User talk:Razr Nation/2014/1

Hahc21's archives

Current discussion

Go to 2013

2014 ← previous year ♦ next archive →

Go to 2015

Happy 2014 from Cyberpower678 —cyberpower OnlineHappy 2014 — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message. —cyberpower OnlineHappy 2014 00:07, 1 January 2014 (UTC) Happy New Year Hahc21! Happy New Year! Hello Hahc21: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 06:03, 1 January 2014 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message. Please comment on Template talk:Infobox single Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Infobox single. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 4 January 2014 (UTC) The Signpost: 01 January 2014 Traffic report: A year stuck in traffic Arbitration report: Examining the Committee's year In the media: Does Wikipedia need a medical disclaimer? Book review: Common Knowledge: An Ethnography of Wikipedia News and notes: The year in review Discussion report: Article incubator, dates and fractions, medical disclaimer WikiProject report: Where Are They Now? Fifth Edition Featured content: 2013—the trends Technology report: Looking back on 2013 Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 05:28, 4 January 2014 (UTC) Wikidata help Hi Hahc21, I was just reading your user page and noticed that you are an administrator on Wikidata. By coincidence, earlier today I had this query on my talk page; I wasn't really much help with it because Wikidata is not a place where am I active. Would you mind taking a look to see if you could help at all, please? I would greatly appreciate anything you can do. Thank you. Acalamari 17:32, 4 January 2014 (UTC) Sure, why not. Let me take a look. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 17:35, 4 January 2014 (UTC) Thank you for your help! :) Acalamari 17:52, 4 January 2014 (UTC) No problem :) — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 17:53, 4 January 2014 (UTC) Notification of an RfC The previous discussion regarding an extension of TFLs on the front page in which you commented, has moved on to an RfC on the Main Page. Your comments and suggestions are once again welcome on this issue. - SchroCat (talk) 11:07, 6 January 2014 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 7 January 2014 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for January 9 Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thirty Flights of Loving, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Edge (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 9 January 2014 (UTC) WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Quarter 4, 2013 The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter Volume 6, No. 4 — 4th Quarter, 2013 Previous issue | Index | Next issue Project At a Glance As of Q4 2013, the project has: 166 Featured Articles 61 Featured Lists 8 Featured Topics 7 Featured Pictures 42 A-Class Articles 639 Good Articles 9 Good Topics Content Changes to Featured and Good content News items and announcements No WikiProject feature this issue. No featured editor this issue. Project Navigation VG Project Main pages Main project – talk Project category – talk Portal – talk VG Project Departments Assessment – talk Cleanup – talk Peer review – talk   Reference library – talk Newsletter – talk Video game images – talk To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list. Your GA nomination of Thirty Flights of Loving Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Thirty Flights of Loving you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricanehink -- Hurricanehink (talk) 06:32, 10 January 2014 (UTC) Your GA nomination of Thirty Flights of Loving The article Thirty Flights of Loving you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Thirty Flights of Loving for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricanehink -- Hurricanehink (talk) 16:12, 10 January 2014 (UTC) Please comment on Talk:Main Page Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Main Page. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 11 January 2014 (UTC) The Signpost: 08 January 2014 Public Domain Day: Why the year 2019 is so significant Traffic report: Tragedy and television Technology report: Gearing up for the Architecture Summit News and notes: WMF employee forced out over "paid advocacy editing" Op-ed: WikiCup competition beginning a new year WikiProject report: Jumping into the television universe Featured content: A portal to the wonderful world of technology Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 08:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC) Precious again Latin American performer Thank you for quality articles on games and albums, such as Sinistar: Unleashed, for featured lists on Latin American performers, such as Ricardo Arjona discography, for reviewing more than 100 Good articles, and for the recognition of the merits of others in their quality contributions and reviews, - you are an awesome Wikipedian! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:44, 9 January 2013 (UTC) A year ago, you were the 360th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:44, 9 January 2014 (UTC) Thank you again, Gerda. It's an honour — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 14:16, 9 January 2014 (UTC) Move Like This by 28bytes Thank you for your vote of trust and prayer, - see my talk for the significance of blue. What do you think of Move Like This in Spanish? We did German ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:46, 9 January 2014 (UTC) You're very welcome :) Wait, Move Like This has no Spanish article? We have to make one! — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 17:19, 9 January 2014 (UTC) when? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC) Maybe next month. I have some projects already on the list and would like to have them FAC'd first. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 22:34, 18 January 2014 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 14 January 2014 (UTC) Hey Hey, long time no talk. I'm looking at the PC 2014 RFC and noticed your name supported proposal one and two. Is that possible? Also, is there really any difference between the two? Dan653 (talk) 03:56, 15 January 2014 (UTC) Hey Dan653! Yes, I supported both because I see instances on which these two might be used. The main difference is that the first proposal is aimed at autoconfirmed users (Use PC2 instead of blocking them, since semiprotection wouldn't work) and the second does not differentiate any use types (applies to all users, and is used as a substitute to full protection). So, I support both because I see PC2 as a plausible solution in many instances where content creation cannot be delayed in spice of having socks or autoconfirmed users edit warring or something. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 14:01, 15 January 2014 (UTC) New proposals at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014 Hello. Several new proposals have been submitted at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014 since you last commented on it. You are invited to return to comment on the new proposals. Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:14, 16 January 2014 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:19, 17 January 2014 (UTC) Arbcom Question Can I ask a question about an arbcom case in which you were a clerk? I've edited as an IP off/on for a few years so I'm familiar with some policies but really don't understand how the full process works. In the Argentine history case, User:Cambalachero was topic banned in part for POV pushing, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Argentine History/Proposed decision#Cambalachero: POV-pushing. I have seen some of his edits at David Jewett and was in the process of removing them. As in the Argentine history case it appears to be dubiously sourced material that is contradicted by most of the other sources I found. I am finding that User:Langus-TxT is simply reverting my changes, citing WP:BRD and accusing me of British POV pushing. In the same aricle, both editors were previously co-operating in POV pushing to remove material they thought was detrimental to Argentina's sovereignty claim to the Falkland Islands, see Talk:David Jewett#Privateer and Pirate. Is it permissible for Langus-TxT to edit to keep dubiously sourced material introduced by a topic banned editor in an article forever? BedsBookworm (talk) 13:35, 18 January 2014 (UTC) Hey, BedsBookworm. I don't know if Cambalachero's edits at David Jewett are in violation of his topic ban, but if you remove them, and Langus-TxT reverts you, then the burden falls upon Langus to explain why such edits are permissible, and not Cambalachero himself. The fact that Langus is reverting your removal means that he approves the text added. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 14:37, 18 January 2014 (UTC) Hello. I got a notification that I was mentioned here, and I have to clarify something: I have not edited the article of David Jewett recently, nor took part in the ongoing discussion about its content. The info discussed here is info that I had added to that article long before the topic ban, so there is no violation on my part. Obviously, I won't take part in that discussion, and if Bookworm and Langus do not agree about the source, they should discuss that source itself, not about me. Cambalachero (talk) 14:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC) Hey, thanks for the clarification. As I said, the burden is on User:Langus-TxT, not on you, to explain such edits. And more even so if you have not touched the article after you were topic banned. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 14:52, 18 January 2014 (UTC) If you check the Talk page you'll see that I did explain myself. But BedsBookworm would just disagree and keep on removing properly sourced material. AND he's looking for a Arbcom case (!) What am I missing? Hahc21, do you support this behavior? --Langus (t) 22:06, 18 January 2014 (UTC) Langus-TxT, thanks for writing here. Well, I have noty checked the actual dispute, and am working only with the hypothethics Bookworm has provided to me, and I answered him according to what is his version of the events. As I said, I have not checked the situation. I think I should check tomorrow when I have time and come back with my thoughts. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 23:33, 18 January 2014 (UTC) Okay, I have checked the talk page and I want to ask a couple of things. First, to BedsBookworm, why did you had to mention Cambalachero's topic ban at David Jewett's talk page? The fact that he was later topic banned for "POV-pushing" does not warrant a green card to splash all of his edits as POV pushing. I see that you removed it using ArbCom's remedy as a fiat, which was a bad idea. Yes, you say that it "contradicts multiple reliable sources," but why not give some examples? To Langus-TxT, apologies if I gave the impression that I was on Bookworm's side. I am actually not taking sides since this is not my dispute (and I don't usually take sides anyways) and my comments were made using the information Bookworm gave me, which has been partially incorrect, to some extent. That's all by now. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 23:50, 18 January 2014 (UTC) 4 FAC Hey! Thank you for your comments on the 4 FAC, however, a moderator has now asked that they are to be elaborated on as to why they specifically meet the FA criteria as the chances of it being promoted are otherwise poor. If you can, I'd appreciate it greatly! Thanks! —JennKR | ☎ 02:01, 19 January 2014 (UTC) Dome of the Rock - Ceramic tile detail Hi Hahc- I have a few additional wikis I'd like to add to this UTC. The first and original three FP were nominated by others. I wanted to see how far I could go and in the process had some very interesting cross-cultural experiences. Only including formal FP processes (not including voting for local wiki POTD): English, Persian, and Arabic. To this is added the following wikipedias:Commons Hebrew, German, Japanese, Spanish, Turkish, Thai, Azerbaijani, and last but by no means least Polish. Though I’m not sure how one or two of them worked, and one has I believe since closed, this totals 12. A very interesting learning experience… - Godot13 (talk) 07:58, 19 January 2014 (UTC) The Signpost: 15 January 2014 News and notes: German chapter asks for "reworking" of Funds Dissemination Committee; should MP4 be allowed on Wikimedia sites? Technology report: Architecture Summit schedule published Op-ed: Licensed for reuse? Citing open-access sources in Wikipedia articles In the media: Is Google hurting Wikipedia traffic?; "Wikipedia-Mania" in the New York Times Traffic report: The Hours are Ours WikiProject report: WikiProject Sociology Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 22:41, 19 January 2014 (UTC) This week's article for improvement File:Oseberg ship head post.jpg An animal-head post found in the Oseberg vikingship, an example of Nordic art Hello, Hahc21. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Nordic art Previous selections: Gopher (animal) • Meal Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: Evad37 [talk] 00:59, 20 January 2014 (UTC) Wikipedia:Surveillance awareness day You were supportive of the idea that Jehochman proposed: "A message is most effective when it matches the format of the media. We're an encyclopedia. On Feb 11, I suggest we fill our front page with articles, blurbs and news about mass spying and privacy. That will send a strong message, and help educate people. It's sort of like what we do on April 1, except serious instead of foolish." Since this proposal received so much support, I and several others have done our best to begin the process of implementation. That said, the proposal is very controversial with Main Page insiders who have, understandably, objections that boil down to WP:NOTADVOCATE. It's valuable to have feedback from people who oppose any deviation from the status quo, but we really need feedback from people who understood Jehochman idea, supported it, and could tell us whether we're succeeding in "implementing the vision" that Jehochman laid out and how to improve the proposal. If you have the time, would you lend your view over at Wikipedia:Surveillance awareness day. If you want to see a list of custom content that could be available, we have a Arbitrary mockup #2, that shows lots of proposed content on one page. Your feedback is most appreciated. --HectorMoffet (talk) 09:56, 20 January 2014 (UTC) Please comment on Template talk:POV Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:POV. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 21 January 2014 (UTC) Your revet of NativeForeigner's "unvote" I think it's clear that NativeForeigner did intend to effectively unvote from the support camp as evidenced in [1]. Please note the edit sumary as it indicates that he was unvoting, but had not yet struck or come up with a new solution. As I'm a party to the case, I'm not allowed to revert, therefore I request that you undo the change. Hasteur (talk) 01:05, 23 January 2014 (UTC) Hasteur: Woah how did I miss that. Thanks. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 01:14, 23 January 2014 (UTC) Kafziel Case Have you taken over clerk duties, since Callanecc is currently inactive? Wee Curry Monster talk 12:51, 24 January 2014 (UTC) A lot of us have been keeping an eye on it, but mostly Hahc21. --Rschen7754 19:40, 24 January 2014 (UTC) No problem, I just wanted to ask a procedural question that if the clerk changes is it not updated at the case page? Wee Curry Monster talk 20:11, 24 January 2014 (UTC) Hmm yes. I have taken over most duties since Callan is inactive. I don't feel it's necessary to update the page though. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 20:50, 24 January 2014 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:11, 25 January 2014 (UTC) The Signpost: 22 January 2014 Book review: Missing Links and Secret Histories: A Selection of Wikipedia Entries from Across the Known Multiverse News and notes: Modification of WMF protection brought to Arbcom Featured content: Dr. Watson, I presume Special report: The few who write Wikipedia Technology report: Architecting the future of MediaWiki In the media: Wikipedia for robots; Wikipedia—a temperamental teenager Traffic report: No show for the Globes Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 01:35, 25 January 2014 (UTC) This week's article for improvement The Low Countries as seen from space Hello, Hahc21. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Low Countries Previous selections: Nordic art • Gopher (animal) Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Evad37 (talk) 01:54, 27 January 2014 (UTC) • Universal Triple Crown Howdy. I think I earned another Universal Triple Crown with File:Chaplin The Kid edit.jpg, which is featured on Commons, the English Wikipedia, and the Farsi one. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:51, 22 January 2014 (UTC) Yay! I need you to request it at WP:TRIPLE/NOM just in case you've not done so :) Cheers! — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 23:42, 24 January 2014 (UTC) 4 I'm really sorry for being a pain, but if you could just clarify (you don't have to review) why you think 4 is suitable for FA status (here) it would be of great help. Otherwise I've been told it will fail and I don't want to go through my third FAC. Cheers, —JennKR | ☎ 16:54, 25 January 2014 (UTC) JennKR: I'm Sorry it did not pass. I will provide a lengthy review next time to make sure my support is not discounted. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 13:22, 27 January 2014 (UTC) No, it's still open! You don't have to review the article if you think there is no concerns, just specify why it meets the FA criteria. —JennKR | ☎ 14:14, 27 January 2014 (UTC) RFA Comments No, as you know I am an advocate for the tools being easier to get and easier to take away as well as breaking them out into modules and limiting how long someone is an admin before they have to reapply (I favor 3 years). That's not going to happen though. No one wants it and the admins (not all but the majority of the ones in "power") on this site want it to be as hard as possible to attain so they can kep their leverage over the rest of the editors in the site that have devoted time and effort to it but don't have a clue and are just second class citizens. For what its worth I am sure my vote will be ignored, ridiculed and will have no effect on the outcome of the RFA. But that's life. Kumioko (talk) 19:38, 27 January 2014 (UTC) Well, I think that if we want to change something, we must start by implementing the change in our way of participation. If I want to take the RfA standards down, I should lower my standards first, and then show the rest that it's not bad doing so. Then, in due course, more people will start doing the same as I did, and the standards will end up being lowered. It's not a fast change, and it takes time, years even, but it can be done. My comment was targeted not at your oppose, since you're free to oppose, but at the fact that your rationale somewhat falls against the very thing you're being an advocate of: change RfA. Why? Because your vote was pretty much like most nit-picky opposers out there who damage the process. If a user is not knowledgeable of all the tools they are going to get, they must be cautioned enough to not to use them until they learn. And that's what we should evaluate. Or I think that's how it should be. When I was given adminship on Wikidata and Wikivoyage, I was measured by my experience in edits, and by how much trust people had in me to not break the wiki. According to their standards, I met both, and I passed. I was not aware of how revision deletion worked, for example, and I learned. I still have yet to learn a lot of things of the admin toolkit even after almost a year of being a sysop, and I don't expect a RfA candidate to know as much as I do, mostly because they don't have yet the tools. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 19:50, 27 January 2014 (UTC) I have been trying since 2008 to change it. Its clear its not going to happen. I have tried nicely and bluntly and now I am to the point where I am just downright rude. I don't even care if I get blocked here anymore. As far as experience I have been an admin for 2 years (at wikia not here) on other sites and I will never ever be an admin here no matter how much I know or can do to help the site. Its not going to happen and that also means that I won't be on any of the other Wikimedia sites as long as I keep the Kumioko name. I shouldn't have to change my name because I wanted to try and change the shitty culture here and pissed off so many people that should have been kicked out of this site that now no one wants to hear it anymore. The sad thing is I am retired from editing here, I haven't edited 1 article since early september and don't plan too anytime soon and I still have more edits this month (about 100 with this edit) than some of the "trusted" ones that are "active". If I was "active" that count would be over 10, 000 (I did 22, 809 so far this month on Wikia and a lot of those could have and would have been here) but my efforts aren't wanted and I am tired of asking abusive admins to implement changes that I shoudl be able to do myself and can't. So I am completely fed up with this site and the attitudes here. So if someone wants my vote at this point they are going to have to be pretty damn near perfect until the bar gets lowered to where it should and needs to be. Kumioko (talk) 20:02, 27 January 2014 (UTC) I understand what you feel, and when such a thing happens to me I just remove myself from discussion pages and do what I was supposed to do here from the start: write content. After all, it was the first thing I ever did, and I still do (although not as much as before). I recognized that drama is a bad thing and thus I don't pay attention to AN or ANI anymore. The only place I do it now is at ArbCom and because I volunteered for that, and it's a thing I like to do. I see that you say that nobody wants to see you anymore. And why that matters? If nobody wants me, I just stop talking to everyone and make content. Nobody can stop me from doing good content editing, and that's certainly something you can do alone. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 20:10, 27 January 2014 (UTC) I used to think that way but somewhere along the way after doing a few hundred thousand edits, featured/good content, trying to get editors to collaborate, trying to save about 100 dead WikiProjects, etc. if enough people tell you your not trusted, it wears you down. Then when policy is being blatantly violated by those that are trusted and nothing is done about it (particularly by other admins or Arbcom), but your told you can't be trusted because your advocating doing something about the violations...lets just say I don't have any faith in the project anymore. I am also not going to edit and improve articles knowing that I am not trusted or wanted on the site. I don't even revert vandalism anymore, I have half a dozen articles and a template on my watchlist that have been vandalized (not by me just to clarify) and I am waiting to see how long it takes before someonen does it. Some have been there since August (although in fairness some others have been caught) One took 4 months though. Wikipedia is getting worse by the day because no one is even trying to do anything about the problems except letting them get worse and telling me I'm an asshole for, at this point, being blunt and telling them their jerks. Why would I want to participate in that. Kumioko (talk) 21:32, 27 January 2014 (UTC) I don't know Kumioko. I think that you are mixing two things that come separate. I see how people shoot each other and I don't bother about it. I used to, but I realized that Wikipedia is about the content, so improving content is the most important thing one should do. After all, it is the very purpose of this website. And to do that you don't need to get editors to collaborate, or to save any Wikiproject, etc. Only two things are needed: sources and a writer, and you have both. I have worked my way through several featured articles on my own (I admit that I've had help and I am very very grateful for that) using that rule, and it has worked for me. I've had several users who have told me that I'm not trusted, or that I am immature. Hell I was even topic banned. And I'm still here, focusing on writing articles. I do a couple more things, I give you that, but my main priority is to work on the articles that interest me, and that won't change even if Jimbo himself tells me that I'm not wanted. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 22:10, 27 January 2014 (UTC) Yeah well, other that the occsasional comment from the sidelines I don't need or want to participate in something/somewhere I'm not wanted. Frankly I wish someone would just block me already. I will probably never edit an article here again anyway. Not until some of the problems get fixed and people start enforcing policy and getting rid of those who are abusing it so it will be fun again. Kumioko (talk) 22:21, 27 January 2014 (UTC) You've gone through this before, Kumioko, and you're still here. I saw you being blocked, I was the one who reported that you released your password publicly before your account was globally locked, and I saw you being blocked because you used your IP address while being blocked. I saw all that, and I saw you create your most recent account, CleanStart, because you, no matter what, still wish to edit here. So, if you still wish to edit here, and cannot take any of the drama because you hate it, then find a way to have both things :) — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 22:39, 27 January 2014 (UTC) I removed the oppose comment since its such a big deal. If people paid half as much attention to the abusive admins as they do to my edits this place would be a lot more enjoyable. Kumioko (talk) 22:35, 27 January 2014 (UTC) It's okay. I did not reply again because it wasn't a big deal for me. I was just a bit impressed and commented accordingly, and that was it. No reason to continue a path that I knew wasn't going to end well. Though I am grateful that you came to my talk page. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 22:39, 27 January 2014 (UTC) Thanks, I came here to respond to your comment because I didn't want to digress the RFA like so many do. As you can see above, it would have taken a lot of space. I asked to be blocked and I was denied, so that was the only way to ensure it would happen. Then I had every intent of editing as an IP, but that wasn't good enough so I was basically forced to create this Username. I would still be editing as an IP if there wasn't such a nasty culture of IP hatred and labelling people as a sockpuppuet. The only reason we need an account is to vote and for email. Everything else should be able to be done as an IP, even if it takes an extra step like using the protection levels. Anyway, I'm done. I think I'm gonna scramble the password on this account and just be done with it. Kumioko (talk) 22:45, 27 January 2014 (UTC) Blue Duck Did you know that a blue duck attacks the German Main page right now? I guess with 28 bites, - had to happen on the 28th ;) - there's also Italian, how about Spanish? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:30, 28 January 2014 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia:2014 main page redesign proposal Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:2014 main page redesign proposal. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 29 January 2014 (UTC) Invitation to WikiProject Mass surveillance WikiProject Mass Surveillance Dear, Razr Nation/2014. We would like to invite you to join WikiProject Mass surveillance, a group of Wikipedians devoted to improving articles related to the privacy and global surveillance. If you're interested, consider adding yourself to the list of participants and joining the discussion on the talkpage. -- HectorMoffet (talk) 13:05, 30 January 2014 (UTC) WikiCup 2014 January newsletter The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer Godot13 (submissions), whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers: 12george1 (submissions) and TropicalAnalystwx13 (submissions) were the first people to score, for the good article Tropical Storm Bret (1981) and its good article review respectively. 12george1 was also the first person to score in 2012 and 2013. Sven Manguard (submissions) scored the first ITN points for 2014 North American polar vortex. WonderBoy1998 (submissions) scored points for an early good topic, finishing off Wikipedia:Featured topics/She Wolf. TheAustinMan (submissions) scored the first bonus points of the competition, for his work on Typhoon Vera. Igordebraga (submissions) has scored the highest number of bonus points for a single article, for the high-importance Jurassic Park (film). Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible. Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup points. 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. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC) The Signpost: 29 January 2014 Traffic report: Six strikes out WikiProject report: Special report: Contesting contests News and notes: Wiki-PR defends itself, condemns Wikipedia's actions Arbitration report: Kafziel case closed; Kww admonished by motion Recent research: Translation assignments, weasel words, and Wikipedia's content in its later years Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:25, 1 February 2014 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Article Feedback Tool/Version 5 Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article Feedback Tool/Version 5. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. Legobot (talk) 00:09, 2 February 2014 (UTC) This week's article for improvement (week 6, 2014) The life sciences involve the study of living organisms Hello, Hahc21. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Life sciences Previous selections: Low Countries • Nordic art Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Evad37 (talk) 02:33, 3 February 2014 (UTC) • The Signpost: 29 January 2014 Traffic report: Six strikes out WikiProject report: Special report: Contesting contests News and notes: Wiki-PR defends itself, condemns Wikipedia's actions Arbitration report: Kafziel case closed; Kww admonished by motion Recent research: Translation assignments, weasel words, and Wikipedia's content in its later years Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 11:10, 3 February 2014 (UTC) Reply I asked you a question a couple of weeks ago. In response, you asked me why I mentioned the topic ban? I followed the edit back to Cambalachero and was going to ask him why he made that particular claim when all of the other sources refer to a license granted by José Rondeau. At that point I discovered he was topic banned for using POV sources. I was simply asking for advice as I said, it seemed odd for another editor to constantly revert to restore information that contradicted the prevailing information in the literature. I could have given examples I suppose, I'll take that as advice for the next time. I edited as an IP for ages but kept finding I was blocked. I usually log in via the school learning platform even at home and my IP was blocked by a range block against Bedfordshire schools. As an IP you learn about some aspects of policy but I'm finding it very different as a named account. There is a lot I simply don't know about and the way Arbcom works is one of them. Hence, I was simply asking how it worked nothing more. BedsBookworm (talk) 11:54, 31 January 2014 (UTC) Invitation to join WikiProject Freedom of speech WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech There is a WikiProject about Freedom of speech, called WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do: List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Freedom_of_speech#Participants. Add userbox {{User Freedom of speech}} to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject. Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using {{WikiProject Freedom of speech}}. Join in discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech. Notify others you think might be interested in Freedom of speech to join the WikiProject. Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt (talk) 16:44, 31 January 2014 (UTC) Another GA thing Do you think I could borrow you to take a look at this issue? Reviewer says the article may not be stable enough, because there is an ongoing discussion about how to handle pricing information I allege is outdated, but for which no new independent, reliable sources have published (a verification not truth-type thing). I suggested we merely modify the pricing info so it is put into more of a historical, date-stamped type of reference, waiting for new sources to come out and there seems to be support to do something kind of ish like that. I haven't found anyone willing to review the discussion, assess consensus, and make an edit and I'm sorta waiting on it before the next round of the review. CorporateM (Talk) 01:44, 1 February 2014 (UTC) Hey Corporate. I am leaving home now, but per WP:NOPRICES, prices should never be included unless they have significant encyclopedic value. So, my recommendation is to remove all pricings altogether unless mentioning them brings any value to the article. I will check later. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 16:39, 1 February 2014 (UTC) Thanks! Whatever you think is best. I just want it resolved so the article can be considered "stable" for the GA review. I don't think anyone cares all that much, but editors are just much more likely to comment than make an edit and it would be inappropriate for me to make the edit myself. Oh the woes of not editing boldly. CorporateM (Talk) 14:30, 6 February 2014 (UTC) Prices removed :) Also, the sentence did not make much sense. You were comparing a feature of the free version with the price of the paid version (see?), so removing the second part was the best option. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 16:44, 6 February 2014 (UTC) Old list Do you need User:Hahc21/List of Steam games anymore? Tag it for deletion, as it looks like a WP:STALEDRAFT.--Vaypertrail (talk) 11:39, 2 February 2014 (UTC) @Vaypertrail: Yes, I have plans for it. So, no, I won't ask for it to be deleted. Thanks. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 00:43, 4 February 2014 (UTC) Feedback on a FAC? Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution is a good article that has undergone substantial improvements. Peer review just told us to take it FAC. It's at FAC now but hasn't got much feedback. If you have the time, would you look it over and see if it meets our standards or how it can be improved. --HectorMoffet (talk) 17:46, 2 February 2014 (UTC) Please comment on Talk:A Beautiful Mind (film) Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:A Beautiful Mind (film). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 9 February 2014 (UTC) This week's article for improvement (week 7, 2014) This staircase is an impossible object Hello, Hahc21. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Impossible object Previous selections: Life sciences • Low Countries Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Evad37 (talk) 01:33, 10 February 2014 (UTC) • Barnstar The Template Barnstar Thank you for all your help at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Recent. I hereby award you this template barnstar as surely it was a great team effort. I will be sure to swing by if ever I have any coding questions. Mkdwtalk 06:33, 10 February 2014 (UTC) Thanks! — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 20:20, 10 February 2014 (UTC) The Signpost: 12 February 2014 In the media: WikiVIP; Art Feminism; Medical articles; PR manipulation; Azerbaijani Wikipedia Technology report: Left with no choice News and notes: WMF bites the bullet on affiliation and FDC funding, elevates Wikimedia user groups Featured content: Space selfie Traffic report: Sports Day WikiProject report: Game Time in Russia Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:59, 13 February 2014 (UTC) Data for your signpost colum To ease of conversation The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. I was "bullied" off wikipedia due to our notorious hostile working environment. On [2] Feb 13 I made a "last edit" explaining why I was leaving Wikipedia. It was caused by one user. I waned the user: " okay, this should be the last you hear of me, unless you want to try to edit war over giving me my last edit.". The user did indeed edit-war over my last edit [3], deleting it without archival. I really really did not want to pursue this, and I still don't. I want to disappear, not engage in endless drama. But Bencherlite edit-warring over my parting complaint is a little tearing up a citation right in front of the eyes of a cop-- it just proves me to that I'm dealing with an out of control user who needs even more oversight than I initially thought. I have been talking with a half dozen user who have also been disaffected because of Bench. I was going to leave, but if Bench is going to delete the evidence of my complaint against he, I have to turn to Wikipedia's fourth estate. Please contact me via email. You wouldn't believe the story we have to tell. --HectorMoffet (talk) 12:05, 13 February 2014 (UTC) Followup: signpost article on TFA Per our earlier discusssion, Bencherlite has been continuing his campaign to scrub any criticism of his performance from Wikipedia. [4] [5][6] [7] This is not the behavior of a respected pillar of our community. No Arbcom or Board member would ever edit war against users in a petty effort to hide hide criticism of their job performance. None of Arbcom or Board would ever claim the power to unilaterally over-rule established consensus-- Bencherlite claims this power. Of course, yes, I will ask people I've been in touch with to send you their contact info and ask them to explain why they want a change. Personally, I'm hoping to skip out on that decision--- I just want to have my say, and as long as it's recorded by legitimate authority, it never needs to go to Wikipedia's fourth estate (or the real world's forth estate). I want out of this drama. But if Bencherlite won't abide criticism and things deletion is a good response to criticism, then obviously, I have to join the others who call for a change in TFA coordinators. Remember that nobody "elected" Bencherlite, he fell into his job after everyone else bailed, and to be VERY polite, his job approval is not positive. I know he wants a criticism-free talk page for when his position comes up for election, but that's not a reason to delete valid criticism. I would like to stay out of this and have it resolved by later generation of Wikipedians. But if Bencherlite is so threatened by my voice that he feels the need to silence it rather than let it stand as part of the archives, that is just a huge red flag that his behavior will not survive scrutiny and a sign that his behavior needs oversight and the community should re-assess who we trust with our special and unique role. We have great members at Arbcom and acting as Arbcom coordinators and assistants. These volunteers respect NPOV and our other policies. They hold themselves to a very high standard, far higher than Bencherlite. I have encouraged Bencherlite to hold himself to this same higher standard, but he instead chose to just erase my criticisms outright. Obviously, if this is his overall approached, we need to seriously look at swapping out personnel, with the Signpost being the "safest" venue for that discussion. Hopefully it's prematue, but I've talked to two different users who are established, have community trust, and could step in for Bencherlite if he's genuinely unable fulfill his on-going duties. Email me for the contact info the diffs I didn't want to post on-wiki. There is a lot of fear of retribution for on-wiki discussion, believe it or not. I didn't know any of this a month ago, or I would have never set foot on Bencherlite's territory. --HectorMoffet (talk) 13:02, 13 February 2014 (UTC) HectorMoffet: Thanks for the comments, but I think you are overreacting. Of course, I have not seen all the diffs and pages where discussion was held, but if this has anything to do with the fact that Bencherlite gave a clear no to rerunning articles on TFA, I think you might reconsider your approach. As I said, of course, I have not read all the relevant information. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 13:59, 13 February 2014 (UTC) A month ago I would have told myself the same thing. Actually, a month ago, {{u|WNT]] told me this very same thing. If you don't want to learn about the subject it's okay-- i'm in touch with other writers. --HectorMoffet (talk) Please comment on Talk:Brooklyn Bridge Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Brooklyn Bridge. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 15 February 2014 (UTC) This week's article for improvement (week 8, 2014) Model of a German SAR-Lupe reconnaissance satellite inside a Cosmos-3M rocket Hello, Hahc21. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Reconnaissance satellite Previous selections: Impossible object • Life sciences Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Evad37 (talk) 16:22, 17 February 2014 (UTC) • Condescension Thank you for choosing to address me in such a condescending tone - I can assure you I am fully capable of understanding what "archiving" is as I have an excellent grasp of the English language. I am also more than capable of determining when the use of the word "killing" is used inappropriately and in a distasteful manner. You have obviously achieved your objective of ensuring a minion like me has been suitably put in their place. Congratulations. SagaciousPhil - Chat 20:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC) @Sagaciousphil: I apologize, it was not my intention to make my comments look like they might to you. All I was trying to do was to provide some clarity to the situation, adding my personal thoughts on the matter. It is not among my objectives to shut down any concerns or criticisms you may have against Kevin Gorman or any other user (maybe administrators in general). Cheers. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 00:35, 21 February 2014 (UTC) Unfortunately you have not understood the point I was making. Please also be assured I have never had any problems with Admins - other than the misguided actions taken by the one you mention above. SagaciousPhil - Chat 06:55, 21 February 2014 (UTC) Feel free to explain your point then, because I certainly do not understand where do you want to go with it. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 14:11, 21 February 2014 (UTC) Please comment on Talk:Outrage (2009 film) Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Outrage (2009 film). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC) The Signpost: 19 February 2014 News and notes: Foundation takes aim at undisclosed paid editing; Greek Wikipedia editor faces down legal challenge Technology report: ULS Comeback WikiProject report: Countering Systemic Bias Featured content: Holotype Traffic report: Chilly Valentines Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:10, 21 February 2014 (UTC) March 2014 GAN Backlog Drive It's that time again! Starting on March 1, there will be another GAN Backlog Drive! There will be several changes compared to previous drives: This drive will introduce a new component to it; a point system. In a nutshell, older nominations are worth more points than newer nominations. The top 3 participants who have the points will be awarded the Golden, Silver, or Bronze Wikipedia Puzzle Piece Trophy, respectively. Unlike the December 2013 Backlog Drive, earning an additional barnstar if you reached your goal has been removed. The allowance to have insufficient reviews has been lowered to 2 before being disqualified. An exception to the rule that all reviews must be completed before the deadline has been created. Also, something that I thought I would share with all of you is that we raised $20.88 (USD) for the WMF in the December 2013 drive. It may not sound like a lot but considering that that was raised just because we reviewed articles, I would say that's pretty good! With that success, pledges can be made for the upcoming drive if you wish. More info regarding the drive and full descriptions regarding the changes to this drive can be found on the the drive page. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message on the drive talk page. I look forward to your participation and hope that because of it, some day the backlog will be gone! --Dom497 --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)