User talk:TFOWR/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6

East-West Schism

Incidentally, how are things going here? It seems to be greatly improved since I was last there...! TFOWR 21:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. There's been some improvement (more people participating) at East–West Schism. However, work seems to have branched off to (or continued unabated at) Catholic–Eastern Orthodox theological differences‎‎ — the same two original editors are still the primary contributors there, and one of them in particular is really acting like he owns the page. I've suggested to them two or three times that they need to improve the state of affairs, and possibly even both take a short break to allow other people to get involved and not feel intimidated, but this hasn't worked so far. Richwales (talk) 22:47, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Vandal heads-up

Sorry to disturb you on your DramaOut, but just let you know the Indonesian misinformation vandal has shown up once again. This time, the address he used was 114.57.17.34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). He's not active right now BTW. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 07:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

No worries, needs must! Thanks, it serves as a reminder that I need to get off my backside and file something at WP:SPI ;-) I'll keep an eye on the IP in the meantime. TFOWR 10:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Urgent - 18 year old girl posts nude photos of herself!!!1!!!11111!!!!

Not really, but Glasgow rosses is back if you would like to do the honours again. O Fenian (talk) 11:14, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I pointed this out to the admin who deleted it last time; didn't realise it was becoming so infamous. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 11:15, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Also if this was a snipe at my urgent, you're asking for a good trouting there. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 11:16, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea to what you are hinting at. Also TFOWR you might want to compare the contributions of Chriscoll 2004 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Glasgowirish67 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). O Fenian (talk) 11:17, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It's daft - "Goals Park" is a 5-a-side facility in a park fairly near me. It's not a major sporting arena, it's where dads take their sons of an evening. This is at best a non-notable amateur team, but that's really WP:AGFing. The renaming of "Goals" to "Goals Park" really makes me think this is deliberate, i.e. a hoax. Anyway, it's deleted (G3) - for now. TFOWR 11:19, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

So it is a bit more upmarket than Ibrox then? O Fenian (talk) 11:21, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Maybe it's time to break out the NaCl. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 11:23, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Left a message below yours - if it turned up at RFPP I'd normally salt after 3 creates, I'd probably punt this one though as the guy's been finally warned now so give him a chance to take the warning on board. TFOWR 11:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Innocent... Not heard of "Ibrox", so can't compare ;-) To the extent I support any "soccer" team, I support these guys (because only students support these guys, and QP play at Hampden... which is cool). But really, the only team worth bothering about (except in world cup years...) is this one. Expect them to peak this year, and be shite next year ;-) TFOWR 11:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Ah yes, is it true that for home games Queens Park supporters get supplied with a megaphone on the way in so they can talk to the fan nearest to them? O Fenian (talk) 11:34, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Heh, you've caught me out - I've never been (but I've heard those rumours, too - and, I'll note, I never hear the Hampden Roar when QP are playing at home...) QP are part of my "Glasgow Survival Kit" - I learned early on that if you get asked a seemingly innocuous question, the answer is almost certainly along the lines of: "I come from New Zealand. I'm a Buddhist/Sikh/Pagan. The school I went to was run by Atheists/non-Christians/robots. My favourite colour is none of the following: blue, green, orange, purple, nor any combination of red, white and blue or orange, white and green." This has stopped me getting killed in most pubs I've been to ;-) TFOWR 11:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Taking things a bit far is it not? O Fenian (talk) 16:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

It does explain, however, why it is that whenever I pop out to the supermarket I end up in Paradise ;-) TFOWR 16:22, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Carn Sports in Munich Susan Shirk Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan Paw Paw Tunnel Fabian Dawkins Estádio 11 de Novembro Sultan bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan Gobbolino, the Witch's Cat Marymount MRT Station Technical University of Łódź Polish census of 2002 Lorong Chuan MRT Station Hamdan bin Mohammed Al Nahyan Mahabir Pun Anwar Rasheed Hamdan bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan ElgooG Bartley MRT Station

Cleanup Spain Penis Limp Bizkit Merge Final Fantasy gameplay Tampines New Town Shift knob Add Sources Mohanlal Šajkača Slater & Gordon Wikify American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons Naked Science Camilla Wicks Expand History of Capri OMG (song) List of R&B number-one singles of 2010 (U.S.)

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:20, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Any ideas?

• List of war films based on books (1898–1926) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Varlaam (talk · contribs)

Hi TFOWR, could you give me some advice please? I edited an article after having checked my sources on the reliable sources noticeboard and included those citations in my edit. I left a note on the article Talkpage referring to the RS/N opinion and explained the circumstances of the edit. That note is unanswered. The edit I made, including the RS refs, has been deleted, with no edit summary. I don't wish to edit war and discussion does not appear to be an option. So, where to now? Would AN/I consider this a content issue? Thanks, Daicaregos (talk) 07:52, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

If RSN are OK with the source used I can't see why it would be removed without comment from the article. Without knowing the context it's difficult to go much further, beyond: have you raised this directly with the editor in question? (e.g. if they're a newbie they may not be aware of the article's talkpage, etc etc). If, however, it's clear that the editor simply wants their preferred version of the truth then maybe it's time for protection to get the editor to talk? Let me know the article in question and I'll take a deeper look. TFOWR 10:19, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks TFOWR. The article in question is List of war films based on books (1898–1926). The edits concern Hedd Wyn. My original edits between 7 March 2010 (diff) and 9 March 2010 were reverted (diff). I took the refs to the RS/N: (here), reinstated the edit with their refs 15 March 2010 (here) and left a message on the Talkpage. The edits were removed on 27 May 2010 (here). Not knowing what to do, I did nothing. For context, a similar series of events took place on List of films based on arts books, but other editors engaged and my edits stand (see the section Poets). Please let me know if you need further information. Appreciate your time. Daicaregos (talk) 10:56, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

It's spread over several months, so I wouldn't consider it edit warring if you were to reinstate the cited claim. However, my first advice would be to raise it with Varlaam. I'm assuming Varlaam didn't look at the talkpage before reverting, so might appreciate a more direct chat. TFOWR 11:09, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I'll give it a go and let you know how it goes. Cheers, Daicaregos (talk) 11:18, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh well. It was worth a try. I left an AGF message on his/her Talkpage. No reply, but this was the result. At least there was an (sweet) edit summary this time. Any ideas (again)? Daicaregos (talk) 19:39, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, I think when an editor removes a BPI cite from an article, they should come up with a better edit summary than that... I've left a message for Varlaam. They're obviously doing a lot of good work there, but the lack of communication in this instance is a concern. And the edit summary was not WP:CIVIL. TFOWR 19:47, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Much appreciated. Daicaregos (talk) 20:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

S/he doesn't appear to have become a reformed character yet. Any suggestions? Daicaregos (talk) 12:59, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The issue for me is the lack of communication (and what little communication exists is in the form of edit summaries that are less than civil). I've been pondering about this, and wondering where to escalate it. There are WP:OWN issues, perhaps, and WP:CIVIL issues, certainly. WP:WQA would address the civility issues, but not anything else. For that reason I'm tempted by WP:ANI but I'd like to try and make one last effort to get through to Varlaam first. TFOWR 13:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Please do. That would have been my preferred option. Unfortunately, my responses from Varlaam have all been less than civil, so I am not minded to try again, myself. But you may have more success than I. I hope so. Daicaregos (talk) 13:20, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I've reverted them, noting in my edit summary that I was reverting back to a cited revision. I've posted on the talkpage, and left a {{talkback}} for Varlaam. I'm still WP:AGFing, and it's entirely possible they have a good reason for their revert, but all I can see is a rude edit summary. If they revert without discussion I'll take it to ANI, but I remain hopeful that that won't be necessary. TFOWR 13:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Let's hope so. Thanks again, Daicaregos (talk) 13:36, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

No reverts so far. I may be tempting fate, but I think we may have turned a corner. Thank you for your help. Daicaregos (talk) 16:17, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Slightly confused

Hi TFOWR,

I'm slightly confused by your statement here that Itsmejudith (talk · contribs) was the only regular at NPOVN to comment. I see three other responses: from Noloop (talk · contribs) (mostly at T:C), Slatersteven (talk · contribs), and Dailycare (talk · contribs). Slatersteven's response was technically ambiguous, but most seemed to be in agreement that the term "uncircumcised" is fine. Are these not regulars? I'm not sufficiently familiar to be able to tell. I wonder if you could clarify? Thanks. :) Jakew (talk) 10:40, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Dammit, I'm equally unfamiliar with NPOVN! I think you're quite right - I'd seen the latter editors post at Talk:Circumcision and discounted them. I'll double-check and re-do the section as needed. TFOWR 10:44, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Fixed, and oops! If MishMich and Baseball Bugs turn out to be NPOVN regulars, too, I'm going to be mortified. TFOWR 10:54, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Jakew (talk) 13:02, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

ITN for Yagan

--Nice work. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:11, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I sent you a pic from the Yagan memorial in Aus. Off2riorob (talk) 16:06, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, both of you, though I don't feel I did much other than tweak a ref here and there for this one. Still - it's good to see it on ITN! TFOWR 10:53, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Can you?

Can you help and award all the users this or a substitute? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 17:35, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

This user participated in the 2010 Great Wikipedia Dramaout, a dedicated effort to exclusively article write for five days from July 5th to 10th.

Those who lapsed and participated in drama may observe the drama out for an additional 2 days.

I can. I'll try and get round to it today, but if I don't (busy weekend...) I'll make sure Monday is the day. For my part, I managed to avoid too much drama, and even though I was mostly wikignoming I still managed to end the week feeling I'd achieved something - so I'm happy! TFOWR 09:44, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

• I've pinged you! TFOWR 12:18, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Lock? positive ;-)

[1] Dear TROWR, The Ryan Seacrest vandals are so disgusting, (see diff) which is why I (apparently) prematurely asked for a block. The good thingi is, I met you and with a little drama we had an excellent outcome and now I know why peeps give you great barnstars! I am a convert LOL. I am here to ask you you about re-considering a block and deleting the above diff. Do I have to do something further or can you take it from here? BTW I did participate in the drama-out altho I didn't sign up anywhere. ;-) I am really glad to have met you! I am looking forward to "hearing" from you. Namaste....DocOfSoc (talk) 10:09, 11 July 2010 (UTC)DocOfSoc (talk) 10:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

My understanding is that edits like this can be "revision deleted" (meaning that the contents are hidden from view - only administrators can see the contents). I've done this here, as the edit made deeply unpleasant claims about a living person ("RD2: Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material"). I've not blocked the IP that made the edit: they've only edited once, and we need to be very careful about users with dynamic IP addresses - it's likely that this IP address is now used by someone completely different. I'll keep an eye on the IP's edits, however, and won't hesitate to block them if it becomes apparent that the same user is using the IP address still. TFOWR 10:17, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

→ 71.161.57.175 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

TYTYTY! I repeat, you were sent from above ;-) DocOfSoc (talk) 10:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

So was Mr Bean (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:13, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

"Behold the man who is a bean". Isn't quite the same without the choir... and I talk too much to be a true Bean ;-) TFOWR 11:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Hielandman

Try the Scottish National Dictionary. The BBC is basically illiterate when it comes to Scots. 84.134.190.108 (talk) 14:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

...or strongly influenced by their location in Glasgow ;-) No disrespect to the DSL, but it's a general dictionary of the Scots language, broadly applicable to Doric, Lallans etc. Try googling for "lallans" + "heilan" - "heiland" (Or, for that matter, compare the results of searching for "Heilanman's Umbrella" compared with searching for "Heilandman's Umbrella"). In general we use the most common name, not the most correct name. TFOWR 14:54, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry. Just interfering with the usual literary spelling. Since Google is the great arbiter I will accept that. Result: "heilanman's umbrella" 2050 Vs "hielanman's umbrella" 873 and "hielandman's umbrella" with a pitiful 58, not much better than "heilandman's umbrella" with 10.

No worries, though I'd add that google is good for casual testing but I wouldn't want to use it for anything more serious. In this case, it's likely that it's Glasgow that's out of step: as you note, the correct Scots spelling is "heiland", but since it's a Glasgow landmark the local Glasgow/Lowland Scots spelling will apply to the article (and, I reckon, that will in turn influence the wider world - the BBC and google, for example). TFOWR 15:24, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, TFOWR. You have new messages at WP:RFPP.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 16:50, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

No worries! I'm sure you're quite right, and tomorrow will see vandalism ramp up for both articles. I'll keep them watchlisted. TFOWR 16:52, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I was actually intending that talkback thing for my Cesc Fabregas reply (it's the 1st time I've used it) But thanks for that. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 16:55, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I am an idiot ;-) I'll semi it for two months, in that case. TFOWR 16:58, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 17:01, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much!

Very much appreciated! -- JohnWBarber (talk) 18:03, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I realize this is probably impossible...

...but how likely would a 78.147.*.* block be? I have a constant problem with this IP prefix, to the point it isn't even worth warning him or requesting a block anymore, as he'll just be back with another IP possibly within hours. Barring effectively indefinite semi- or pending changes protection, there's literally no other way to deal with this guy; he's been a problem for almost a year. HalfShadow 18:31, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm probably the wrong person to ask - my experience with rangeblocks is through being denied them at SPI ;-) In this case it's 65536 individual IP addresses that would be affected, so I suspect your case would need to be pretty compelling (no evidence of the range being used by good faith editors, for example). How many pages are affected? Would RFPP be an option, or are there too many targets? TFOWR 18:35, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

He seems to be targeting this page particularly. literally every edit by this prefix has been vandalism to the page. That's pretty much it. He's effectively made a career out of it. In fact the page itself appears to be an asshole magnet. HalfShadow 18:46, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Heh, I spent a good part of my life (a part I'm never going to get back...) dealing with a sock puppeteer who used this ISP (Opal Telecom). I'd cheerfully block all their IP ranges. In this case the path of least resistance is probably semi protection, which I have applied for two weeks (previous protection was recent, and for one week - so I'm reluctant to protect for too long). The IP's edits appear to lack competence but I suspect it's a UK viewer who doesn't realise that the US and UK versions differ slightly - and who is unable to edit coherently, in any event. TFOWR 18:54, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm rightly proud of the page; more than half of it is my own work. It's certainly not an ownership issue: there are the odd random IP edits that actually are helpful, it's just the vast majority either aren't or are this twit. HalfShadow 19:12, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Aye, it's a tricky one - my first thought was that PC1 might be good (as there are other IPs at work) but on balance the other IPs weren't all that good, and there were simply too many edits per day. Hopefully - though I doubt it, frankly - the fortnight off will make the Opal Telecom IP reconsider. At the very least it should give you some welcome respite ;-) TFOWR 19:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

wiki weather

Sunshine and occasional clouds with a strong possibility of drama. Off2riorob (talk) 19:09, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) And an occasional passing troll. --220.101 (talk) ^\Contribs 19:25, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

No sign of the sunshine, but then no sign of trolls, either - I must be hanging out in the wrong places! TFOWR 19:34, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Are you experiencing any Admin burnout yet? Off2riorob (talk) 19:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

No, not yet - but I've just had several days avoiding WP:AIV, WP:RFPP and - especially! - WP:AN and WP:ANI. I actually think that's the way to go - take a look at User:TFOWR/Dashboard periodically, but don't treat it like I treat my watchlist. Though I did go through RFPP today, hitting everything. Oh, and I warned an admin! TFOWR 19:34, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Your dashboard is a good place to find drama. I saw your warning, very humorous indeed. Off2riorob (talk) 19:52, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Oi! Me dashboard is for serious admin buzniss, not dramah! Oh, wait, the Dramaout is over. Carry on...! TFOWR 16:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Ta!

Victims of the Rouge IP's

Thank you for that!. People should beware, I have recently added another 'head' to my 'trophy' collection, [2]. Looky, room for one more! UAA may need 'another' admins attention. Poomypants (talk · contribs)! Poomy-pants? 'Poo-my-pants' seems more likely! Took 7 1/2 hours to get 'Poomy' indeffed.
Re an earlier post (I must come stalk here more often!) I've been interested in what my 'deleted edits' are too, especially when they 'jump' suddenly! Mind you they are only at about 0.7%, average seems to be about 5%! --220.101 (talk) ^\Contribs 19:25, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

UAA isn't my strong point, but Poomypants seems pretty unambiguous - surprised it took that long...

Your deleted contribs - I sees 'em ;-) First one, dating back to November 2009, is File:User contributions detail.png (moved to commons, then recreated/repointed/rewhatever-it-is-they-do here). Most recent (8 July) is FORS - Schweizer Kompetenzzentrum Sozialwissenschaften - you tagged it as {{notenglish}}, then Jac16888 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) deleted it as a recently-created duplicate of FORS (Swiss Centre of Expertise in the Social Sciences). All very mundane, I'm afraid!

If you're interested in the full gory details, email me and I'll reply with the full list - titles only, I can't/won't/am-too-lazy-to restore without digging further.

TFOWR 19:43, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I have just over two and a half thousand deleted edits, about nine percent of my edits, is that good? Off2riorob (talk) 19:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It depends on what type of edits you usually make; I do a lot of newpage patrolling, which inevitably involves nominating articles for speedy deletion, so about 14-15% of my edits are deleted edits. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 19:50, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

As Giftiger says, "It depends on what type of edits", plus (POV) how long you have been editing as I presume the longer you edit, the more likely you will be reverted. If you make lots of minor edits it may be more likely too. My (OR) personal observation is that 5% is about average. Thanks, TWOFR but It's probably not important at all as my deleted edits are, so far, very low. -- 220.101 (talk) ^\Contribs 23:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Being reverted doesn't mark your edits as deleted, only your contributions on pages which have since been deleted show up as deleted. Also obviously anything which has been revdelled, but that's unusual for a constructive editor. I'm not sure whether oversighted edits display as deleted, or simply aren't listed at all, but hopefully there'll never be reason to oversight any of my edits so I hope not to find out ;) GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 11:13, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback message

Hello, TFOWR. You have new messages at HJ Mitchell's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

/HeyMid (contributions) 11:56, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Drama-out

Very good suggestions.

Here is your barnstar. It can be cut and pasted.

Awarded to TFOWR

		The 3rd Anti-Drama Barnstar
		Awarded for participating in the 3rd Great Wikipedia Dramaout. Thanks for participating to reduce drama during the festival!

Is the person organising this worthy of being awarded a barnstar from you? ;p Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 15:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not worthy! But thank you anyway - I'll keep it ;-)

However... the barnstar image still says "2nd" - we should probably update it (or, better yet, create a "generic" barnstar that we can use for every Dramaout). TFOWR 15:07, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The lazy option is rarely the "better" option. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 20:36, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Revdel may be required

Could you take a look at this edit on Chzz' talk page and revdel the email address if appropriate? I believe it's being quoted so I think you may need to find the original source as well. I'm not sure if it's appropriate to revdel, but since it seems to be someone's personal email address I would err on the side of caution. Thanks TFOWR. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 16:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I have so done. I believe that, since it contained an email address, it qualified for Wikipedia:REVDEL#HIDINGBEFORESIGHT. I've WP:REVDELed it, and emailed oversight for long-term fixing. Thanks for spotting this so quickly! TFOWR 16:13, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

No problem; I'm not sure that it warrants oversight, but best to check I suppose. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 16:25, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure, either, and I mentioned in my email that they could {{trout}} me if necessary ;-) In this case, though, the only applicable criteria for rev-del specified that the deletion was prior to oversighting. I'd guess that if oversight felt oversight was inappropriate, they'd also "un-rev-del" the edit. TFOWR 16:27, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Level of involvement

As you have commented here, could you please state your level of involvement (if any) next to your support/oppose/comment in that discussion? Although all input would/should be considered, this will help clarify a community consensus from a local consensus among involved users. Thank you, Ncmvocalist (talk) 19:37, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

 Done Incidentally, I think that link is broken: I had to go to ANI manually!!!!1! TFOWR 19:43, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmm...I blame your computer - it works for me when I click on it and I didn't have to go manually. :P Ncmvocalist (talk) 20:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Weird, it works when I click the link on the page, but not when I click the link in the diff. That normally works... TFOWR 20:17, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

cut and copy

Hi , what do you know about talkpage cut and copy content from citations? I though, excessive posting without reason to insert or discuss in the article had copyright issues and similar to forum content as in just posting excessive content to the talkpage? Off2riorob (talk) 19:59, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

(Me + copyright: Nooo. I know nuffing). I'd imagine it's a bad thing, in much the same way that saying "Jane Doe2 is a child murderer" at Talk:Jane Doe2 is just as bad as saying it at Jane Doe2. I could be wrong, but I'd suggest that erring on the side of caution is a good thing, until someone sensible says otherwise. My "someone sensible" for copyright issues would probably be Moonriddengirl (talk · contribs). You've got me thinking, though... User:TFOWR/Sandbox is probably a copyvio right now... dammit. TFOWR 20:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Haha, Clean your cupboard I will be looking later. Off2riorob (talk) 20:08, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Too late - already cleaned! TFOWR 20:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

You are fast..What about this, is this copyrighted? If I add it I will be faster than you. Off2riorob (talk) 20:11, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I'd guess not, though I'm assuming that Betacommand hasn't "borrowed" copyrighted code (pretty safe bet: Beta is smart enough to write their own, I'd guess). Since it's been "published" to Wikipedia I'd assume it's licensed the same way any of our contributions are. But I honestly can't say - I Am Not A Lawyer, etc! TFOWR 20:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Haha, I was wondering, what the F would happen if I added all that magic code to my monobook? Off2riorob (talk) 20:25, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Heh, I was more than happy with one little "import" in my monobook until quite recently (easy diff, since you ask...!) Then bad things happened and now my monobook is jammed full of strange new code... ;-) So - I have no idea what would happen. Bad things?! I reckon if you look carefully you'll find a script to {{trout}} AN for failing to protect a main page image... but that's just a guess ;-) TFOWR 20:31, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

It is so scary, your momobook is like a sissy compared. I think that is on auto the trout for not protecting main page pics and looks like an army of bots also , waiting to spring into action. I so appreciate the guys that write the code that allows all this to function. Off2riorob (talk) 20:38, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

You should adjust the script so that the trout slowly grows each day and then dies of old age. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 09:07, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

;-) I tried doing that manually at AN once - I think the consensus was that all admins deserved the trouting (which is/was probably true...) Right now I'd settle for a script that gave me easy access to Beta's new username - that "delta" symbol ain't on my keyboard ;-) TFOWR 09:11, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Δ good thing there's that little insert bar below the save page button eh? ΏᾃᾋὃἅΉἍΈέστρΣπΞΞξΝμἩ. By the way I'm going to be taking a short wikibreak because of an argument with another editor so don't miss my (talk page stalker)ism too much. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 09:25, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey, cool! I was thinking last night I've never used the GUI (I was going through my preferences turning stuff on and off, so I turned off the GUI - but I've still got the "Insert..." drop-down, and I've just checked, and you're right, and now I've selected "Greek" and I can see... Ά ά etc - and most importantly: Δ (and δ - which may come in useful).

I saw a couple of reverts - the most recent one was the first thing I checked when I logged in this morning (the edit summary kinda grabbed my attention...!) FWIW, I would have done the next revert, if required (I had to do something similar recently...) TFOWR 09:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. I'm not proud of swearing in the edit summary and I apologise to anyone who had to see that, but not to TT. Mocking me on my talk page because no one paid attention to a perfectly valid wikiquette about his actions and then stalking my talk page is totally out of line as far as I'm concerned. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 09:38, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, you want to watch those accusations of stalking, Giftiger. ╟─TreasuryTag►Tellers' wands─╢ 09:48, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

By the way, TT has made a big show of how I'm not allowed to "ban him" from my talk page, but I'm certainly allowed to revert whatever I please from my talk page and grant that right to anyone else. If you happen to see my talk page edited by TT and it's not an inconvenience to you, please don't hesitate to hit that lovely rollback button for me. Thanks. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 09:41, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

• At no stage did I object to the removal of the material. I fully support the removal of material from talkpages. However, TFOWR, I hope that you're not endorsing the personal attacks and incivility emanating from Giftiger today? Because that is what I was complaining about, not the deletion itself. For instance, "infantile," "FUCK OFF," "What are you, three years old? Stay the fuck away from me," "stalking," and so on. None of that is acceptable, even if the removal of material from one's own talkpage is. ╟─TreasuryTag►Tellers' wands─╢ 09:48, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

  WP:WQA is thataway. My objection is to posting twice after being reverted once. It's difficult to see any good faith reason why that was necessary. I'm pretty lenient when it comes to civility, largely because - far too often - it's used as a weapon: "She dragged me to WQA, so now I'm going to drag her to WQA." Perhaps that context is colouring my view of your normally civil conduct? TFOWR 09:54, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

  I did not "post twice after being reverted once" – the first message was a no-personal-attacks warning. When it was deleted with yet more personal attacks, I left a final warning. This is normal practice on Wikipedia, and is exactly why we have {{uw-npa1}} + {{uw-npa2}} + {{uw-npa3}} + {{uw-npa4}}. I could have simply left these warnings, but thought, as I'm sure you will agree, that that would be a bad idea. That was my good-faith reason for leaving more than one message, and I hope you have been enlightened.

  I should perhaps also point out that while you may be lenient toward incivility and personal attacks, Wikipedia policy is avowedly not! ╟─TreasuryTag►First Secretary of State─╢ 09:58, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

  Fortunately en.wiki has a venue for dealing with precisely these issues: WP:WQA. Time to step up, TT. If you think you've got a case - have at it. TFOWR 10:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

  Do I take it that you withdraw your accusation of bad faith, then? ╟─TreasuryTag►directorate─╢ 10:04, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

  No accusation to withdraw, apologies if you think there was such an accusation, and I'm happy to continue assuming good faith, without prejudice to WQA (or ANI, or wherever). TFOWR 10:09, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

• hmmm... Good morning to you all. So where is this delta symbol ...Δ... ah, thanks, reminds me of the person that used to be called Prince (musician) changed his name to Love Symbol Album, which it says in the lede of his BLP..attracted ridicule Off2riorob (talk) 10:40, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

  (talk page stalker) Hmm, bit of a WP:WEASEL there; I've added a weasel tag and requested a couple more citations; I'm fairly sure it's "true", but verifiable is a different matter, and what can be called "ridicule" is a matter of opinion. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 10:46, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I think we should remove ridicule as it is a bit very weasely there in the lede...but what to add ... Off2riorob (talk) 10:52, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

How about something along the lines of "the media speculated that he was suffering from a mental condition"? Obviously with verification (I doubt it'll be too difficult to reference that). Also maybe replace "the media" with something more specific to avoid lumping it all together. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 10:56, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, I've tweaked it from the lede, I don't think a claim of ridicule (or madness) is needed in the lede like that. I see you tweaked it a bit more, its better now. Off2riorob (talk) 11:01, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Probably not, unless we actually have evidence that he is/was suffering from a mental breakdown or some such condition; the media isn't exactly qualified. The lede looks better now. By the way, was "ass" in the edit summary short for "assess"ing the suggestion? I assume it was. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 11:04, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Ow, excuse me, I must get some new fingers or a new keyboard. It should of said add...not .ass.. youll see the s key sitting next to the d key, excuse me. Off2riorob (talk) 11:09, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

No problem; given the context of the comment I honestly thought it must have been an unfortunate choice of abbreviation for "assess" or something. By the way, should we move this discussion to the article talk page for future reference by others who notice the changes? GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 11:12, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

This keyboard is getting sticky and is ready for renewal, I am thinking to upgrade my computer also, but thats another story. You might leave a note on the talkpage to let them know, seems reasonable. Off2riorob (talk) 11:23, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Vandal alert.

Our Indonesian vandal friend is at it again. This time, the address he used is 114.57.11.7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). WP:AIV is currently backlogged. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 07:20, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Dammit, missed them! MuZemike, didn't, however. It's probably a timely reminder for me that I've had this on my to-do list for a week or so, and I should probably do something about it... TFOWR 08:57, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

As I also requested, he did a 3-day rangeblock on the 114.57.0.0/16 range because the vandal seems to be using addresses in the 114.57.230.0/23 and 114.57.0.0/19 ranges lately. Just letting you know. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 15:23, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, TFOWR. You have new messages at TreasuryTag's talk page.
Message added 09:50, 13 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, TFOWR. You have new messages at TreasuryTag's talk page.
Message added 10:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sorry

Sorry to have dragged my problems onto your talk page, TFOWR. I don't intend to make the matter any worse by responding, but I'll try to avoid getting you involved if there's a next time. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 10:21, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Help cleaning up

Hi TFOWR,

Another sock of Lucy appeared and made disruptive edits to articles Special:Contributions/Time_served. He has been blocked now but would appreciate a third party cleans up after him to diffuse his personal targeting of me.

1. End time The changes I made along the lines suggested by Maunus were reverted
2. Cults and governments Restored something I removed a very long time ago [3] because the reference was just a link to the BK's own Uunited Nations-related website and didn't support the contentious claim being made [4]
3. Dada Lekhraj Date diddling and insertion of bias using words like "claimed". Basically restored contentious edits that were previously reverted by Maunus [5]
4. Robin Gibb Re-insertion of a paragraph that was removed by Orderinchaos due to BLP concerns [6]

I did ask Maunus but I know he is away from the Internet most of the time due to travel so I was wondering if you could help as you already know some of the background to these various socks and I appreciate your help and support in the past.

Thanks & Regards, Bksimonb (talk) 10:31, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I've undone the four sets of edits you listed. I've also revision deleted the edit summaries from four of their edits - I took the view that the edit summaries were purely disruptive, and qualified for "RD3". I'm going to seek review of this: it's possible that other admins may not share my view, or that the edits may even be more appropriately oversighted. TFOWR 10:40, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Wow that was quick! Thank you for the speedy response. I'll be happy with whatever the consensus is regarding the edit comments but I can see that they may discourage participation or become an accepted normal use of edit comments if left unchecked. Bksimonb (talk) 10:57, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

In response to the scary AN notification I already figured it was on ANI since that's the place I guessed you'd be seeking consensus. I'll be interested in seeing the comments too so I know what best approach to follow in future. Best regards Bksimonb (talk) 11:10, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Govinda sport

Could you please undelete this article? We have received OTRS permission for it which I can add as soon as it is restored. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:05, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

 Done Wow, that was fast! I'd asked the creator an hour or so ago if they could assign copyright to WMF, but I didn't expect them to actually do it, and certainly not so quickly! TFOWR 14:08, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm new to OTRS, but from what I've seen editors are often pretty quick when they're the actual owners and not part of a business where they need approval, there's just usually a hefty backlog of emails for people to look through and confirm the permission. Thanks for restoring it, it has now been tagged appropriately. Cheers! VernoWhitney (talk) 14:10, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Delted articles request for useryfied

Hi

The version 1.0 bot has started working again, although the article alert bot has not, and I have just found that there were some articles deleted after 7 days.

Disruption (of schema) , GEGA , Length schema and Swapsc which all fall under the perdue of the Robotics project.

Is there any chance you can tell me if there was any content in there and if they can be useryfied for me to try and include in other articles or to be rewritten? If so there is a page ready at User:Chaosdruid/sandbox7

thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 16:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

 Done - kind of ;-) All four articles were deleted as expired WP:PRODs, and since you've effective "contested the proposed deletion" I've restored all four of them. Enjoy! TFOWR 16:41, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that; and the speedy response - once finished merging etc. do I leave as redirect, re-prod or ask you to delete the blanks ? Chaosdruid (talk) 18:12, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

No worries. What happens next is probably more a matter for you/WikiProject Robotics: I'd be happy for them all to be redirects if applicable, but I know nothing about robotics, so I'm an extremely bad person to ask ;-) TFOWR 18:17, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Protip: it involves robots. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 18:25, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Hah! You can't catch me out like that! Robot: robots. Robotic: robotics. Two completely different words. Now I just need to work out what a "robotic" is. My guess is it's something like an optic... ;-) TFOWR 18:29, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Facepalm GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 18:38, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I know, I'm sorry, but "optic" was the closest to "robotic" I could think of (and I was trying to work an alcoholic robot joke in there, too. Without any success. I'll leave the alcoholic robot jokes to Chaosdruid and WikProject Robotics ;-) TFOWR 18:40, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry TFOWR, I know better than to expect you to be funny by now :p the alcoholic robot quite reminds me of a quote from Xenogears though: someone mistook "Positronic fusion brain" for "Gin'n'tonic futon" brain ^_^ I guess you had to be there. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 18:43, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Lol - Robot is the thing and robotics is the bits its made from - a robotic arm or a robotic manipulator. The robotic optic is known as a waiter ;¬) I merged them all and made them redirects BTW Chaosdruid (talk) 20:01, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Protection FYI...

Hello! Friendly FYI, when you protect a template, such as Template:AcademyAwardBestSupportingActor 1961–1980 that you protected, if you are using Twinkle to add the templates, like you did here, please make sure to check the "Wrap <noinclude>" option, as can be seen here. I fixed this myself here, but in the meantime, every page that transcluded that template also transcluded the protection tag, and since most of the articles are no protected, it caused them all to appear in Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates. Since I've fixed the template the job queue will eventually clear it out. :) No harm done, just a friendly FYI. Keep up the great work!  :) ^Avic_ennasis @ 18:05, 2 Av 5770 / 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Oops! Thanks for letting me know. The first few times I did it I did wonder, and checked pages that transcluded the templates to see if the padlock appeared, but it never occurred to me to check for cats... I love and hate Twinkle... ;-) Thanks again! TFOWR 18:09, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Here's one for a bored moment (maybe...)

Not admin stuff - may not even fall within your interest, but I also thought it just might - feel free (and maybe wise) to ignore - I'm likely to wish I never started it: discussion  -  Begoon (talk) 18:48, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I took a quick look, I'll look in more detail tomorrow. TFOWR 00:28, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Outing

See this. Image probably needs deletion and revdel may also be required. I've asked Alison (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) for oversight since she responded quickly last time. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 22:25, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Less outing than PBML yanking our chains again, but your obvious edit summary probably got the attention of everyone with AN on their watchlist. —DoRD (talk) 22:37, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Heh, I've missed all the excitement - I can't even see the edit in question! Alison moved fast... and who's "PBML" - it rings a bell...? TFOWR 00:27, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Pickbothmanlol. Yworo (talk) 00:29, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Now that's familiar. Ta! TFOWR 00:29, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) (edit conflict) Prairie Midget Baseball League. I wonder if they are actually midgets playing baseball with little diddy bats, or if it is just a smaller "little league". O Fenian (talk) 00:30, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

And evidently I am dyslexic tonight. O Fenian (talk) 00:31, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed - PMBL made perfect sense to me, but it's late... and now I have a vision of baseball-playing midgets from Saskatchewan socking on en.wiki... going to be some scary-ass dreams tonight... ;-) TFOWR 00:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Could be worse. They could be baseball-playing midget clowns... Sweet dreams >:) —DoRD (talk) 00:42, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

It could indeed ;-) TFOWR 08:18, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

"WP:OUTING" isn't that obvious, it's just informative. It's not like I said 0mg email addresses and passwords AAAH KILL KILL KILL. The worse mistake was asking for oversight on a talk page... GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 09:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

User talk:69.181.249.92

Thanks for the update, and no worries about your posts to my talk page. I'm a bit bizarre and odd myself (some would leave out the "bit") so it's a good fit. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 15:14, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Of course, I see from the above section that you may identify with the same descriptors... Midget clowns playing baseball? <shudder> Glad I just woke up! 69.181.249.92 (talk) 15:16, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

You're very lucky - I got that at bedtime, then woke up to the clown addition... there is some deeply disturbing stuff on Wikipedia, which is, of course, why I felt that you'd like to know that I had deleted some of it ;-) TFOWR 15:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

More trigger-happy revdelness?

Looks like someone left a personal e-mail address here. Not sure if it requires revdel as presumably it's their own email address, but I'll leave that to you to decide. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 18:56, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to leave that one (actually, I rev-del'ed it and then restored it...) - my thinking is: the only valid criteria for rev-del would be "hiding material prior to oversight" and I'm not convinced I'll make too many friends with oversight if I request oversight for every email address that someone posts (the Help Desk would be constantly being rev-del'ed...!) It was fairly promptly redacted by an editor, so any spammers would need to trawl through history to get it. TFOWR 19:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

You want to take the bullets out of it and toss it behind the sofa. I bet you never thought you would go rushing off at first notice to save the wikipedia by rev deleting a worthless made up email address. Off2riorob (talk) 19:06, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I figured it might not be necessary, but I thought it'd be best to leave it to you since you seem to be amassing quite a lot of revdel experience :p GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 19:13, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Definitely better safe than sorry! That's why I did rev-del, then thought about it hard. ("Shoot first, ask questions later" - bad policy with blocking, OK-ish policy with privacy concerns...) TFOWR 19:17, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to have to! Today's been a bit of a day for rev-del, there's been stuff that (as far as I know) no one's noticed and I've quietly rev-del'd (you can trawl my logs if you're curious) and other stuff that's come up at ANI. But rev-del wasn't something I considered in any depth before the RfA (not like, say, blocking, protecting, etc - I've got a pretty good idea about when I can and can't do most stuff, but rev-del I have to look up each time - generally after I've done it... because it's always fairly urgent). TFOWR 19:17, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

• And on a tangentially-related note - dammit! During the Dramaout I managed to keep my name off ANI. Now I seem to be all over the damn board. I blame... I don't know, me, probably. TFOWR 19:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

  I had noticed your name cropping up on ANI recently. If I eventually go for an RfA, my ridiculous stalking of ANI is probably going to be a point of interest :p GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 19:30, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Glastonbury

TFOWR, I was just going to ask you to semi-protect this page, but it was just done a few minutes ago. It's almost like a bunch of IPs worked together to disrupt the page at the same time...have you seen anything like that before? Very weird. Regards, • CinchBug • 21:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Weird - I have, actually, but only just today. There were a couple of pages listed at WP:RFPP mentioning "an attack" - one was a userpage, another an article. I protected the userpage and its history looked much like Glastonbury. I guess it's idiots coordinating via IRC or something. Hadn't seen it before today, but just yesterday I came across an admin's subpage where they were explaining what a certain edit summary meant (it was something vague like "inbound. protect. s/t" or something equally cryptic. Their subpage explained that it was deliberately cryptic, per WP:DENY, and that they had various tools to give them advance warnings about attacks, and they'd protect pages for very short periods (minutes, rather than days or weeks). I didn't really take it all in at the time, but I'm guessing it's nonsense like this that they monitor for?

How are you settling back in after your wikibreak? I noticed a comment about reviewing float past my watchlist when you updated your userpage! You seem to be having the same issues with it I am - it's too darn slow...! (Apart from that, I want to like it - I do like it - but it's a bit of a hassle). TFOWR 21:45, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

As the admin that protected, I'm not sure exactly. We have to deal with 4chan attacks, and the like, although generally they get detected when they are first incoming. NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 21:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, NativeForeigner, that explanation makes sense (well, as much sense as anything - I can't see the attraction in it, but I guess most of us can't...) TFOWR 09:11, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Well, I guess if some admin knows about it, then at least someone's looking out for it, which is good. The vandalism was so fast that someone with Huggle (and, I presume, Twinkle or Igloo) could easily and inadvertently revert a vandalized page back to another vandalized version, which ends up being quite a mess to clean up (as may be the case at Glastonbury right now).

Regarding the Reviewing tool, yeah, I'm not overly impressed right now (w....a....y.....t....o....o......s....l....o....w), though I'll wait to render my final judgment. Philosophically, I'm somewhat inclined to support the concept but, on the other hand, I'll admit that I'm not entirely comfortable with the idea of (eventually) essentially eliminating anonymous IP edits (until they're reviewed), which I gather could be the ultimate result/consequence. It's a hard balancing act, in any case... Regards, • CinchBug • 22:05, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I believe that slowness is a known (and potentially fixed, just not quite yet...) issue: T26124. Whether the fix will make any difference when en.wiki gets it is anyone's guess... ;-)

I'm in the inclusionist camp with pending changes - I see it as an alternative to semi-protection, rather than an alternative to no protection (and I've been annoying numerous people by applying pending changes when they've requested semi...) Whether this philosophy will prevail is anyone's guess... and I can see the argument, say, for every BLP to be automatically PC protected. TFOWR 22:12, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

You know, I agree that there's a good argument for that (especially with regards to BLPs--I could very easily be persuaded to support full implementation of pending changes on all BLPs right now). I just wonder if we're making even more work for ourselves in the process... I suppose it comes down to a simple question: Which is worse, needing to (ex post facto) revert vandalism on pages or needing to have users individually check each (anonymous) reversion to a page? Not an easy answer, in my opinion, though I fully support your idea of trying it as an alternative to page protection. Of course, if semi-protection of all articles is something that is inevitable, then I would prefer pending changes!

To Native Foreigner, out of curiosity, what do you mean when you say that they are generally detected when they are first incoming? Regards, • CinchBug • 22:27, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, generally incoming attacks from 4chan get spotted, and pre-emtively protected, because of certain tools we have at our disposal. (I don't know much more than this, but there are a couple users that are very involved with this) NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 22:36, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, crap, that sounds good to me! I'll leave it at that and won't ask any other questions about it. I'm just glad that someone is watching out for this kind of stuff, at least from 4chan. Regards, • CinchBug • 22:43, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

SRQ

Dear Tfowr, I am now receiving emails from SRQ. Will you email what was deleted today> I would like to know what was said. TY for watching my back! You are a keeper! Namaste....DocOfSoc (talk) 00:31, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

 Done

I've emailed you. In the meantime I'd recommend the following:

• KEEP the emails you've received - they may well be useful later. (Maybe move them to a folder where you don't have to look at them until they're needed).
• DISABLE email in your Wikipedia preferences - there's no reason you should have to tolerate any more of this.

Best wishes, TFOWR 09:09, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

J Jones

Hi TFOWR, any comment regarding my comments at the BLPN . Off2riorob (talk) 19:57, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Nope, and thanks for commenting! I was really looking for sanity-checking of my actions, and - obviously - more eyes on the article, so thanks for (a) not suggesting I was completely mad, and (b) taking a look ;-)

It did seem to me to be borderline - if it wasn't a BLP I'd have cheerfully let it be. It did seem to give undue weight to one episode from 2002, though I realise I didn't actually mention that at BLPN (only in my edit summary, apparently...) If BLPN folk - yourself included - are OK with the addition, I'll be OK too.

I am surprised about The Smoking Gun, however - I share your view that it's a pretty poor source. In this case I was also concerned that there seemed to be a lot of primary sources (advising me about legal codes), and the secondary sources seemed either very tabloidy or only tangentially related (PeeWee Herman, with a brief mention of J Jones).

Thanks again! Now you're on my "go to" list, for BLPN issues ;-)

TFOWR 20:03, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

The difference imo as I have seen is in the USA there is a different (more public) position as regards legal documents and the work of public workers is in the public domain and in the UK we have more privacy rights. The smoking gun is a big publisher of primary court reports and such like and it is apparently trusted for this, it is an important point to consider when looking at the quality of USA citations and say what we would expect in the UK. Off2riorob (talk) 20:18, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Interesting. My only exposure to TSG is a large "annual"-type book I read at the barbers! TFOWR 20:21, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Ha, in such circumstances although I do disagree a little, if the content in our article is kept non tabloid and not with titillating commentary and written in an uninvolved manner, I can pay a little less attention to the citations, simply removing the worst from the content and citations with the mindset that although it is not as good as I would like, under the circumstances it is better that when I arrived. Off2riorob (talk) 20:26, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Another good reflection of this is the different legality and attitude to criminal mug shots, it is only in extreme cases where there is a danger to the public that police release pictures in the UK and still not into the public domain, but in the US is is normal and expected, although in the UK ASBOs have been a change in this attitude. Off2riorob (talk) 20:44, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

NO...! Please take me off that list, I have seen people coming here to your talkpage for this and that and it gets excessive. I don't mind working the BLPN if and when they report issues there but my talkpage is my own, you should consider a similar position. Report it to the correct location and either I or one of my fellow Administrators will deal with it there, thank you. Off2riorob (talk) 20:14, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh, alright! BLPN it is, then! TFOWR 20:21, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I was the one who raised the complaint regarding people removing stuff from the J Jones article. The fact that he has been arrested 7 charged MULTIPLE TIMES for failing to register as a sex offender is a big deal. He is facing up to three years in prison. His child porn conviction was not a minor deal. Maybe in the UK such things are looked at differently. But in the U.S. it is a HUGE deal. Either you register or you don't, and if you don't, you go to prison. It's as simple as that. Some states, such as California, can chose to incarcerate these people indefinately, even after they have already served their prison sentence. Someone has been trying to white-wash this guy's page. That is why I bitched and asked for it to be protected.

The reason why I included the reference to Pee-wee Herman is because BOTH men were under investigation as a result of ONE complaint by a 14 year old boy. Pee-wee Herman is also a well known movie star AND a sex offender. So the fact that the two of them were involved in a child porn complaint is relevant and important.

As far as the news sources that I cited, you may not be familiar with some of their names because you are not from the U.S. For example, The Smoking Gun website is owned by owned by Time Warner through its subsidiary, Turner Broadcasting (aka: CNN the cable news channel). While I don't agree with their political bent, they are highly reputable.

Please tell me what your specific problems are as I am new to wikipedia and do not understand all the stuff that you two were talking about. thanks!24.243.2.132 (talk) 23:45, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, if I'd felt you had acted inappropriately I would have raised it directly with you - so please don't feel my response was in any way a criticism of you.

My response was driven by the fact that the article was a "BLP" - an article about a living person - and we need to be very careful when handling such articles. As such I erred on the side of caution and removed the section you'd added. I was sufficiently unsure as to whether or not I was acting correctly that I requested that other editors, more experienced in dealing with BLPs, review what I'd done (I did this by posting on a noticeboard that considers BLP issues).

The feedback I received on the noticeboard (from Off2riorob) was that I was probably being a little too cautious. Off2riorob subsequently re-added much of the content I'd removed.

Hope that clarifies things! In summary, you did everything correctly, I was extremely cautious, and everything worked out OK in the end!

TFOWR 23:55, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey - thanks for explaining it to me!!!!!!24.243.2.132 (talk) 05:50, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Pomeroy

It could be worse. O Fenian (talk) 22:38, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Blimey (that's one page I'm glad I protected). Coincidentally, I've just been establishing my neutral credentials by reverting shite on Rangers F.C. and Republic of Ireland within seconds of each other. You'd have thought living in Glasgow would render me immune to this nonsense... but no, I still find it deeply depressing... TFOWR 22:44, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Although they may be the same individual, that version is from early 2009. With prose like "local republican criminal Seamus Woods who got his comeuppance from the lord", "The lord works in mysterious ways" and "illegal monument glorifying Seamus Woods and other terrorists who got their just desserts" it is little surprise the editor was blocked rather quickly. O Fenian (talk) 22:47, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Are we ready?

Are we ready to protect the Ryan Seacrest Article yet? THANKS for everything else!

Chocolate butterfly cake

Namaste....DocOfSoc (talk) 02:13, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

• I've absolutely seen quite enough. Semi-protected indefinitely. A couple months would just put us into the enxt season of Idol when it would start right up again. Courcelles (talk) 02:22, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Lawdy you are good! Speedy! TYTY!! DocOfSoc (talk) 02:59, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Slightly late, but - aye. I've just had another look at the vandalism I reverted last night, and the number of times "possible BLP issue or vandalism" crops up in the page history, and it's disgusting. Thanks, Courcelles. TFOWR 08:38, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you BOTH! DocOfSoc (talk) 12:35, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Collaboration

That's right, you guessed well. I'll let you know if I see some editing activity from him again. Thanks for dropping by! Arctic Night 12:29, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Problem user

The new (July 2010) symbol for the Indian rupee

Hello, I'm here again because of a different problem user. The problem article is not really my cup of tea, but there seems to be a pattern. I've noticed that 220.224.246.9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) has kept readding this link (http://www.saveindianrupeesymbol.org) to Indian rupee in one way or another. I've checked the page and it seems to be more POV ("biased," to say the least). His edits were of course removed by several users, but he keeps adding it back. Can you warn this person for me? I don't know what warning can I issue on his talk page. Thanks. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 01:51, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

I've dropped a message on their talk page - a couple, actually! One was a welcome template that advised them of our WP:NPOV policy, the second went into more detail about why I felt their edits to Indian rupee were inappropriate.

I'm a little surprised that there's any criticism of the new symbol - it looks great to me, and makes perfect sense. I'd regard it as a case of the Indian government applying WP:IAR to the selection process ;-)

TFOWR 09:45, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Looks like the user did not heed your warnings. Warrant a block? - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 15:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh yes. TFOWR 15:58, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

What is that rupee symbol, strange. I still remember when Paisa was useful currency. Off2riorob (talk) 16:05, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Looks like the guy's doing some block evasion by posting as 202.133.60.187 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 22:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

PS: Should this address be blocked and the guy reappears through a third address, should a filter or a submission to a good spam URL blacklist be good against this guy? Thanks. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 22:53, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

It may just be easier to semi-protect the two articles the IP seems to target - Rupee and Indian rupee. I've got both watchlisted: if the nonsense continues I'll protect them for a short while to see if that deters our POV-pushing friend. I had a look yesterday to see if there was any support for their position: it looks like there isn't; in fact, it seems that the only views on the new symbol are either neutral ("India has a new currency symbol") or positive ("...and it's great!") so I'm beginning to suspect that the IP may be a disgruntled contestant who's annoyed they didn't win! TFOWR 07:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

 Done Both articles semi-protected for two days. TFOWR 10:49, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

User:Weatherextreme

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I have reported him 7 times already. he has been warned by administrators and he still keeping vandalising my userpage and sending insults,threats and inflamatory words. Just tell me once at all if i have to shut down my account, since nobody do anything, and vandals are given green light to attack, insult, threat and vandalize other userpages. Tell me now and i will delete my account. I cannot stay in a community where vandals are free to destroy anything they want. 7 warnings and days and days of this story have not been enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxcrc (talk • contribs) 15:44, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, sorry, I started to look into this but then got distracted (problems with my Internet connection). Another admin has warned the editor, however.

I take the view that Weatherextreme has received a final warning. If they repeat this they will be being disruptive. I would imagine any admin who sees this will block them. If you let me know if this behaviour continues I will certainly block them. TFOWR 15:48, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Oops, it looks like Weatherextreme did continue. However, they have also been blocked. TFOWR 15:49, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I am not satisfied at all. he has promised to keep doing that until my last brethe , as yo can see in his statements and insults in the history of my Talk Page. I would need to delete my account than, since vandals are given green light to insult, threat and vandalise userpages. I don't think this is fair for Wikipedia, every good user (well, i might not be so good, but i am not problematic) will be forced to leave and vandals will become the owners. You can be sure, after 1 minute his block expires, he will vandalise my page again. What a shame i will have to delete my account. Me out and he in. If you think this is fair... Maxcrc (talk) 15:57, 17 July 2010 (UTC) Please can you apply a BOT or a protection or something ? I have been up for over 2 days without sleeping for reverting dozens of vandalism of that user. I really prefer to close my account than be forced to monitor it 24 hours a day. Maxcrc (talk) 16:03, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

You could raise this with the admin who blocked Weatherextreme, Edgar181. I reiterate that I have had very little to do with this episode beyond offering to help you if the problem continues. TFOWR 16:05, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok never mind, i understand. Nobody can do anything. I will be forced to close my account. Being a good Wikiuser is forbidden than. Only vandals who insults and send violent threats are free to exist here. Thanks anyway Maxcrc (talk) 16:10, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Nobody can do anything. Excuse me? I offered to help if the problem continued. If you wish to misinterpret that as "Nobody can do anything" that's your choice. I suggest that if you wish to continue this you do at ANI. TFOWR 16:15, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I have already thanked you for that. But i also invited you to see how many days have passed i had to stay 24 hours reverting these vandalisms before actions were taken. Just check what that user said: he will keep doing that forever until i change my wikipage in the way he wants. What will happen tomorrow at this time ? He will entry and vandalize my page again after 1 second his block will finish. Tell me what i have to do ? Monitor my page 24 hours ? If you can tell me what i have to do to have my wikipage not vandalize starting tomorrow (or maybe before if he will use an anonimous identity) I will be grateful. Maxcrc (talk) 16:23, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

ANI is thataway. TFOWR 16:25, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nigel Finzi

In my capacity of webmaster of geraldfinzi.com, the official website of the English composer Gerald Finzi, I contributed a page about his son Nigel, who has recently died. Nigel was a noted concert violinist and businessman in his own right and as you already have pages about his brother Christopher (Kiffer) Finzi, his mother Joy Finzi and naturally his father, I assumed you would welcome something about Nigel. However, it appears to have been deleted out of hand. I invite you to expand upon your reasons for this, as the entry made quite clear Nigel's achievements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.208.201 (talk) 14:17, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I didn't consider his relatives as notability has to be considered from the perspective of the article's subject, not their relations. In Nigel's case his career as a violinist didn't appear sufficient to assert notability, and his subsequent business career likewise. This is no reflection on Nigel; merely an observation on the notability requirements for articles. I assure you the article was not deleted out of hand: I gave it extensive consideration, and copy-edited it prior to deletion to ensure that I was aware of all the possible claims of notability made in the article. If you wish, I would be happy to email you a copy of the deleted article, and I would have no objection to the article being recreated if the notability concerns were to be addressed. TFOWR 14:27, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

OK - I will ask his widow Jo to supply more details about Nigel's concert career and we can perhaps take it from there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.208.201 (talk) 08:18, 17 July 2010 (UTC) Hi, Nigel's widow Jo has supplied the following further information about him. He was a member of the London Symphony Orchestra and also toured with Yehudi Menuhin's orchestra, playing several concerts for the British Royal Family. His construction firm, Belhasa Projects LLC, was responsible for building the world's largest swimming pool (a private lake on a Sheikh's island) and the largest aquarium in the world in the world's tallest building, Dubai's Burj Khalifa (formerly known as the Burj Dubai). Based on this, can you tell me whether this now clears the bar in terms of notability? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.208.201 (talk) 11:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

But that would be original research. If it's not verifiable on third party reliable sources, then it's not permissible on Wikipedia. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:15, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

The criteria that would be applied would, I believe, be WP:ARTIST for the early part of his career, and WP:BASIC for the latter part of his career. Offhand, I'd say that notability wouldn't be met on WP:ARTIST alone; however it seems to me that a case could be made that - as the founder of Belhasa - he could be notable. Belhasa seems to me to be significant and/or important based on the swimming pool and aquarium projects.

My recommendation would be to create an article (assuming one doesn't already exist) on Belhasa, ensuring that it is well referenced to meet Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). That would make it far easier to demonstrate that Nigel Finzi was notable: as founder of a notable company. Bwilkins notes above that claims must be verifiable, i.e. you need to cite sources (e.g. newspapers, magazines, books) and can't simply rely on personal correspondence.

It's important when creating any article to "indicate significance or importance" - if an article claims the subject is significant or important that is enough to prevent the article from being speedily deleted. However, it's also important to demonstrate notability, i.e. by citing sources that support the claim. Articles can be proposed for deletion or sent to a deletion discussion if notability claims aren't cited.

Finally (apologies, there's a lot to cover!), I'd recommend creating any article in "userspace". That requires creating an account, however.

TFOWR 11:22, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Jack Cooper (musician, composer, arranger)

TFOWR,

Hello, I was trying to add content to a page and by accident I erased the work I did. I must have tried to save this the wrong way. None the less, I ended up with a page that had a title and nothing in it. I ran out of time earlier and had to leave. Rightfully so you edited (maybe canceled) the page that was lacking a great deal in content (Jack Cooper-musician/composer/arranger). What do i do at this point?

JC —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcooper1 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

No worries, it happens! What I'd recommend is to first create the article in your "userspace" (create an article at, say, User:Jcooper1/Jack Cooper (musician) - click the red link to go to the page). That way you'll be able to work on the article with minimal risk of idiots like me deleting it again ;-) When you're satisfied with the article, move it into "main space" - from the "Page" tab at the top of the browser window select the "move page" option, and enter the new name for the article (e.g. the old name would be User:Jcooper1/Jack Cooper (musician) and the new name would be Jack Cooper (musician). I'm going offline shortly, but if you need a hand with anything post another message here, and I'll help if I'm still online or one of the many helpful editors who watch my talkpage will - I'm sure - volunteer to help. TFOWR 00:27, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

User:Posse72

Hello! That user continues to personally attack me in his comments [7][8][9], even after I warned him. What I can do in this case? --Tbma (talk) 01:09, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Well it appears he's had sufficient warning and this isn't an isolated incident, so I've blocked him for 48 hours. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:45, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you HJ Mitchell! --Tbma (talk) 01:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

That's particularly disappointing because I did say at ANI that the {{POV}} and {{Disputed}} tags should be retained until the dispute was resolved. Good block. TFOWR 02:09, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't give a shit about the tags, repeatedly calling someone's edits "nationalistic rubbish" is blockable alone if you ask me and totally inexcusable- it's hardly conducive to a healthy editing environment. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:35, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Definitely, yes. The tags were just the "icing on the cake" (I wouldn't have blocked them solely for ignoring my advice... people ignore me all the time ;-) TFOWR 02:37, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Jack Cooper (musician, composer, arranger) (part 2)

TFOWR,

I have done a great deal of editing to the page in question in order to conform to wiki standards. Yes, it would be considered to be 'autobiographical' in nature and I do understand why this is problematic. But, I am not sure I am very into requiring a 'grad student' do a page on me or asking some else to do this. I know artists who have. It is sort of a 'Catch 22' issue of who/how/when/where.

Importance of me as an artist or musician(?). Well, I guess that is up to editors in Wikipedia and my 'resume' has to speak for itself. Only way to find that out is to post the entry, i am still unsure about where the page should be placed (if at all).

Thanks for your time, Jcooper1 (talk) 20:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC) JC

(edit conflict) I'm not sure I understand. I advised you to work on the article at User:Jcooper1/Jack Cooper (musician), however the article appears to have already been "posted": you've been working on it at Jack Cooper (musician, composer, arranger). I am concerned that you refer to it as your "resume": this appears to suggest that the article is autobiographical, and that you have a conflict of interest in working on it. If this is the case I would strongly recommend not working on the article: if the article's subject (you, presumably) is notable, then someone else will create the article. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia: it is not a web-hosting service for resumés.

If you wish to keep working on the article I would strongly recommend that you follow my original suggestion and create a copy of the article in (or, better still, move it to) your "userspace" - e.g. User:Jcooper1/Jack Cooper (musician).

TFOWR 20:15, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Keith Floyd

I'm not clear - are you saying you agree that the Floyd BI deletion by HK should be reverted? Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

No. I'm saying we should stop debating it endlessly at Wikipedia talk:General sanctions/British Isles Probation Log. There are at least two admins watching the situation, and I for one won't hesitate to step in if there's a problem, and I would imagine Black Kite will do the same. Discuss it at Wikipedia talk:British Isles Terminology task force/Specific Examples. TFOWR 20:18, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

It's just that you helpfully placed those links in the BISE page (which I was talking about) as if to encourage a revert - only your comments on the Probation page looked different. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 20:19, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

The diffs were so that I - and other editors - could see what was being discussed, without having to trawl through the articles' history or HighKing's contributions. TFOWR 20:24, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Keep Northern Ireland Clean

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

@ TFOWR "did I challenge or revert Ghmyrtle? - Doesn't look like it - what's your point?"

That I was not edit-warring. a) With Mabuska I was in the middle of trying to fix the caption formatting to what I wanted to try (whilst I had 'new message' messages as he reverted my talk page), and b) I did not carry on any edit-warring after Ghmyrtle changed it again. I left it. I sorry but the formatting is complex, I tried previewing, I tried to save it.

From what I have just read, I did not even break the "3RR" rule. It says, "An editor must not perform more than three reverts (as defined below) on a single page within a 24-hour period." My first edit was done the day before.

Logically, I am clearly not using a "bad kids made me do it excuse", so please do not patronise. I am asking, "why the punishment or scapegoating is one sided when others have very obviously been grinding their axe over this issue for a very long time and many articles?" and I did not break a rule. --Triton Rocker (talk) 04:02, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Heh! OK, fine. Carry on. Do want you want, use any excuse you wish. Just don't act surprised in future when we start applying sanctions against you. That I was not edit-warring. And thanks for that, that's made my day. Logically, I am clearly not using a "bad kids made me do it excuse", so please do not patronise. I am asking, "why the punishment or scapegoating is one sided when others have very obviously been grinding their axe over this issue for a very long time and many articles?" I don't know where to even begin with this one. Take responsibility for your actions: if you don't, we will. TFOWR 08:07, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Incidentally, it would be worth your while reading WP:EW and WP:3RR, by the way. I've linked to them at Talk:Northern Ireland. The key part you appear to me missing is: Remember that an administrator may still act whenever they believe a user's behavior constitutes edit warring, and any user may report edit-warring, even if the three-revert rule has not been breached. The rule is not an entitlement to revert a page a specific number of times. (my emphasis). You'll sometimes hear this described as "The 3RR is a bright-line" - if you cross it you will be edit warring; however, you are edit probably edit warring well before that. TFOWR 08:16, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, try this on for size. Two total, identical, spite and deliberately provocative reversions;

Reversion a) http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Artemisia_vulgaris&action=historysubmit&diff=373871361&oldid=373735604

Reversion b) http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Artemisia_vulgaris&action=historysubmit&diff=374305767&oldid=374305582

Now, fine, if Snowed (who is lurking around the Northern Ireland topic) wants to take out "British Isles", he can do ... why then revert all the development work and the additional references?

If you want to be blind to what is going on, then fair enough. There is no amount of logical and reasonable discussion from me that is going to convince you to what is going on. If they are willing to edit war over a topic about a bloody weed, or two cottages knocked into one - which is where I got dragged into this - tell me, what is really going on?

Take on board, of course, the 'snitch' summary ... "(rv restructuring or article which appears to be motivated by a desire to insert British Isles. Editor already blocked for edit waring on this. Please discuss changes first)".

Your call if you want to be seen to play this even handedly. --Triton Rocker (talk) 14:06, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Attencion! Attencion!

TFOWR's broadband connection is down. See the comment beneath the talkpage header for an explanation. There is currently no ETA for this being resolved :-(

TFOWR's left sock will be available only intermittently (you try using a G1 keyboard for anything other that SMS...) and is unlikely to be of much use (damn socks, eh?!)

TFOWR's left sock 14:09, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Update: provisional date is 4 August 2010. TFOWR's left sock 08:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Flipping heck, two weeks...have you considered all options? Perhaps ripping it out and refusing to pay, and getting a better deal, satellite - WI fi? Off2riorob (talk) 08:56, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

That is my option ;-) In a fit of petulance I told my phone company that since they were unable to honour their contract I'd take my business elsewhere (and I'd bill them for my costs). Unfortunately the replacement phone company need to give the old phone company time to object (I'm assuming they won't...)

In the meantime my plan is: cheap netbook! Using a G1 keyboard is crap, I need something with a half-decent keyboard and - ideally - tabbed browsing. The G1 browser is not good for anything other than casual browsing. So... normal service may resume earlier: 4 August is a worst-case scenario. TFOWR's left sock 09:12, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

"a fit of petulance" - hehe, I would likely have done also. My broadband has been excellent for the last couple of years and when it was down for a day last month I was horrified. There are some good deals about, myself I lke to use one of the major providers, anyway you are still in touch, take it easy my friend. Off2riorob (talk) 09:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm back! It occurred to me, as I was buying a router for another task, that I could simply get a pay-as-you-go 3G dongle thingy, which I did do, and which is now working! I know what you mean about your experience last month - this last day or two has been horrific. I can not believe there was once a time before broadband. I can not believe that time covered most of my life. (I was in my late 20s when I got dial up for the first time - I managed to miss the acoustic coupler revolution of the 1980s by living in the desert...) TFOWR 13:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Yea, well done dude, the dongle pay as you go wi fi solution,. Is it working ok and cheap enough and easy to set up? Off2riorob (talk) 13:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

You young uns and your technology. Away and go play fitba in the street like we auld yins used to do. ;) Jack 1314 (talk) 13:46, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

...in the back close with ma jeelie piece - too many fancy motor cars in my street ;-)

You'll all notice that I am not, in fact, properly back yet. Turns out 3G doesn't work too well in my study, so I'm going to have to do some "Changing Rooms"-style moving about. Ironically, 3G is what I had in NZ when I first started on Wikipedia - except now I've got 3GB over 2 weeks, instead of 1GB over 1 month. £40 instead of $50, though, so still not that cheap... —Preceding unsigned comment added by TFOWR's left sock (talk • contribs) 14:09, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you SineBot, you're a life-saver. I've forgiven you now for all that grief you put me - and Rob - through yesterday with that un-rollbackable-spam.

I'm back (again)... let's see how long this lasts. The 3G dongle thingy still isn't in an ideal position (back home I had it by the window, in a room with many, many windows. Here it's as far from the window as possible, due to too much furniture to be moved and too little willpower to fight with heavy furniture).

So... what have I missed?!

TFOWR 14:49, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Nothing much, apart from the news that Jimbo Wales is going to close down Wikipedia. Oh, one other thing. I've suggested that the question on demonyms from the N.Ireland page be asked again at the reliable sources notice board [10]. Without the stampede of course. What do you think? A dead duck maybe? Jack 1314 (talk) 14:57, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Where have you gone? I was only joking about Jimbo Wales closing it down. Come back!! Jack 1314 (talk) 15:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Jimbo blocked me for my !vote here - I suggested that defying Jimbo was a good thing ;-)

Nah, got distracted by offline events and online connection problems - my new toy (the 3G dongle) is trying its best to annoy me ;-)

I think, in general, that I prefer it when posts to notice boards aren't accompanied by stampedes, but in practice it always happens! (Almost always. Since you've flagged that as a problem, and since everyone has hopefully said all they need to say at RSN, it's possible it wouldn't happen this time. It's worth a try). Having said that, I got the impression that the latest noticeboard posting got some useful responses? OrangeMike commented, and he's an editor I respect (mostly due to our shared view on <ahem> workplace organisation and social development). OrangeMike's view was that "Northern Irish" should suffice, which would - hopefully - satisfy both sides? I haven't looked too deeply, however, and it's entirely possible that one side or t'other wouldn't be happy with that - particularly as sources may (or may not...!) exist for options other than Northern Irish.

TFOWR 16:54, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

TritonRocker

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I look forward to finishing the discussion re Snowded, and even handed treatment of users, once your broadband connection is restored.

You can see Snowded's tactic, here Specific_Example making up a bogus accusation that I "came off his block for mass insertions". That is not what happened.

Mate, this is a voluntary project. If you want to keep volunteers, you admins have to stop crap like that from happening.

Thank you. --Triton Rocker (talk) 22:54, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

The discussion was about your behaviour, no one else's. If you wish to complain about someone else I suggest you (a) raise it at WT:BISE or with BlackKite (talk · contribs), and (b) be prepared to address the outstanding issues I've raised about your conduct. Mate, this is indeed a voluntary project. Editors, including admins, are entitled to honest responses when they raise questions about your disruptive behaviour. Unless you are able to accept responsibility for your actions without the disingenous crap and buck-passing you have engaged in at Talk:Northern Ireland and here you are likely to be sanctioned sooner rather than later.

Address the issues raised. Don't try and spin out issues by avoiding questions, providing disingenous responses and pointing fingers at similar behaviour. We are all well aware that other editors do bad things. We are equally well aware that a common and tedious response when dealing with "bad things" is for the editor responsible to behave as you have. It is very tedious, and serves only to drag out one incident. It pisses the community off and results in the kind of response you will have seen at ANI. Again: take responsibilty for your actions. TFOWR's left sock 08:50, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Cigna Page

Hello TFOWR,

I work for Cigna and have been trying to update our wiki page, however, it seems to be protected. I noticed in the discussion that you were thinking about protecting it. It this is the case could you please release that protection so that I may change our page.

Thanks Chris Curran July 20, 2010 - 11:45 a.m.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Cignacorporatecommunications (talk • contribs) 15:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

• - Blocked. Off2riorob (talk) 15:53, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Chris. As Off2riorob notes, you've been blocked - this is solely due to your username (Wikipedia doesn't permit usernames that appear to be promotional) and you would be welcome to edit Wikipedia in general if you were to change your username (you can use the "unblock" process to indicate that you're willing to change your username). I'd also be concerned about a conflict of interest if you were to edit the article - though I'd encourage you to comment on the talkpage if there are any problems with the article.

The reason the article is protected is because it's been the target of frequent silly vandalism - as an employee of Cigna I'm sure you don't want the company to be described in the way it has been by vandals, so hopefully you'll understand why it's necessary to keep the article protected. I reiterate, however, that you - anyone, in fact - are welcome to comment on the talkpage and the article can be updated on the basis of consensus on the talkpage.

TFOWR 16:42, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Technically, Chris can just register another username. I've blocked him with account creation unblocked and autoblocks off. All the rest is good advice. :) Syrthiss (talk) 16:47, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Question about Dawn Wells

Did you mean we should put that "vote" on WP:BLPN#Dawn_Wells instead of on Talk:Dawn Wells? If so, do I cut it from the talk and paste it to the noticeboard? Thanks for your answer. —Prhartcom (talk) 21:06, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

We should aim to make the decision at the page with the widest number of participants. In this case the issue had already been raised at WP:BLPN so we should continue the discussion there, particularly because BLPs are such a sensitive area - BLPN attracts a huge number of "BLP specialists", editors who know the legal and policy ramifications of editing BLPs.

I also feel that "pure" voting is probably not appropriate, because the article is a WP:BLP. I've no objection to !voting, however - something along the lines of:

• Support: the pot incident was reported widely, is covered in the sources, and the proposed wording makes clear the subject was not convicted for a drugs offense. ~~~~
• Oppose: the subject was not convicted for drugs, so this is undue. ~~~~

I'd be inclined to leave it for now - the issue is being discussed at BLPN, and editors at Talk:Dawn Wells know about the BLPN discussion so they can comment there. TFOWR 21:19, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

...and sorry, I should have been clearer when I posted at Talk:Dawn Wells! I'm readjusting to life online after a day or two of terse posts to Wikipedia made through a tiny mobile phone keyboard ;-) TFOWR 21:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey

Just wanted to let you know that I just sent you an email. Nothing too pressing or anything like that, just something I thought was interesting. Regards, • CinchBug • 21:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I'll look out for it! (Nothing yet, but the last few times people have emailed me through Wikipedia it's taken ages to arrive!) TFOWR 21:30, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Jack Cooper (musician, composer, arranger) (part 3)

TFOWR,

First, I think you might want to re-read what I wrote in the last message. The term 'resume' has to do with real historical accomplishments not the wikipedia entry itself. Again, editors like yourself would have determine if the person in question (myself) is worth a wikipedia entry. Again, someone else doing this entry seems a bit disingenuous; as me as the artist and the eclectic nature of things I do. Again, I can sight several entries where grad students got tagged to write entries for an artist and thier grade depend on it. Whether that is right or wrong, that is the truth. That is not the type fo things I want to do.

I have edited the entry numerous times to reflect what it needs to be as compared to others (I finally found a couple of people who are closer to what I do/have done, after a great deal of looking though, it took a while). Yes, this was done more in real time rather than what you had suggested afterwords. But, I did not see that suggestion until after I has done all those edits. That is my fault and I am sorry for the confusion with all that. I guess if that is not sufficient then the entry as it stands would have to be eliminated by an editor. It is really down to bare bones from what I can see, I did follow the notices and suggestions posted/embeded in the posting (from other editors it seems).

I am an author of entries for both music texts and music encyclopedias but the length, depth, and detail of those are all relative to the publication and final editor. In Wikipedias case it would seem that the entry which might note 'my existence' (not a resume by any means) needed to be short and concise. I whittled to short and concise and a short discograghy. I am not sure what else to add at this point, please advise.

Jcooper1 (talk) 05:18, 21 July 2010 (UTC) Thanks JC

I advised - and continue to advise - that if you wish to work on the article then you do it in your userspace, e.g. at User:Jcooper1/Jack Cooper (musician).

You said in your previous message Yes, it would be considered to be 'autobiographical' in nature and I do understand why this is problematic. and I replied I am concerned that you refer to it as your "resume": this appears to suggest that the article is autobiographical, and that you have a conflict of interest in working on it. If this is the case I would strongly recommend not working on the article: if the article's subject (you, presumably) is notable, then someone else will create the article. In hindsight I should have said "the article is autobiographical, and you have a conflict of interest in working on it".

I suggested that you either copy or move the article to your userspace, e.g. to User:Jcooper1/Jack Cooper (musician). This means that if an editor decides that the notability requirements have not been met, and the article ends up being deleted, then your hard work will not have been wasted.

One or more editors have "tagged" the article, identifying several issues which should be addressed. I would recommend that - rather than editing the article itself - you post on the article's talkpage requesting clarification as to how to address these issues, and/or proposing changes that would address these issues. I strongly recommend - given your conflict of interest - that you do not edit the article itself.

There is no "Catch-22" in this. Either an article's subject is notable - in which case an editor who is in no way associated with the subject will create the article - or the article's subject is not notable. The goal here is not to ensure that you have an article; rather, it is to ensure that we build an encyclopaedia about notable topics.

TFOWR 08:45, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Asterisk schools

How would you feel about me changing the link in the PROD template on those articles from WP:N to this? The latter explicitly mentions schools. Anthony (talk) 23:39, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

No worries at all - I'm taking lots of (sometimes dubious) shortcuts at the moment in the hope that kindly folk such as yourself will step in and make things better ;-) TFOWR 05:56, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

...kindly folk such as Everard Proudfoot (talk · contribs), too - Everard's redirected the two schools I prodded to Comal Independent School District, which strikes me as the best solution. TFOWR 06:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for stalking :)

Great comment! Very well put. Ryan Norton 19:08, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

No worries! I guess editors complaining about deleted articles is one thing that hasn't changed?! TFOWR 19:20, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Heh, well they of course did complain sometimes; seems like they complain more now and are encouraged to contact the administrator directly rather then the notice board; a fair more responsibility. I don't mind it, and am used to it for the most part; it has been a really rough past few days getting readjusted to the new climate though. The biggest thing is how liberal the deletion policies are interpreted now, back then I would be considered a "deletionist" (back when those kind of silly labels were popular), now the way CSDs and AFD closures are interpreted are so far to that side that even I find it a huge readjustment. It'll just take a week or two though probably. Ryan Norton 19:53, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting. I tend to delete far more than decline CSDs, though I do make a conscious effort to decline (I try and approach CSDs from a "I will decline unless I absolutely have to delete" standpoint). I wouldn't worry too much about "having" to delete - you'll probably win over a lot more friends if you tend to decline speedies rather than delete. That said, all this is still fairly new to me - and there are CSDs that I won't touch (I don't feel comfortable assessing spam, for example, and A7s I'm struggling with).

I'm OK with editors coming directly to me to discuss my actions; however, (and this falls into adjusting to being a new admin) I am moving towards steering people towards the relevant venue rather than actioning personal requests - no matter how straightforward they appear.

...having said all that, I really am doing very little at the moment! My internet connection is intermittent, and I have a huge amount going on in real-life, so I'm back to talk-page stalking and doing my level best to avoid controversy ;-)

TFOWR 20:07, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

solutions

Hey dude whats the answer? Off2riorob (talk) 21:18, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

42? I'm lost - what was the question?! TFOWR 21:23, 22 July 2010 (UTC) (nice try)

When is Arbcom going to close the great climate change case? Off2riorob (talk) 21:37, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

It's not something I've been following, to be honest, and one thing I've realised recently (WT:BISE) is that I'm not a legal eagle. My go-to editor for arb stuff would be Ncmvocalist (talk · contribs) - I could raise it with them? (Ncmvocalist is - as far as I can tell - uninvolved with this case, so they might be a good bet). TFOWR 21:52, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Ha, yes the British Isles debacle, awful awful awful, keep out of any Admin actions there as well. I have asked the clerk about the CC debacle. Good to see you are on line now. My email settings are shot to bits, I got one going today but I have about eight accounts for this work and that work, tiresome. Today I did some wiki work to find out if people were dead and alive and find a cite and suchlike officially update their passing so to speak, plenty of work there when you need something refreshing. It is awful muggy here and earlier we had a thunderstorm and a great big rainstorm. Off2riorob (talk) 22:01, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the welcome! I found it a bit tough to navigate around here considering the fact that I'm a part of another wiki site. First, I'm not able to patrol recent changes. I can't find Mark as Patrolled tab. Could you help me out? FlameHill (talk) 11:32, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

No worries, and good to see another editor working on Oman - there only seem to be two regulars and we're both more active elsewhere.

Regarding "mark as patrolled", the only time I see this is when I arrive at a page via Special:NewPages. I'd recommend reading Wikipedia:New pages patrol first, as it's possible (likely, in fact - Wikipedia seems to have all sorts of arcane rules and guidelines all of its own!) that patrolling has different requirements.

You've probably already encountered Special:RecentChanges: typically that's for detecting vandalism, but copy-editing is always useful. As far as I know there's no "mark as patrolled" for recent changes - simply undo any vandalism or leave the page as it is.

Hope that helps! Don't hesitate to ask me anything else. If I'm not around my talkpage has numerous friendly stalkers who will help instead.

TFOWR 11:41, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! FlameHill (talk) 16:46, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Fancy a beer

New worlds strongest Scottish beer Off2riorob (talk) 12:25, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Get stuffed ;-) I'm guessing selling it inside stuffed animals adds to the price - but I'm guessing at £500 a bottle the stuffed animals don't add that much to the price...

I checked the article to see if I was remembering right - I think I am - but they made "Sink the Bismarck" (only 41%...), and I seem to remember they were competing with a German company for World's Strongest/silliest beer... hence "Sink the Bismarck" (the German company has one roughly as strong, and called something like "Kilt-wearing Haggis-eaters suck" (maybe not exactly that, but in a similar vein...))

...but to answer your question: aye! Something a little weaker, though, and definitely not served out of a dead stoat!

While you're here, what's your executive summary on our BLP Viscount? I looked at it last night, but only enough to get a feel for arcane constitutional law as it relates to Viscounts... my gut feeling is that the Salt Lake Tribune and the Guardian are making too much of this, and it's a non-issue as far as the article is concerned...

TFOWR 13:10, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

A dead stoat, come on your not a vegetarian are you? get it down ya big sissie. Off2riorob (talk) 14:04, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

The viscount, lord, my thinking is that it deserves a bit more looking at and if he is going round asserting something that is not quite correct and telling that to the USA house of representatives then it is something worthy of addition, in a well written and well sourced way, I think really it is also a matter of interpretation of the adjustments which I saw you investigate anf post the alterations. Looks like hair splitting to me though. Off2riorob (talk) 14:08, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

It's just I'm kinda conservative when it comes to beer - I like it served in a pint glass!

After my comment above I realised Jimbo had commented since I posted last night - I keep find myself on the same side as Jimbo, despite my recent comment in an RfA... I kind of think it's ad hominem ("if he lied about that, what else is he lying about?") but, as you say, it's something he's said to the House of Representatives... it's not like an off-the-cuff comment to a tabloid journalist. TFOWR 14:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the project has I think a life of its own now but I think Jimmy has an insight, as founder, of the beneficial directions to nudge the project in and as such imo his comments are valuable and insightful. Off2riorob (talk) 14:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I'll be in the pub tonight. Rob, any idea where I can find this beer and do they sell it on draught. I have a hell of a thirst on me after seeing that. Anyway, I'm off to my local, the stoat and squirral. :) Jack 1314 (talk) 14:21, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I was curious, too - apparently they've only made twelve bottles... seems a shame: despite the price I reckon they'd find punters willing to pay that. A little out of my price range, but I can imagine people I know seriously considering it... TFOWR 14:24, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

He, stuffing your stoats and squirrels with strong beer, is that allowed, it must be..strange days indeed. Its 5oo pounds a bottle, they are aving a laugh. Your better of with a gallon of Stella. Off2riorob (talk) 14:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I would almost prefer a Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster ;-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:28, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

At 55%, I think both would be "like having your brain smashed out by a slice of lemon wrapped round a large gold brick". Though I'm inclining toward the PGGB... or a nice Jynnan tonnyx! TFOWR 14:36, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Pole-ish dancing

I would like a taste though, last week I was on a stag night with a lot of Polish people and we went to a Vodka bar and that was when the dancing started. Off2riorob (talk) 14:39, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Me too. At £500 a bottle it's comparable to an expensive Scotch, so one option would be to do what the expensive Scotch drinkers do, and pool their money to buy a bottle. You could buy a "dram" in a pub - 25ml for £50, the pub would double their money on a 500ml bottle. And while I'm not one of them, I do know folk who have paid over £50 for a dram... I reckon after drinking a bottle you wouldn't be dancing though... you'd be struggling to dial "999" ;-) TFOWR 14:46, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

You could tell your other half you were only going out for a few beers and stagger back pissed out of your head. You wouldn't be lying to them so no guilt involved. perfect! Jack 1314 (talk) 14:42, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

What kind of dancing was this then, Rob? Some kind of Polish thing was it? Jack 1314 (talk) 14:44, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Innocent... and were any Northern Scandinavians involved later on? TFOWR 14:47, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Lap. Not dancing.

"But... but... I never even finished me pint!" TFOWR 14:47, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Can't recall many Scandinavian people, last thing I remember is getting into a big yellow car driven by a man from Bangladesh. ? Off2riorob (talk) 16:48, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Just so long as you were paying him to take you home, and not to let you sit on his lap! ;-) TFOWR 16:53, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

• Are you busy? Off2riorob (talk) 17:57, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
  •  Done I'd normally start off at 1 week semi or 1 month PC1, and since there was no history of protection here that's what I did. Probably a little conservative - it's a BLP - but I'll cheerfully re-PC1 in a month's time if it's warranted. TFOWR 18:05, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
• Thank you from me and my friend User:BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ - Off2riorob (talk) 18:08, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

The Clocktower Gallery

Hello TFOWR,

I recently created a blank page for The Clocktower Gallery so that I could redirect it to the Art International Radio page; Art International Radio is home to the Clocktower Gallery, something I -- and I believe many other people -- was confused by until I went to take a visit. I went about this the wrong way, though: I didn't realize that you couldn't just create a blank page for this purpose. How, then, should I redirect from the Clocktower Gallery to Art International Radio? Is there no need, if there isn't already a page? I think it may be helpful to people, though. Should I just copy-paste the Art International Radio page into the Clocktower Gallery page and then redirect it back to the Art International Radio page, or would that constitute plagiarism? ;)

Thanks for your help, and your advice!

Pgiotto (talk) 16:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

 Done here ;-)

See WP:REDIRECT for detailed instructions, but basically you start a new page, which consists of one line - like this:

#REDIRECT [[Art International Radio#Clocktower Gallery History]]

The part between the "[[" and the "#" is the name of the article, and the (optional) part from the "#" to the "]]" is the section within the article.

I called the redirect "Clocktower Gallery" - that should work for anyone searching for "The Clocktower Gallery".

If you want to modify the redirect, go to Clocktower Gallery, wait to be redirected to Art International Radio#Clocktower Gallery History, go to the top of the article, click on the "redirected from Clocktower Gallery" link, then edit the redirect page.

Hope that helps! TFOWR 16:45, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks so much, TFOWR! That's really kind of you. It's greatly appreciated! Pgiotto (talk) 17:09, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback Raul Gonzales

Hello, TFOWR. You have new messages at WP:RFPP.
Message added Mauler90 _talk 18:51, 23 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Oh noes!

[11] That extra two minutes just may be the tipping point ya know?  :) Jmlk17 19:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I won't be offended if you wheel war to restore your original duration! ;-) Strange, I assumed I wouldn't be able to do that, it's not something I've encountered before... oh well! TFOWR 19:17, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a raincheck on the wheel war... maybe next time! Keep up the great work as always though. Jmlk17 19:37, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

anchor

I attached (Climate Change BLP) to the title a couple of days ago, people need tokoow it is yet another disrupted CC blp, if someone wants to anchor it down they are welcome, but there are no broken incoming links anyway at least not of any importance. Off2riorob (talk) 19:19, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

No worries (and I thought it'd been there for as long as I remember - but I got involved late). My thinking was purely to stop you and/or ChrisO doing something <ahem> risky ;-) TFOWR 19:23, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

There are broken incoming links from the history and the watchlist. Just use the {{anchor}} template whenever you change a header. –xeno^talk 19:24, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

RE: Message

I had left a TY message for C. I removed it because I am now getting personal emails from the stalker SRQ, a banned editor. Because of her medical condition, her fixation could continue ad infinitum. So, I try to leave no ammunition. I appreciate, as always, your vigilance! TY! Feel free to remove this when read. BTW, you are not paranoid if they are REALLY out to get you! ;;-) DocOfSoc (talk) 08:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi DocOfSoc. Are the emails coming through Wikipedia, or did SRQ somehow find out your email address? (You had mentioned before that SRQ had emailed you, around the time I deleted a particularly nasty edit SRQ made to your userpage). If they are coming through WIkipedia's "email user" facility, I'd recommend disabling it. If they are coming direct to your email address it may be that someone could use the emails to identify SRQ... so don't delete them (stick them in a folder where you don't have to put up with them). It may be possible to make a complaint to SRQ's internet service provider.

Incidentally, I've had an item on my to-do list for a while: check WP:LTA and add SRQ if they are not already on it. I guess I should get off my backside and do that now!

Apologies for the bad language (even if it is in Latin!) but... Illegitimi non carborundum ;-)

I hope you're watching my talkpage: I don't want to give SRQ any satisfaction by posting on your talkpage, but if you haven't replied here in the next hour or so I'll drop a {{talkback}} on your talkpage.

TFOWR 08:57, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I have got my eye on you! ;-) I have removed my email from Wiki but because of other affiliations it is easily obtained on internet. The "Maiden" agrees with your Latin and is working on it. Will go to LTA right now. TY again. Namaste....DocOfSoc (talk) 09:28, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Off topic (unrelated to SRQ), but "namaste"? - none of my business, but are you a Lost fan? I <ahem> worked for the Dharma Initiative for three years in the 1970s ...! TFOWR 09:33, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I spent three glorious weeks in India representing the U.S. in a World Conference for Girl Guides/Scouts. One of the most amazing times of my life. And no, I am not "Lost" LOL. Have bookmarked the suggested link for later. Namaste 09:44, 24 July 2010 (UTC)DocOfSoc (talk)

Ah! I knew sooner or later I'd encounter someone using the word correctly! I've never been to India (except for a brief stop at an airport in the late 1970s, which I really can't remember!), but my sister has several times and says its amazing. I also seem to be editing quite a lot of India-related articles at the moment... not sure how or why?! TFOWR 09:47, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

User talk:MoiraMoira

The user isn't leaving her alone, even after your warning. I'm inclined to revert Faust's edits per Moi's request, but I'm not quite sure. So, since your warn, and the following disregard for that warning, could you perhaps do something?— Dædαlus ^Contribs 09:23, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm discussing it with them, so I'll hold for the moment (I'm assuming they posted to MoiraMoira's talkpage before receiving my message). TFOWR 09:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

But your message was on her talk page before he posted that tl;dr bit, especially after -she- told him to leave her alone. Should I revert?— Dædαlus ^Contribs 09:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I'd still recommend holding off for now - there don't seem to be any further posts to her talk page, so leave it to MoiraMoira to decide whether to remove or reply. I'm going to suggest to Faust that if they have an issue with MoiraMoira that pertains to en.wiki then they either post here (or let another admin know) or raise it at ANI (ideally within the existing thread). TFOWR 09:50, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

And now they are reverting me on my own talk page. A block is in order, perhaps?— Dædαlus ^Contribs 10:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I've issued a final warning: Faust's behaviour is now disruptive. TFOWR 11:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback Faust

Hello, TFOWR. You have new messages at Faust's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Query

I do not understand what you are saying to me on my talk page. I thought it was mandated to contact the user first before launching formal complaints? I have done so and I have honored the request of the user on the issue raised previously. Please advise on how to deal wityh that situation since what you are saying and what the wiki guidelines say are in conflict. --Faust (talk) 10:26, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

You have contacted the user, they have requested that you stop posting on their talkpage. I do not see how there is any conflict between the guidelines and the request that you do not post again on their talkpage. TFOWR 10:29, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello TFOWR, the conflict is that theuser in question has made serious enough transgression to warrant admin interference. That is why I have made more attempts to discuss matters with the user. Since any issue that will be brought under the attention of the admins must first be talked over with the user in question on the users talk page it seems that there is a conflict in conduct. Besides that, I would like to ask you to help me out. Apparently I makeing silly mistakes, judging from your remark: "Since my post above I've also had to warn Faust about reverting Daedalus969 on Daedalus969's own talkpage." I merely wanted to alert him to my response to his remark on my talk page. So, I undid his undo of my talkback. I didn't think that would be a problem. Could you please inform me what other things I should keep in mind? --Faust (talk) 17:29, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, this is a contributory encyclopedia, you appear to have been here a month and have one hundred and fifty edits, only five percent of which are to articles. Off2riorob (talk) 17:35, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, regarding the talkpage thing I assumed you simply didn't know, which is why I warned you rather than doing anything else. Have a read of WP:REMOVED (the entire page is probably a useful read).

Help:Contents is a good starting point - I don't know what you don't know (!) so I can't be much more specific than that. I would say, however, that if it's obvious you're making an effort to learn and get along with other editors then people will be far more ready to accept any small problems.

Turning to MoiraMoira, what is the problem? I realise you've posted on her talkpage, but I'd suggest starting afresh here. State what the problem is (keep it short, and make sure you're only referring to issues that took place here, on en.wiki). I'll do my best to help, though that may consist of referring you to a dispute resolution noticeboard.

TFOWR 17:37, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi TFOWR, I am unclear what the problem is. I do know that I have had some problems with her, JZ85 and Theobald in the past (you know where), but to me that was not relevant. The only thing I tried to stipulate is that the way JZ85 was trying to influence the admin in another issue. That is immoral (in the narrow sense) behavior. Everybody wants an impartial judge. Previous offenses are only looked at in regards to the punishment, not in regards to if a punishment is needed. JZ85 tried to motivate a punishment on the basis of previous transgressions. Since his motivation was also based on transgressions made on nl.wiki, I decided to talk to him about that. So far so good, I never expected him to actually listen or do anything with that remark. The fact that MoiraMoira support him by saying he is such a good admin and colleague (on the nl.wiki!)seemed a bit strange in this situation, so I decided to ask her to stay out of it, in the off chance that he might remember it. Since I had responded to JZ85's remark concerning history on the nl.wiki MoiraMoira decided that I had transferred these issues here. This is not the case. That is why I contacted MoiraMoira again, pointing out that it was JZ85 who did so. MoiraMoira subsequently stated her desire to see me blocked, so I decided to point out where she herself had brought issues from the nl.wiki to the discussion (3 occurrences by the way). Seeing as at that time she had also tried to get an admin to respond in a bias manner in light of her POV I decided to give her the same lecture I had given JZ85. In the mean time MoiraMoira had asked me not to make use of her talk page any more, but since new transgressions on her part had occurred I decided to make new partitions on her talk page. This then caught your eye, escalating the entire situation. So, I have no problem with MoiraMoira, but she insists to interfere in matters that I am involved in, on the basis of her POV, which she obtained on nl.wiki. All my communications to her have been attempts to reason with her, but I have not had a response that hinted on her sympathizing with my objections to her behavior.

It might be that I am doing stupid things. I have not been here (nor on the nl.wiki) for long. However, I have made great efforts to learn the rules (my quoting the wiki guidelines, my question here and my attempts to keep up the assumption of good intentions should be able to vouch for that). I have learned these rules the hard way: while I was under attack by these users (yes, that was on the nl.wiki). My experience is that at no time any of these users have assumed my good intentions. I will stop here because I will cross the border of the en.wiki very far.

NOTE: The issue I first contacted JZ85 on was not my own and I did not even know he had an account here as well. That was a coincidence. I assumed that we could communicate without the baggage of the nl.wiki. By now I am having great difficulties with seeing the two situations as separate issues.

--Faust (talk) 18:21, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

p.s. From my perspective this case is done. I have absolutely no stake in this, apart from getting these users to play nice where they are not. A dispute resolution board seems superfluous from that perspective.

p.p.s. Thank you for the directions. I will look in to it shortly.

lay lady lay

Hey good afternoon to yu. What happened at that small section you added to Brown, it now appears to be uncited? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Brown#Global_recession was it always uncited, anyways an IP has resented a cite on the talkpage but it doesn't cover all the facts... Off2riorob (talk) 15:54, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Afternoon! Fairly sure it was cited - I basically copied it from an existing article (forget which one, but the whole process will be in GB's talk archive - I posted it on talk before adding it to the article). Give me a minute and I'll dig it out. TFOWR 16:25, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Dammit, I've just trawled through 4 of the 5 archives. Eventually found it on the current talk page: Talk:Gordon Brown#Edit request 22nd May More in-depth coverage of Brown's Premiership?. Uncited... :-( Was that the bit you were thinking of? Of not, I'll delete this post and pretend this never happened ;-) If so, there will be cites at Premiership of Gordon Brown. I'd suggest I should add them, to atone for my sins. But I'll cheerfully let you or the IP fix my mistakes...! TFOWR 16:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

It seems to have got added uncited...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gordon_Brown#Edit_request_22nd_May_More_in-depth_coverage_of_Brown.27s_Premiership.3F was the discussion , it seems to have now gone from Premiership_of_Gordon_Brown and is also not really at 2008_United_Kingdom_bank_rescue_package ... there has been a cite placed on the Brown talkpage (that is what set this off) and it is a good one but doesn't cover the car scrapping and has different figures..I think it may need a bit of tweaking and a couple of citations... hmmm.. shall we do it later.. it is standard pretty indisputable stuff, no worries. Off2riorob (talk) 16:39, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I will look at it later, let me do it TFOWR, better with my broadband. Off2riorob (talk) 16:41, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks. I'm tempted to say it'll be cited at Premiership, at the point in time when I stole it, but obviously my memory can't be trusted... anyway, thanks for the "your broadband" offer - my 3G is shite, and drops off half way through anything important (and only during important things - I'm scared to block/protect/delete at the moment because I'll lose me connection before completion...) TFOWR 16:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure, it is not desperate anyways, I'll just put it on my list and do it in the next day or two. There is so much work round here it is un bloody believable, and that is something we need to consider when the community ends up rejecting good contributors with perhaps what is only minor relating or civility issues or perhaps just someone you have come to dislike because they support a differing position to you...we need experienced contributors should be high on our list of considerations. (thinking oot loud)Off2riorob (talk) 16:51, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

True, on both counts (I have two sandboxes waiting for enough time to finish them off - both dead short, one mostly done, the other done apart from the actual writing...) Re: rejecting good contributors: aye. We're too quick to reach for blocks and bans - and as someone who's been quick to agree to bans it's something I'm mindful of. Truthkeeper88 mentioned it before my RfA: we worry about fairly trivial things, and ban people, while much more serious things go on and nothing happens. Also thinking aloud! TFOWR 16:58, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Yea, respect, to change the whole you start with yourself...haha..ow dear I have swallowed a peace and love pill by mistake. Off2riorob (talk) 17:01, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

(You'll have to imagine me making the "peace" symbol with my fingers...)

Peace and WikiLove, brother! TFOWR 17:06, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Your signing

You should consider linking also to your user page (User:TFOWR). Do something like this: TFOWR

/HeyMid (contributions) 18:12, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I used to - I stopped after my RfA because I figured the most important thing for other editors was to be able to talk to me. I do link to my userpage from my talkpage, and I have thought about changing my signature (much as you suggest), but on the whole I'm happy to keep my talkpage as the main focus and leave the userpage as an "Easter egg"! TFOWR 18:19, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

For helping here [12], and for your excellent explanation. I've noticed an entire school of contributions devoted to unsourced and vandalism of soap opera actors and plots....usually I run in the other direction. JNW (talk) 18:16, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

No worries! I felt it had to be a lengthy explanation for the block, partly for them, and partly for whoever comes after you and me... it'll help other editors understand (a) this editor's behaviour, and (b) why I jumped from a 48-hour block straight to 2 weeks. Anyway - hope it helps, and if it doesn't let me know in 2-3 weeks time and I'll have "another word" with them ;-) TFOWR 18:21, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Trust

N.P. I trusted my Shaman would take care of that. Gratitude abounds! DocOfSoc (talk) 11:51, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

No worries! I'm keen to avoid giving any satisfaction to this former editor, so operating invisibly (via email) seems the way to go. Just my opinion, so I won't revert you again if yuo disagree with me. TFOWR 11:54, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

No disagreement whatsoever. You have blanket privileges ;-) DocOfSoc (talk) 11:58, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Whuh? You two are sharing blankets now? LOL (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:01, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

 ;-) TFOWR 12:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Cozy! Room for one more? sonia^♫♪ 12:11, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Always! Though at this point I'll need to speak to Davtra and see if they have {{=)|blushing even more}} template! TFOWR 12:13, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I feel like a voyeur or something...I feel so dirty *snicker* (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:16, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

*beckons* You can always hop in, instead of just watching from out in the cold... sonia^♫♪ 12:19, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh, Sonia, while you're here - when is the composer of the world's best national anthem going to hit DYK? I hope I haven't missed it... TFOWR 12:20, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Blanket Permission! Such MINDS! LOL DocOfSoc (talk) 12:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

No idea. It's waiting, but as this is my first DYK (and first proper article!), I don't know how the system works. I'm suitably proud of myself for getting that far. *yawns* 12.27am... can I stay here for the night? *snuggles in* sonia^♫♪ 12:28, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Oops, sorry, it was warm and cozy and I drifted off! ;-)

Aye, I had my first ITN the other day - somewhat shocking, but I've not been the content creator I thought I would be. I've got a few ideas for new articles in the pipeline, but I doubt they'll reach DYK. TFOWR 15:18, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

You posted that just after I went to bed. :P As for DYK, why not? Any of them NZ-related articles I could possibly help source? I'm not a good writer, but I enjoy research. sonia^♫♪ 20:50, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid not - they're both Oman-related: if you're curious you can take a look at User:TFOWR/Sandbox and User:TFOWR/Sandbox2. Sourcing is a nightmare, though there is some.

When I first joined Wikipedia, it was with the intention of writing this NZ-related article - Fred Evans - some one beat me to it, though! Fred Evans interested me because for a long time he was the only person to have died as a result of industrial action in New Zealand: an article about the other person (name escapes me, but she (?) died fairly recently - knocked over by a truck, so much less exciting than Fred!) could be an interesting article? I'm not sure, though - I don't know much about the incident. TFOWR 20:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

That first sandbox hurts my head. Are you trying to fix up part of an existing article? Kudos, anyway, for taking on something so confusing looking. (I have no idea why I joined Wikipedia- I think it was probably just because, in another user's words, I was an "account whore". Definitely not to write an article. But then I got hit with {{welcomeg}} and realized how much went on behind the scenes ) sonia^♫♪ 11:20, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Aye, it's spiralled out of control! It's part of Oman, a really tiny part, one section on a few hundred years in which Oman controlled part of what is now Pakistan. What's there at present seems basically correct, with a few odd names, so I just need to rewrite it and add cites (and get the names right, and link to existing articles, and...!) The sandbox is far too messy, but it has grown...

Those welcome templates are amazing! I think my story is somewhat similar: after I failed to create the Fred Evans article, I went vandal fighting, and one day someone welcomed me - which surprised me: getting thanked for fixing problems? Why?! Then an admin mentioned my userpage (it had a black cat logo, the symbol of the IWW, on it, and said admin was an IWW member) in a talkpage post, and I started looking harder at what admins did, and what work went on behind the scenes. At least I think that's how I got caught up in ANI... One day I'll dig out my first post to ANI to see if I can remember who that all started...

Anyway... that's part of the reason I'm really keen on welcoming editors - it works!

TFOWR 11:27, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Aye, that it does. I always get a feel good buzz when a newbie I've welcomed pops back over to ask me a question, or when I find that a user's actually taken the advice from one of the many "Welcome, sorry, but this is what's wrong with your article:" emails I send out (mainly from involvement in other sites/real life things where it's clear I "work for Wikipedia"– sometimes I feel like a one-man OTRS queue for SPAs trying to make articles about themselves or their companies!)

ANI? The only time I really comment there is to tell people to shut up. I really don't like drama, so given that I'm also not a content writer, it's amazing I have any edits at all... Anyway, what appalls me (and is part of the reason I abandoned Huggle) is seeing a good-faith newbie with a couple of warnings (HG) and a handful of speedy deletion notifications (TW) and no proper welcome, just trying to write an article. I do try to drop a welcome, but after all that templating it probably just looks like another clump of gibberish. Like, over on simple I was about to leave a message for an IP about why their article on their school play wasn't suitable, then another admin twinkledeleted it.  :( We're in desperate need of new contributors over there, so I try to tread really carefully with newbies- I think what's more depressing than a talk page of warnings is a receptive new user who makes twenty edits, writes an article, then is never seen again. Such potential... sonia^♫♪ 11:45, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Ah, so maybe you've read this essay? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:54, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I hadn't, but it reflects my own philosophy completely. Added to my toolbox! TFOWR 12:04, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

{{outdent}} is rapidly becoming my favourite template...!

Good call at ANI - it is a dramah-fest, but that knocking-of-two-heads-together was needed (and, I'd hope, is how I work at ANI... certainly I have fond memories of a long Saturday morning when Europe and America were asleep, dealing with two editors who had come to blows. At least one of them is now a {{tps}} right here!)

Aye, non-welcomes and templates. If an apparent vandal hasn't been welcomed, I'll drop the welcome-vandal template on them rather than start with a level-1+ warning. I regard the welcome-vandal template as a "level-0" warning: you can follow it with a level-1, or a level-2, as needed. But the welcome is vital. And that's precisely because of the problem you're seeing at simple.wiki: personal contact creates good editors - if Orangemike had never posted on my talkpage, it's entirely possible I'd have started fighting the good fight at various articles, "correcting" the mistaken belief that "Anarcho-Capitalism" is anything other than an oxymoron. As it is, I learned about WP:NPOV, and that seems to be where I do a lot of work - Greece/Macedonia, Arabia/Persia, Israel/Palestine and now Britain/Ireland. All of which I'd hope is far more useful than edit warring to "educate" readers about my own personal beliefs. TFOWR 11:58, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Bwilkins: It's the first time I've seen it, and I agree wholeheartedly. I actually think a good number of our warning templates and notices need to be stated more clearly; some people don't even get that this is an encyclopedia, therefore the content they insert isn't going to be encyclopedic. Some problem users are only trying to help, but I think too much of the time it's easier to twinklespeedy something than to explain to a user what's actually going on.

Yeah, I imported welcome-vandal over to simple (it's so very useful!) and I also created two for users from other wikis that I thought would be more helpful and encouraging to the experienced Wikipedian than "Welcome! You can change this page! Here's how!", especially as they'll be familiar with templates already and some have expressed that they've felt patronised by the default welcome. And long-term contributors, even more so than newbs, are something we cannot afford to lose. Over here on enwiki, I discovered {{W-FAQ}}, which is quite a cool welcome I think. What do you think about newish users who go around welcoming others? I feel a bit nervous about it, because I've often found that the welcomed go back to seek advice and don't get any- or worse, they get misleading advice. Users who are doing more on the people-side of our project are sometimes the newer or more chatty users (me); these are more prone to myspacing and thus less to actually knowing our policies well enough to give help without stonewalling a new editor. I've seen it happen a few times, and often the damage is irreversible- but I don't want to drive away the welcomer as well... sonia^♫♪ 12:19, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Will you lot frikking stop it

Use any fooking method you want to test this. I am an open book. I am not Light Current. What I am is very very very pissed off and I just don't even understand what makes you tick. Do you feel a bigger man doing all this blocking? You're not. You're very small men.

Heck at this point I'll even settle without an apology. Just accept I ain't a sock and let me banter with bugs. 217.41.226.121 (talk) 18:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Welcome, my rusty-knife wielding friend! I've created a talkpage all for you! You can rant and rave all you wish, and I may even drop by for a chat! In the meantime, this talkpage is protected - sorry! TFOWR 18:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Probably raining there, repeated threats of violence... contact his provider and his local police. Off2riorob (talk) 18:54, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Nah, the chance of a rusty-knife coming anywhere near me are remote. Wikipedia:Give 'em enough rope... and WP:ANI will hang 'em. TFOWR 19:01, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

heh.... on a related note feel free to unprotect your userpage whenever. Ryan Norton 19:04, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Will do, and thanks for protecting it. I had thought about protection just before I got hit (I'd been expecting it and was planning ahead, but hadn't quite got that far...) TFOWR 19:07, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I know I am not involved and just might intrude here, but I feel the need to say this. I really just came by to see if a reply had been made to my query/remark. If I understand correctly this user was diagnosed as a sock puppet, but now is understood as another user. If indeed this is true, then his anger can be explained as resisting/breaking false images projected upon him (Aggressiveness in Psychoanalysis - Jacques Lacan): the only function it has (I would like to say that aggression say nothing about guilt or innocence and is something else than violence). In that case a little understanding might be in order. I'll but out now, just thought I'd speak on this users behalf. --Faust (talk) 19:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm 99% certain that the IP is who I believe it is, but there is always the possibility that the IP is impersonating another (banned) user. So - the IP is either a banned user, or is behaving in the same way as a banned user. Either way, Wikipedia is better off without them. TFOWR 19:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

A position worthy of consideration . As in , if its good enough for my friend its good enough for me.Off2riorob (talk) 22:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Aye. I hesitated today before protecting this page (and left it to another admin to protect my userpage - creating work for an overloaded sysop who now - sadly - is no longer an admin). It did prompt me to get off my backside and create User talk:TFOWR/Never protected, so I'm now in a position where I can accept this page being protected. I still have a libertarian idea that this page should be as free as possible - but the reality of that approach is that other editors have to revert attacks, other admins have to protect, etc. My philosophy is creating work for others - which really isn't what I want. I'll ponder it overnight... TFOWR 22:20, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Well you could just temporarily protect it as and when. Mine's only protected until the devs sort out the abuse filter logs so they can be deleted. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:29, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

In the cold light of day, after a good night's sleep, that's pretty much the conclusion I've come to. I have move-protected everything, but right now everything is open to non-autoconfirmed editing (I unprotected my userpage while move-prot'ing). I trust my fellow admins to protect and unprotect sensibly, and I trust my talkpage stalkers and other vandal fighters to react swiftly and sensibly to any problems. TFOWR 09:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

• And where are my frikkin' sharks with lasers? Geez, throw me a frikkin' bone, will you? HalfShadow 13:00, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Snitch away if you makes you happy.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I was talking to you and Black Kite about "evenhandedness". I have not seen you caution Snowded for his bogus allegations against me yet.

Snitch away if you makes you happy, mate. You are an admin, aren't you? Why ask Black Kite to do your dirty work? I could argue the facts but even if I was right, who would listen? I am sorry, I have seen too much of that already. This is a strange world where being completely wrong, insulting or uninformed goes without any comment, punishment or limitation ... but if you dare talk back, a couple of admins will take it in turns to bugger you. Look ...

• There is no point in discussing if people wont discuss.

• Not discussing is just another way of controlling topics.

• I raised the question of a blanket ruling for non-political topics, here, because I agree that political topics should be handled sensitively and accurately.

• No one answered it and so I took it as a green light. It is as simple as that.

Of course, User:Snowded has "Welsh nationalist issues" there is no shame to that. It is just a statement of fact. Look at his user page ... "This user supports the independence of Wales" etc ... and tell me there is NO political motivation for his point of view.

On that basis, he is trolling all my edits right now. --Triton Rocker (talk) 08:48, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

When I warned you against making personal attacks I was unaware that Black Kite had previous warned you. Had I been aware I would likely have blocked you immediately: I raised it with Black Kite as a "professional courtesy".

Regarding your additions of "British Isles" and any topic ban that may result: a topic ban should be discussed prior to being implemented. Applying a topic ban is not a step to be taken lightly.

TFOWR 08:56, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Move protection

Semi-move protection is useless, because users without the autoconfirmed flag don't have the ability to move pages at all. Courcelles (talk) 10:10, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Doh! That's comparatively recent, isn't it? i.e. within my time here, so I should have remembered. Dammit, I'll bump it up to full move-prot. Thanks. TFOWR 10:13, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I must confess I've no idea- it's been that way as long as I can remember, which by some standards really isn't that long. Courcelles (talk) 10:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm probably making it up ;-) Thanks for the tip, I've changed protection on everything in my userspace.

All my userpages, talkpages and subpages are now fully move protected. I feel like a dirty hypocrite. In addition to limiting freedom in my userspace, I've also opposed banning a racist and got another admin to my dirty work. What unpleasant stuff can I do next...? And that's ignoring my involvement yesterday in a sysop becoming an ex-sysop...

TFOWR 11:05, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

What happened to the anarchist I used to know?! If someone has usurped this username can the original TFOWR please get in touch with another admin. ;) Jack 1314 (talk) 11:14, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Seduced by the dark side! All this nonsense really had to stop. TFOWR's right sock 11:19, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Damn reactionary sock puppet.

Aye, it's a funny one. I don't represent the community, in the sense of representative democracy (mine is just another voice in policy discussions, not more important than anyone else's). I do serve the community, though, in the sense that I carry out its wishes - so in that sense I do represent authority, but it's the authority of the community.

Regarding the "oppose banning a racist", that's partly a freedom of speech issue, partly an application of policy issue - the editor in question hasn't edited in a week, so I believe the ban discussion is premature (and I'd cheerfully block the editor if they were to resume editing in a similar vein).

The "getting Black Kite to enact a topic ban" issue is more me feeling a bit newbie-ish. It's an area I've only participated in as an editor before - even my most recent NPOV work (Talk:Gaza flotilla raid) was primarily as an editor: my RfA came half-way through the Gaza stuff, so I could basically decline to be an admin. This time I'm very much an admin: I'm not participating in the discussion (much) and I'm learning fast.

So... my philosophy remains the same, and continues to guide how I act, but I live and learn and develop etc. ¡A las Barricadas! TFOWR 11:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

RFPP

I've replied to the request for indefinite move protection for Earth. Cheers, Connormah^talk 15:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

HJ's moved-protected. To <ahem> answer your question, see above ;-) Talk page stalkers (particularly those of you of an RFPP inclination): what are your thoughts? I've not been move-protecting anything when I've semi'd stuff. TFOWR 15:16, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, I guess it's ultimately up to you to decide if it's entirely appropriate - if it's a high traffic, high profile article that doesn't already have move protection, then I think it should be move-protected, but that's just me. Connormah^talk 15:31, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Not sure if you read the section above but I believed that semi-protection might help move protect against non-autoconfirmed editors. Obviously this isn't the case, so my question at RFPP probably confused the issue somewhat... ;-) In this case (Earth) I followed your advice (semi-prot) and queried the original request (move-prot) as a result of my idiocy. I should have semi-prot'd and move-prot'd.

What I was getting at above, though, is - should we be move-prot'ing every time we semi? It's not something I've ever considered, and I'd be somewhat reluctant unless there was an obvious risk of page-move vandalism (which is something I've had cause to consider in my userspace very recently (see above)). TFOWR 15:37, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

As I said above, I guess it's up to the protecting admin - just use your best judgement. High profile/visibility pages that are not already move-protected, I think, should be move-protected if there's a significant chance of page-move vandalism (or a history of it in the past already). Connormah^talk 15:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Gotcha. My best judgement sometimes comes up a little short ;-) Anyway, I'm on the same page now. TFOWR 15:51, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Alexander Ovechkin

Although you now have indefinitely move-protected Alexander Ovechkin, your pp-move-indef template has not yet been visible on the page. Do you have to wait for a while before it is being shown up? (Sorry for being a newbie.) /HeyMid (contributions) 17:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, let me check. It should be instantaneous, but it's been a while since I used the template instead of letting Twinkle do it for me... TFOWR 17:14, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Template:Pp-move-indef - it's invisible! It just adds the page to a category. I presume there's no need to advertise the protection - it's not like protection applied as a result of vandalism or a dispute, where there's value in advising editors to behave themselves ;-) TFOWR 17:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

will produce a green lock, but I think it is a silly thing to advertise for long-term move protection. Leave that slot for protection relating to editing, which is what 99% of people care about, and don't understand our colour-coded lock system. Courcelles (talk) 17:27, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

This is getting really tedious

We just sort out those Triton inserts of BI this morning via a very sensible discussion at WT:BISE and then along comes User:LevenBoy and simply reinserts Triton's edits here and here without any discussion and despite the previous edit summary referencing agreement at WT:BISE. So, am I allowed to revert to the agreement? --Snowded ^TALK 12:55, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

OK strike that he just self-reverted --Snowded ^TALK 13:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Well that was in the nick of time... I've just this second opened up the probation log page. TFOWR 13:14, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Triton

Well the day after his ban he inserted British Isles here but did do some good content work at the same time. His edit summary when he blanked his page was not encouraging and I don't think he had really understood what has happened. That said I think we have a good content editor here and ideally we don't want to loose that. Your call (you are the admin) but I think it can be considered a technical breech which deserves a minor warning rather than any block. If he doesn't over react then maybe no action is needed. --Snowded ^TALK 07:44, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

It's a breach, and I've blocked TritonRocker for 24 hours. I haven't reverted the edit. I do agree about the content - what I take issue with is the insertion of the term "British Isles". Using content additions to mask addition/removal of BI is not an acceptable excuse. If a "pro-Ireland" editor pulled that stunt we'd all be calling for blood: I see no reason to handle "pro-Britain" editors any differently. TFOWR 08:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

It is really quite fun when I insert British Isles into articles it is so amusing to think that there are really people that don't like it, I can recommend it to other users as a light hearted way to amuse yourselves. Off2riorob (talk) 07:56, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

WP:BEANS, but I'm feeling WP:ROUGE... I'm waiting for an editor who randomly adds and removes the term! That'll confuse 'em even more than editors like Snowded who - gasp! - deal with the issue on a case-by-case basis. TFOWR 08:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that - much appreciated--Snowded ^TALK 08:51, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure. Off2riorob (talk) 09:02, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Why the censorship?

That's right, censorship. I'm trying to get involved but you guys keep trying to stop the discussion in it's tracks. I'll point out how big a problem this is with another thread soon. And by the way, I'm a nerd too, who else ever edits this site anyway. But having young gamer nerds dominate the FA with way too many video games getting in there is a problem that is really starting to bug me. Talk to you soon.63.229.248.13 (talk) 19:40, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Censorship. Heh. You'd be surprised how often someone tries to claim that.

Anyway, if you're prepared to listen to what other editors say, I'll look forward to our conversation. TFOWR 19:44, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Note: The IP's been blocked for edit-warring on Talk:Main Page. N419BH 19:49, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Huh, whoda thought it. Ironically, when the editor mentioned "bias" I tried to add a comment after the archived thread that the thread was actually supposed to be about bias - but they edit-conflicted with me. Oh well. Maybe they'll use their block to read the comments you and I left on their talk page? Or even the thread still on Talk:Main Page - the British Antarctic explorers one is the one I'm thinking of - that covers much the same ground? Oh well! TFOWR 19:54, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Fun times. Unrelated note, mind blocking User:86.162.178.117 per WP:DUCK. See the ANI thread they're posting on for evidence. N419BH 20:02, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Heh! I've passed my controversy quota for the day, I'm afraid - I'm about to settle down to watch this. The two ANI IPs have different ISPs (BT and Telewest), so I suspect it may well be a meat-puppetry thing (the 2nd IP refers to "my wife"). I suspect a more confident/less lazy admin would cheerfully execute a WP:DUCK block, though. TFOWR 20:15, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Meh, they haven't edited anything else. Might just try WP:DENY. They're IP hopping so fast a block probably wouldn't prevent disruption anyway. N419BH 20:18, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Balance

I see Faust is unblocked as a misunderstanding perhaps we could unblock Jan to preserve the balance, I don't know if Jan was actually sure or had been informed about decision of the ANI as I don't see any posts from her on ANI for some time previous to the decision and no notification of the decision on her talkpage, however I am sure she understands now and would mention the situation again, just thinking. Off2riorob (talk) 20:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Meh. I'll punt it. I've told them how to request {{unblock}}, and I've no objection (as always) to someone unblocking without running it by me. That said, it was pretty spectacular talk-about-something-while-trying-hard-not-to-be-seen-talking-about-it, followed up by some pretty disingenuous read-it-again-and-you'll-see-I-didn't-actually-say-it nonsense (which I'd anticipated, and was in large part why I did block - because the way they phrased it was setting everything up for a subsequent bout of I-didn't-actually-say-that). I've no view on Faust: I don't think unblocking Jan would restore balance - it's not like they were on "opposing sides". But I'm pretty jaundiced right now - if someone fresher and wiser wants to unblock that's fine by me. TFOWR 20:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, had a think during the evening entertainment... I'm still not up for lifting/changing the block. The comment that prompted the block strongly suggests that the editor was aware of the community's concerns, and was doing their level best to avoid directly saying nl.wiki. The post-block wikilawyering merely confirms that for me. Maybe another admin will see it differently, however. (I'm commenting here so as not to "pollute" their talkpage and prejudice any unblock request. Likewise I'm avoiding using their username).

I'd suggest that if the editor was to make an unblock request they should commit to pursuing any further grievance with nl.wiki at meta or via OTRS. There must be no more nl.wiki nonsense here on en.wiki: the ANI threads should have made that abundantly clear to all editors involved.

I'd also strongly suggest that they need to show that they understand that wikilawyering pissed off the community, and in this editors case was the cause of their block. (And, incidentally, why I'm not inclined to lift or change the block).

The editor needs to understand that en.wiki is about creating articles, not pursuing past grievances. The community here does not give a shit about their grievances on nl.wiki. I can not stress that highly enough. We have no authority at nl.wiki - it's an entirely separate community. Admins there are not necessarily anything other than editors here, and vice versa.

I realise that you realise this - I'm simply listing the things that the editor - in my opinion - needs to take on board. One thing you may not know is that you'll probably need to "sanitise" this before relaying it to the editor: if they don't like the word "dammit" they're certainly not going to like "shit" and "pissed".

Thanks for stepping in here, mate.

TFOWR 22:09, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

No worries, I will talk to Jan if I can, I remember in Dec they came here and had the idea to add uncited text and their opinions to articles and I had the pleasure of pointing them in the right direction and I was like you know when you see a user you are thinking they are not gonna last the month here but I was a bit surprised and they became in a small way a productive editor , even though perhaps holding fringe views she managed to keep a clean block log. I can see there is zero support or patience with the other wiki stuff and I have also commented previous to the block to tell her to drop it, lets see if they comment more, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 22:19, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I think Jan overreacted when he saw that Faust was blocked based on a misunderstanding about Faust's post on my talk page. To prevent future trouble, I think it is better to also ask him not to indirectly invoke the NL-Wiki issue here. Perhaps he thought that explicitely discussing the content of the dispute that rages at NL-Wiki was not allowed, but making a comment like: "Well, this looks like NL-Wiki here" would not be a problem. But such comments can trigger precisely the more detailed arguments that we don't want to have here. Count Iblis (talk) 02:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Quite possibly (and thanks for mediating with Faust, by the way). I'd certainly hope that any unblock request would include a clear commitment to avoid implicit as well as explicit references to nl.wiki, and to avoid any further wikilawyering. JanDeFietser has been directed repeatedly to meta and to OTRS: there really is no excuse for this nonsense to be mentioned - directly or indirectly - on en.wiki in any way at this point. If JanDeFietser can not be bothered following the dispute resolution advice given to them by the community - i.e. meta, OTRS, not en.wiki - JanDeFietser must understand that the community in turn can not be bothered putting up with JanDeFietser's crap. TFOWR 07:06, 26 July 2010 (UTC)