Jump to content

User talk:L235

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is an Arbitration clerk on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Foxer236 (talk | contribs) at 15:10, 18 June 2015 (→Fuck U!: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Use of the User|10 template at WER

Hey L. I think it may have happened again. Todays nominator of Ymingbao used the template and so, most likely, the nominee was notified. Perhaps going forward, our instructions should not mention User|10 so that there is no confusion. You and I know and one of us can add it after the nomination has been made. Thanks, your supportive presence is important to me. . Buster Seven Talk 11:16, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Buster7, yes, please amend the instructions as you wish. I'm just getting back from an exhausting trip and have a lot of emails to respond to (per the note at the top of this talk page) so I won't be able to do anything for a while. Thanks, --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 02:03, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The door is locked. I think you need a "special key" or a handprint or blood sample or some other way to elavate your stature above the "maddening crowd". . Buster Seven Talk 00:05, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Let me know what edits you need made, and I'll make them. The best way is to copy it to a userspace page, make your edits there, and link me to it. (Alternatively, make an {{edit request}} with your role as a coordinator of WikiProject Editor Retention.) Thanks, --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 00:18, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chomp chomp nom nom

[Breathing out a light spray of {{cookie}} crumbs as she speaks :] Darwinbish has stolen your cookie from Bishonen's page! The cookie made her happy and she'd like to give you a great big hug for leaving it where she could reach it. Spread the WikiLove by giving her more {{cookie}}s, unless you want her boys to pay you a visit!

@Bishonen and Darwinbish: LOL. Happy editing! --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 21:49, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather/Evidence

Hey, L, when you get a moment can you double-check the word counts for the evidence statements. I was getting different totals and now I'm about to adjust them. But having you double-check them would ease some minds, I think. I was using http://wordcounter.net but the tool in the clerks procedures is http://www.javascriptkit.com/script/script2/countwords.shtml so that's what I'm using now. Liz Read! Talk! 19:55, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Your counts were all within 10 words of my counts, so I didn't change anything. Thanks, --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 21:54, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
While mention has been made about conversations @ WP:WER I think it best not to get involved in an already crowded case. However, should more be made or mentioned about WER or EotW or members/clerks etc., I wonder if you might ping me. Thanks.. I hope it is not necessary.. Buster Seven Talk 00:01, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Buster7: I'm sorry, that's really not the role of the clerks of the Arbitration Committee. Thanks, --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 00:15, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. I failed to consider that my request may be inappropriate. . Buster Seven Talk 05:09, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Guidance on commas after Jr. and Sr.

Following the closure of a recent RfC you participated in, I have started an RfC on the separate but related issue of commas after Jr. and Sr.. Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) § RfC: Guidance on commas after Jr. and Sr. and feel free to comment there. Thanks! —sroc 💬 06:03, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on MediaWiki talk:Tag-OneClickArchiver

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on MediaWiki talk:Tag-OneClickArchiver. Legobot (talk) 00:06, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 May 2015

DRN

Feel free to go ahead and open Economic history of Chile for discussion. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 14:13, 26 May 2015 (UTC) (current DRN coordinator)[reply]

Remind the participants to be civil and concise and to comment on content, not contributors. If they start commenting on each other, they need to be cautioned. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:46, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
One of the participants has posted a statement, and has a concern about tags. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:42, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom

Since you are active in policy matters, you might see if you want to standardize how cases/requests are listed. Declined case requests are listed newest cases at the top, which makes sense given the bottom (old) to top (new) chronology of the page. But in the main case box, there should probably be one system, either newest>oldest or oldest>newest and right now it's a mix of both. Liz Read! Talk! 16:27, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: This should probably go on the clerks' list, because it's not something I can decide unilaterally; my personal opinion is newest>oldest. My apologies on my last mistake. Thanks, --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 16:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No apology necessary. When I removed the Alternative Medicine request, I had to reorder the remaining requests so the instructions have been ignored for a while. Liz Read! Talk! 17:35, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Liz, since you're here, could you remove the "From the Arbitration Committee" from your announcement at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American_politics_2/Proposed_decision#Proposed_decision_date, since it wasn't something "ratified by the Arbitration Committee" ... "by formal vote", per the mailing list? Thanks, --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 17:39, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Always a stickler for details. Liz Read! Talk! 19:06, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz: Sorry, if you don't want me to in the future, let me know. --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 19:08, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a sort of related point, and I don't know where to suggest it: When the Arbs pass a motion like "I) Remedy 3.2 of the Infoboxes case is suspended", could the text of said remedy, or at least a link to it, be included? WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:39, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@WhatamIdoing: Well, we don't usually like to modify the "historical record", but I'll see if I can link to those in a bit. For the future, the best way to remind us is probably to leave a note at WP:ACCN, preferably before the motion receives majority support. Thanks. --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 02:47, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you need to change the historical record, but if you see something similar in the future, then perhaps you could suggest a link. I don't really follow ArbCom pages, so I'm unlikely to notice in time. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:12, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Hi! Zeb (talk) 01:26, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@ObsequiousNewt: Hi, great to see you! (In the interest of privacy, mind continuing the conversation on IRC?) Also, you probably want to have at least one link to your enwikipedia userpage in your signature, otherwise Sinebot gets a bit agitated. Thanks. --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 01:29, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

08:16:52, 2 June 2015 review of submission by Mohyla103


Recently, you rejected my article on the "Top 100 Mountains (Taiwan)" by claiming that the list itself is not notable. Since I assume you don't live in Taiwan, I thought I would clarify something that you might have misunderstood.

I realize you are probably very busy reviewing and rejecting many articles so when you see "Top XXX" you might just assume it's a meaningless list. If you read the article, you will see this is NOT a list of the 100 highest mountains in Taiwan. This is a set of 100 peaks chosen out of hundreds as a goal for hikers in Taiwan, specifically because these peaks have something special about them, not because of their height. It is the Bible for hikers in Taiwan and the most notable anything in the Taiwanese hiking world. It has been around essentially unchanged for around 45 years. I realize this is not a very notable list in the English-speaking world (although many hikers are aware of it anyway), but it is certainly notable in certain circles. It's for this reason that it has its own page in Chinese: https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E5%8F%B0%E7%81%A3%E7%99%BE%E5%B2%B3 on Wikipedia already. My page was essentially a direct translation of that page (as I noted in the Talk page) including all its sources, with a few extra pieces of information that I added for completeness, also sourced.

If it is notable enough to have its own page in Chinese, and my page is essentially the same, why is it not notable enough to have its own page in English?

As supporting evidence for my claim, I see this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Colorado_fourteeners is an acceptable article on Wikipedia. This is essentially the same as my article. It is a list of famous mountains that is RELEVANT because it is an agreed-upon goal within the hiking community in the area. It is not necessarily designated by an official source but it certainly exists by convention. In fact, I would say the fourteeners is even less relevant than my page, as it is literally just a list of mountains simply based on their height, whereas the Top 100 in Taiwan is based on a variety of factors agreed upon by the hiking community.

Again, if the Colorado fourteeners is an acceptable article and notable enough, despite being localized to Colarado, why is the Top 100 here in Taiwan not notable enough?

I will try to add more outside references to show you its notability as per the comments left, and will do my best to find some in English. However, I wanted to share the above to give you a local perspective on the issue before I resubmit the article. Thank you for taking the time to read this.


Mohyla103 (talk) 08:16, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Just a comment about one of the points/question you brought up. While the subject in question may meet Chinese Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, that doesn't necessarily mean that it meets English Wikipedia's policy about notability. Policy differs across the different languages of the project.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 19:57, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) @Mohyla103: Looking at this further, List of Colorado fourteeners (another point you bring up) has 195 references and is extremely well sourced. Draft:Top 100 Mountains (Taiwan) has 5 references, which I can't read (without running them through a translator program) because they are in Chinese, so I can't speak to their quality. As User:L235 brought up when they declined your request, "add[ing] citations to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject", would establish notability and clear this for creation.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 20:40, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Mohyla103: Looks like it was accepted by Primefac. Thanks, --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 23:11, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved
 – submission accepted. --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 23:11, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 03 June 2015

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather

I just looked through the temporary injunction that you posted at WP:AN. Is there a reason that the temporary injunction isn't posted in the temporary-injunction section of the case page itself? I felt like adding it, but WP:IAR doesn't seem to apply to arbitration, so I didn't think it would help if I corrected the issue myself. Nyttend (talk) 04:00, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nyttend: My apologies, now  Done. Thanks, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 04:04, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To follow up, the arbitrators had made it clear on the mailing list that it was important that the injunction be implemented immediately- the exact words were Urgent clerk action needed! The motion[1] is now passing and is to be enacted immediately- so I made the edits too quickly and forgot to double check. My apologies, won't happen again. L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 04:09, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, no problem. I'm not a party, so it won't affect me; I was just afraid that if I added the chunk in question, I'd (1) be reverted because I wasn't an arbitrator or clerk, and/or (2) become a party to the case because I'd edited one of its documents. Nyttend (talk) 04:13, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, we're a bit protective of the space, because it's pretty clear what to do in case of issues with the page, and allowing edits to it quickly turns into a slippery slope. Thanks for letting me know. L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 04:16, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Regarding this edit [1], you are of course correct that it was high time for it to be removed, but as it says both on the CENT template itself in in the notice you should have seen when opening the edit window, when removing a discussion it is expected it be moved to the archive, not just deleted. (don't worry about it, I already went ahead and did so, just thought you should know for future reference) Beeblebrox (talk) 22:20, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Beeblebrox: Goodness, my apologies. Thanks for correcting it! Best regards, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 23:46, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

speedy deletion

ah well i disagree but its been deleted so like , ah well etc, the person who the page was about liked it, so i dont think i come off looking stupid. i thought it was important as a page because of the fame of the person included. so this experience has put me off wikipedia, so just a big pile of oh well and i do something else with my life haha! i cant be bothered to contest something, it would just make me bitter. when i tell him whats happened, ahhh its just sad really. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nik hb (talk • contribs) 00:02, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nik hb: I've read this five times now and still have no clue what you're asking me. Mind clarifying? L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 17:43, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like this is in reference to Drcarlsonalbion, which you (correctly) nominated for speedy deletion back in February. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:11, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

Hi, with regard to "Continuing hatted discussion without prior permission; also not relevant to coming to a decision", is it worth putting my note (which was not intended to continue the prior discussion but suggest an alternative) in its own subsection? Thanks --Fæ (talk) 17:36, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Fæ: Hi Fæ, I would probably have hatted the section as not relevant to assisting the ArbCom in coming to a decision if you had posted a new one; you are free to post to individual editors' talk pages individually with suggestions, or if you receive permission to post it from any other arbitrator or clerk, I will defer. Thanks, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 17:42, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I'll consider whether it is worth the risk of being accused of canvassing, or just wait until the right time to go ahead and start a !vote elsewhere myself. Email is a good option to avoid bad faith allegations of grave-dancing or worse. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 17:46, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kashmir conflict

Sir,

Please see the edit history http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Kashmir_conflict&action=history how WP neutrality is being violated by Human3015 and co using different tactics. Your justice will be required. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.47.121.0 (talk) 16:46, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the person to ask about that, sorry. L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 17:43, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You!

The Civility Barnstar
Thank you for being so welcoming and so courteous in answering my questions. Vordrak (talk) 20:06, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Vordrak, are you sure you meant to give this to me? I mean, you personally interpreted my comments as threatening journalists with sanctions. Let me know if this was left for me on accident or a joke or similar. Thanks, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 21:46, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
L235 not a joke. I thought you were generally civil in a complex and acrimonious matter. I did make the remark about "threatening journalists" but I noticed that you did explain it was a standard template and also removed your comment about "self-promotion" from the PD talk page. The only constructive criticism I would make with regard to civility is that you have twice ascribed bad faith - once in the "self-promotion" remark and once in the "grave dancing" remark on Chase Me's page. As it happens after the latter comment another long-standing user responded to you on that page (albeit neglecting to ping you) saying they thought my request reasonable.
However aside from that I thought you very civil and gave you a barn star. Vordrak (talk) 22:20, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Vordrak: Thanks. Not that it much matters, but can you remind me what "grave dancing" remark you were talking about? Thanks, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 22:27, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@L235: Oops. Further demonstrating my newbie status in the latter remark I somehow mixed you up with Liz. :O Corrected as above. Vordrak (talk) 22:48, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 June 2015

my recent edits

the show kung fu panda legends of awesomeness is on hiatus and there might not be an explanation but people who visit the page need to know what's going one, and why hasn't the airdate been announced ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.88.212.24 (talk) 17:44, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

I just noticed you have been made a full clerk! I missed that announcement. Well-deserved as you seem to be on top of all case developments. Congratulations! Liz Read! Talk! 22:47, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Thanks! L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 23:04, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration case opening

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/Technical 13. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Technical 13/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 30, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Technical 13/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 01:49, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DENY, outing

Would the clerk read and understand WP:DENY and then agree to redelete what I deleted already. Also, the archive.is stuff crosses the line. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.216.194.32 (talk) 03:46, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Arbitration Committee is already reviewing my provisional action. L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 03:48, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, L235.

Resolved
 – Committee reviewed and actioned. L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 14:35, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bots


You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at https://www.mediawiki.org/enwiki/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages ), it's time to fix your code!

Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.

Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fuck U!

Yo,u little motherfucker ,what u say?!? Nobody need a source for that ! Haven't u got eyes?!?! I'm gonna to fuck yo mamma if you delete this again !Nobody mess with the fandom ! _|_

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:L235&oldid=667498792"