Done! Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:31, 18 November 2015 (UTC).

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

TNNT3

Hi Lankiveil. Could you please restore the reference format as the numbered fashions as I just edited? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Transactivator (talk • contribs) 04:25, 28 November 2015 (UTC) @Transactivator: What are you actually trying to do there? Due to the lack of edit summaries, it looks like you're just removing the references wholesale from the article? Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 04:31, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Sorry about the sausage thing, I'm still trying to get used to s few things on here and was testing a few things out.When I tried to change it again to a grey tabby cat...Somebody gave me another warning when it was true!Tarder sauce does have a grey tabby father Doctorpanda8 (talk) 22:26, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

@Doctorpanda8: This is fine, please in the future if you want to do editing tests, I suggest your sandbox as a venue so it doesn't get mistaken for vandalism. As for the extra info about Grumpy Cat, you're welcome to put it in but you'll need to provide a reliable source so that readers can confirm for themselves it's true. Happy editing! Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:32, 29 November 2015 (UTC).

Alex Gilbert Article

Hi!

I was wondering if you can check out this here Wikipedia:Help_desk#Alex_Gilbert_Article. I have improved this article Draft:Alex Gilbert. When do you think I should resubmit to the Deletion Review? Thanks!

I have added and detailed all the references on the Draft Article below! I just need your opinion and help as I want to get this to the mainspace without it being deleted. Before when YES it wasn't notable for Wikipedia it was deleted. Though the article now has gone through massive improvements!

Long list of references

References that cover his 'I'm Adopted' Organisation [19] Анатомия дня TV Show NTV Russia Retrieved 29 October 2015. Source covers his Non-Profit Organisation 'I'm Adopted' and talks about him helping others. [20] Retrieved 22 August 2015. Whangarei boy who traced Russian roots helps fellow Kiwi adoptees find bloodlines (TVNZ) - This source also talks about 'I'm Adopted' [21] Retrieved August 7, 2015. Russian adoptee shares stories The Northern Advocate - This source is only about his 'I'm Adopted' page and mentions A former Russian adoptee raised in Whangarei is helping other adopted people share their stories. This is not a BLP1E am I correct? [22] Retrieved 4 November 2015. Adoption project enthrals Russians The Northern Advocate - This article talks about what impact his page has had with the Russian Media. I have also added these news outlet links to the article. This is due to his 'I'm Adopted' page. [23] Retrieved 29 October 2015. In social networks, a new unusual community. Children of Russia, adopted by foreigners looking for their biological parents Translated from Russian. NTV Russia - This source is from a huge Russian Media outlet about his I'm Adopted Organisation. Read the article or watch the video. Other References [24] Retrieved February 26, 2015. From Russia with love The Northern Advocate - This article is about his Book 'My Russian Side' that he published in 2014. It reads Now 22, Alex, has written a book about his journey. [25] Retrieved 23 February 2015. TVNZ - This is his actual Full Length NZ TV Documentary Story which aired in NZ and yes at the time was an issue where BLP1E was talked about in the previous deletions. New Sources have since been found and updated. ALOT MORE [26] Retrieved July 2, 2014. The New Zealand Herald - This article covers a meet up Alex Gilbert had with another New Zealander he found through his TV Documentary. [27] Retrieved 16 November 2015. Change One Life Russia - This article is an excellent interview with Alex Gilbert about his own story and journey. [28] Retrieved 5 June 2015. - TV3 NZ - This TV Show features Alex who talks to other adoptees who are going through the same journey as he went through. References in Russian Language If you can't understand them then don't comment. People have been ignoring these. These are put up as a support to the article. It shows you how much coverage it had. [29] Retrieved 21 October 2015. yarcom.ru - This article talks about his experience and journey. [30] Retrieved 21 October 2015 New Zealander Alex Gilbert found his mother in the Rybinsk, threw him in the hospital . echo76 - New Russian article talking also about his life and journey to Russia. [31] Retrieved 21 October 2015. New Zealander found in Rybinsk own mother - 76.ru - This article notes if translated Now the young man helps the other people who find themselves in a similar situation, to find their loved ones. [32] Retrieved 21 October 2015. progorod76.ru- The guy from New Zealand found in the Yaroslavl region his own mother [33] Retrieved 21 October 2015. http://rweek.ru/ - This article talks about his journey and experience also [34] Retrieved 21 October 2015. yarnews.net - New Zealander Alex Gilbert found his mother in the Rybinsk [35] Retrieved 21 October 2015. vesti.ru - This source is from Vesti News. One of the largest TV News outlets in Russia - Russia-24 [36] Retrieved 22 October 2015. http://bsvesti.ru/ - This is another alternative news source [37] Retrieved 1 November 2015 yar.kp.ru - Another news source in Russia [38] Retrieved 22 October 2015. http://rybinskcity.ru/ - A news source from Rybinsk City, Russia [39] Retrieved 16 November 2015. - sguschenka.com - A reliable source talking to Alex directly about his experience and journey. [40] Retrieved 21 October 2015. http://1news.uz/ - Another Russian News Source

Thank You! --DmitryPopovRU (talk) 22:39, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

@DmitryPopovRU: I'm not sure that I'm the best person to ask about this, as I wasn't involved in the DRV and I do have some strong views on this topic. Can you indicate which references are new since the article was deleted? Generally speaking it's not quantity that is the issue, it is quality. A single good source is worth a thousand brief mentions. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 05:17, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Lankiveil I am still adding new references etc. The ones I have highlighted above.. most of them are new. The old AFD was from 2014. Thanks! --DmitryPopovRU (talk) 19:55, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

@DmitryPopovRU: At a brief glance they look okay, but I don't know whether they'd be good enough for the article to survive another deletion discussion, which is almost inevitable given the recent DRV discussion concerning this article. My advice is to park it in the draft space, work on some other articles for a bit, and come back to this in 6-12 months to see if the community's appetite has changed. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 09:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC).

@Lankiveil: I have updated and have added some new sources. These are highlighted below! Please take a look. I will however further be working on this draft until more come along though. I do believe this article has passed basic notability but I will keep on improving it for the meantime. I really think it may be worded incorrectly and needs a clean up. That is what I am struggling with. There is so many sources on this article, someone like you could help? --DmitryPopovRU (talk) 10:04, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Long list of references- Updated - 1 December 2015

New Sources that were found since the last Deletion Review Note: The draft Draft:Alex Gilbert had the deletion review before these and closed on the 6th of November 2015. See Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2015_October_29 [41] Retrieved 22 November 2015. ‘’Whirlwind trip feels like it didn't happen’’ The Northern Advocate - Source talks about his recent trip to Russia for his TV Appearance on ‘Let them Talk’ [42] Retrieved 1 December 2015. ‘’To Russia with love: The Kiwi-Russian taking his homeland by storm’’ - TVNZ - Alex is featured on another TVNZ ‘’Sunday’’ Story about his recent trip to Russia. He is expected to appear on this huge TV Channel in Russia this year. [43] 16 November 2015. ‘’Alex Gilbert - I crossed the ocean, to see my biological parents” - changeonelife.ru . This is another big article website. It also talks about his recent trip to Russia. References that cover his 'I'm Adopted' Organisation [44] Анатомия дня TV Show NTV Russia Retrieved 29 October 2015. Source covers his Non-Profit Organisation 'I'm Adopted' and talks about him helping others. [45] Retrieved 22 August 2015. Whangarei boy who traced Russian roots helps fellow Kiwi adoptees find bloodlines (TVNZ) - This source also talks about 'I'm Adopted' [46] Retrieved August 7, 2015. Russian adoptee shares stories The Northern Advocate - This source is only about his 'I'm Adopted' page and mentions A former Russian adoptee raised in Whangarei is helping other adopted people share their stories. This is not a BLP1E am I correct? [47] Retrieved 4 November 2015. Adoption project enthrals Russians The Northern Advocate - This article talks about what impact his page has had with the Russian Media. I have also added these news outlet links to the article. This is due to his 'I'm Adopted' page. [48] Retrieved 29 October 2015. In social networks, a new unusual community. Children of Russia, adopted by foreigners looking for their biological parents Translated from Russian. NTV Russia - This source is from a huge Russian Media outlet about his I'm Adopted Organisation. Read the article or watch the video. Other References [49] Retrieved February 26, 2015. From Russia with love The Northern Advocate - This article is about his Book 'My Russian Side' that he published in 2014. It reads Now 22, Alex, has written a book about his journey. [50] Retrieved 23 February 2015. TVNZ - This is his actual Full Length NZ TV Documentary Story which aired in NZ and yes at the time was an issue where BLP1E was talked about in the previous deletions. New Sources have since been found and updated. ALOT MORE [51] Retrieved July 2, 2014. The New Zealand Herald - This article covers a meet up Alex Gilbert had with another New Zealander he found through his TV Documentary. [52] Retrieved 16 November 2015. Change One Life Russia - This article is an excellent interview with Alex Gilbert about his own story and journey. [53] Retrieved 5 June 2015. - TV3 NZ - This TV Show features Alex who talks to other adoptees who are going through the same journey as he went through. References in Russian Language If you can't understand them then don't comment. People have been ignoring these. These are put up as a support to the article. It shows you how much coverage it had. [54] Retrieved 21 October 2015. yarcom.ru - This article talks about his experience and journey. [55] Retrieved 21 October 2015 New Zealander Alex Gilbert found his mother in the Rybinsk, threw him in the hospital . echo76 - New Russian article talking also about his life and journey to Russia. [56] Retrieved 21 October 2015. New Zealander found in Rybinsk own mother - 76.ru - This article notes if translated Now the young man helps the other people who find themselves in a similar situation, to find their loved ones. [57] Retrieved 21 October 2015. progorod76.ru- The guy from New Zealand found in the Yaroslavl region his own mother [58] Retrieved 21 October 2015. http://rweek.ru/ - This article talks about his journey and experience also [59] Retrieved 21 October 2015. yarnews.net - New Zealander Alex Gilbert found his mother in the Rybinsk [60] Retrieved 21 October 2015. vesti.ru - This source is from Vesti News. One of the largest TV News outlets in Russia - Russia-24 [61] Retrieved 22 October 2015. http://bsvesti.ru/ - This is another alternative news source [62] Retrieved 1 November 2015 yar.kp.ru - Another news source in Russia [63] Retrieved 22 October 2015. http://rybinskcity.ru/ - A news source from Rybinsk City, Russia [64] Retrieved 16 November 2015. - sguschenka.com - A reliable source talking to Alex directly about his experience and journey. [65] Retrieved 21 October 2015. http://1news.uz/ - Another Russian News Source

E-cigs

If you're still the (or a) clerk handling that case's management, I have three post-closure requests.

Case needs a shortcut (I would suggest WP:ARBEC); I'm sure we'll be referring to it frequently, as the heat in that article space has not abated even slightly.

Template:Ds/alert needs a code for it ("ec" is available).

I would also appreciate it if that Ds/alert were delivered to User talk:Mystery Wolff, per recent battlegrounding behavior at Talk:Electronic cigarette. This is a "new" editor who quotes policy left and right, and has already attracted sockpuppet suspicions, is revert warring with an agenda, and doing little on the talk page but creating unnecessary (and unnecessarily snide and combative) disputes, as well as exhibiting serious WP:COMPETENCE problems. I went to deliver the Ds/alert myself, but found I could not, for lack of a case code. At least under the present name, this editor was not a party to the case, and thus is "immune" from DS for now for their current behavior, and can't be made "aware" until the template has a code for this case, due to the Ds/alert red tape system.

PS: I did not receive a notice that the case had closed despite being a party (though not one addressed in a remedy); I didn't find out until after an ARCA had been filed and an AE, too.  :-)

 — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  14:18, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

@SMcCandlish: I can handle these. These are usually handled during close, so I'll finish them off. L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 16:25, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

@SMcCandlish: Done. For the future, the clerks' noticeboard is a good place to post requests of this type. Thanks, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 16:36, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

@L235: Ah so! I did not know that NB even existed. LOL.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  22:49, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks User:L235. For future reference now that the case has closed, you can contact any clerk for assistance (although the NB is the best venue), although of course I'm happy to help. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 23:07, 29 November 2015 (UTC).

Perhaps I am late to respond to this, but I find it highly offensive and careless of SMcCandlish to be making the above statements about me. Immediately prior to his request here, I had found SMcCandlish interacting with QuackGuru on his talk page. QuackGuru is the person whom the ARB took action on. They were talking about a page I created and one that QuackGuru had removed. QuackGuru accused me of being a sockpuppet. SMcCandlish listened interacted and talked about what was going to come of the ARB. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SMcCandlish#E-liquid

SMcCandlish is an interested editor on these items. To see him assert WP:COMPETENCE accusations here is no proper. To have a person who is subject of an ARB accuse me of being a sockpuppet, and to then take it over to this FUNCTION, as assert here I am under suspicion of being a sockpuppet is outrageous. It is gaming the system.

SMcCandlish lays out a litany false items at me, because of his interested POV editorship. ie saying I am battlegrounding, revert warring, complaining about my remarks that are in a discussion with him, AS IF he is not an interested party. His accusation of sock-puppetry is done here by putting "new" editor...with quotes.

SMcCandlish, is gaming you, and the system, and whilst accusing me falsely. And I suspect this and $6.50 will get me a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Mystery Wolff (talk) 13:17, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 14

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 14, October-November 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - Gale, Brill, plus Finnish and Farsi resources
• Open Access Week recap, and DOIs, Wikipedia, and scholarly citations
• Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref - a citation drive for librarians

Read the full newsletter

The Interior, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:12, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, Lankiveil. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Xover (talk) 13:46, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

@Xover: Noted, please check your email. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 13:57, 11 December 2015 (UTC).

Kevin Gorman case

Hi Lankiveil. Just glanced over the creation of the Kevin Gorman case, and it looks like you forgot to include the preliminary statements from the three parties in the case on the Evidence page. Worm^TT(talk) 12:33, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

You know, I had thought that wasn't necessary as they were on the main case page (and it doesn't seem to consistently happen elsewhere). As it turns out though, it's not in the procedures so I've added them on the evidence page as well, just to be sure. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 13:45, 11 December 2015 (UTC).

Really? That's odd. The "preliminary evidence" thing is a fairly new addition, so I haven't looked into the history or the reasons behind it, but I'd expect the party's statements to be at the top of the evidence page for ease of reading. Can you have a chat with the clerks and see if you can get the procedures updated if necessary? Thanks :) Worm^TT(talk) 13:51, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

@Worm That Turned: By that I mean, "I thought it said not to do it, but it doesn't say either way". It might have just been something that popped into my head, but I'll discuss with the other clerks and arbs to see if there's a change that can be made to the procedures. Thanks for your eagle eyes on this, as well as the headsup! Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 13:56, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Glad to help out. Just not too much. Don't want to spend too much time near Arbcom! Worm^TT(talk) 13:59, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Actually, the preliminary statements can go on the main case talk page or the evidence page, depending on the preference of the drafting arbitrators. At least, that has been the practice for the last few cases. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:58, 12 December 2015 (UTC)