Jump to content

User talk:Worm That Turned

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user helped "Doom Bar" become a featured article.
This user helped "Sabrina Sidney" become a featured article.
This user helped 30 articles reach "Good Article" status x 30
This user helped 54 articles reach "Did You Know?" status x 54
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lmc33 (talk | contribs) at 20:38, 9 December 2013 (→Mr. Craven - update re: status). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User Talk Articles To Do Toolbox Subpages DYK Awards

Welcome to my talk page. Leave me a message! I am probably offline and am unable to respond swiftly. I will respond as soon as I can. Please feel free to send me an email, where I will likely respond faster.

This user is stalked by friendly talk page staplers.
This user replies where s/he likes, and is inconsistent in that respect.

Thank you

The Special Barnstar
I saw your question to Richwales today and wanted to thank you for the work you do despite all that has happened to you. I know what it feels like and feel so sad that you and probably others have been subjected to this kind of treatment. Best wishes. olive (talk) 16:51, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I know what it is like too. All the best. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:08, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Olive, Hawkeye7, thank you both for taking the time to come over and say that. I do appreciate it. Personally, I'm fine with what people say about me, I've long since made my peace with that side of being on the committee. I weigh up my thoughts and pick the least worst option, but I'll never please everyone. That means that there will always be people who do dislike me and it then follows that the poor treatment appears.
I felt it was important that the next crop of arbitrators were aware of what it could be like though. I'm not one to complain and would have happily never mentioned it, but they deserved to be aware of what they were coming into. WormTT(talk) 10:29, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(watching) Curious by the above, I looked up your good question and support the barnstar. You may have noticed that I asked my own and collected the responses which are promising: most candidates looked without bias at the fact that troubled me, and the one who came up with too easy an interpretation could be helped. More communication among the arbs seems a good goal, in any case, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:48, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice: Your 2013 Arbitration Committee Election vote

Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis

Curses! WormTT(talk) 08:27, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So much for your cunning plan to rig the election... You're not standing for another term, then? Yunshui 雲‍水 08:31, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unless I wanted to run two terms at the same time, I thought it a poor idea. My term runs out at the end of next year Having said that, no, I very much doubt I will be running for a second term this time next year. WormTT(talk) 08:43, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Meh, infographics are too complicated for me. Nice pastels, though; I might print the chart off to help me and the wife decide on some new curtains. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:57, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You should have seen the chart before it was brought to this readable state, - or better not ;) - I will miss you, WTT, and NW in the next committee, but have hopes looking at answers from candidates, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:15, 26 November 2013 (UTC) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:15, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, I think you've misunderstood. I'm not going anywhere yet! WormTT(talk) 09:25, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, - I confused it with your less time here and more for real life ;) - Looking at the observations from some candidates, I trust that they will look at evidence, in context, without bias, question the reasoning of colleagues, communicate, assume good faith. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:02, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You haven't quite gone power mad yet and ruled as a benevolent Wikidictator. I'd give you my vote. Just please stop mailing me pieces of my dog! Thanks ツ Jenova20 (email) 09:33, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
... yet WormTT(talk) 10:01, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bringing a constructive idea out of the former confusion, maybe arbs who can get elected intra-term actually should be able to have two arbitratorships running concurrently, with each arbitratorship allowed one vote in arbcom decisions? Continuing confidence of electorate = extra power. Just like Julius Caesar, who ... --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:28, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why stop at two? We could allow people to run for election multiple times each election so there's the possibility for one person having all the arbitrator positions at once. It'll definitely make decision making more simple. Thanks ツ Jenova20 (email) 09:12, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked IPs

There is a serious backlog of about 20K individual IPs that are blocked without expiration. I have broken the IPs into groups of 5000: m:User:とある白い猫/English Wikipedia open proxy candidates. So they are effectively blocked until time ends. This creates considerable potential collateral damage as the owners of IPs tend to be not very consistent. Some of these IPs are on dynamic ranges which results in arbitrary blocks of good users. Vast majority of the blocks go back years all the way to 2004 - some were preemptively blocked. Nowadays even open proxies normally do not get indefinite blocks.

The problem is that no single admin wants to review this many IPs and very few have the technical capability to review. Such a technical review would be non-trivial for individual IPs which in my humble opinion would be a complete waste of time. I feel ArbCom could step in and provide criteria for bulk action. A bulk unblock of all indefinite blocks (with exceptions if the specific single IP unblocks are contested) before - say - 2010 would be a good start.

Open proxies tend to be better handled at meta as open proxies are a global problem for all wikis.

-- A Certain White Cat chi? 11:31, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
Important article improvement milestone - nice to see this essential article getting the recognition it deserves! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 16:03, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Craven - update re: status

Greetings, Mr. Craven,

I messaged you apprx. 5 months ago re: adoption and at the time you weren't adopting even though you had listed on the page that you might have time for adoption - at least I believe that I am remembering this correctly! I messaged you and, at most, possibly one other person about adoption, but I do believe that you were the one person that I messaged about this opportunity. I've read that you are moving into a lower stage of Wikipedia work, but, I would like to know if you might possibly be able to take on a lower activity adoptee who also does their own research on how to enter edits, etc on Wikipedia before asking for help. Is there a chance that you might consider taking on an, at this time, low maintenance adoptee?

Also, regardless of the adoptee question, I wanted to ask you a question, quick question, about an edit I made to the "Mink Stole" page - I believe my second edit, the citation, was done correctly but, as you will clearly see, I added a film for 1971, "Is There Sex After Death" and I followed the formatting of the other films in that decade and had a big blunder - the list ended up outside of the sectioned box! It is really very obvious, is in the filmography section of her page and the problem addition is on the far right side - listed in the early 1970's section - film is a 1971 film. I am not even sure of how to flag the page so that somebody can assist me with the correction of the formatting. All of the information is there and when in edit mode it even appears correctly in the list of her film history. If you have a moment and can check on it, I would really appreciate it, Mr. Craven. If you do drop in and correct it, could you please, in brief, explain why the film listing didn't appear in the row once I chose to "Save" the edit - I would really appreciate it.

I hope that all is well with you in England, Loren M. Cooley (lmc33) Detroit, Michigan - USA 20:32, 9 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmc33 (talk • contribs)

ps - Mr. Craven, I attempted to reply to your message to me from 5 mos. ago, and this is message to you placed here, "User Talk", I'm not sure if this is correct! I am so sorry if it is not and hoping that you might show me how to properly reply to messages received and how to message a user correctly when initiating the contact. Thank you, again, for your response and assistance. lmc33 20:38, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Worm_That_Turned&oldid=585330860"