User talk:Boing! said Zebedee/Archive 12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5 ← Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15

January 2012

Mentioned you

I've mentioned you here as someone who may be able to advise on a username issue. - Sitush (talk) 05:46, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I've left them a suggestion -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:53, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppetry

Greetings Zebedee, and have a great new year 2012!

Remember Antony1821 (talk · contribs) who was blocked for copyvio? Well, I believe he's trying to evade his block by creating a new account, Antony1994 (talk · contribs). Apart from the obvious username similarities (in his first account, his year of birth is mentioned as 1994), he created his account only yesterday and he has so far shown similar editing behaviour (editing predominately Olympiakos-related articles). I recognize that maybe these are not yet sufficient data to file a WP:SPI report, but I'd appreciate if you watched that user for future sockpuppetry evidence, or maybe give me some feedback on how to act next. Cheers. – Kosm1fent 09:13, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, it does look like a possibility - I'll keep an eye on things. Unless there's any resumption of the copyvio problem (or any other problems), I think I'd be tempted to just leave things alone and observe -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:58, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Greeting Zebedee. There are some issues concerning Antony1994. Just letting you know. Cheers. – Kosm1fent 15:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
And he is now blocked. – Kosm1fent 07:26, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:09, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Efanrees

Go ahead. I certainly trust your judgement. Daniel Case (talk) 16:04, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks - I'll not object to a faceful of wet fish should I turn out to be wrong ;-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:12, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
I support giving another chance. The person seems to me to be genuinely willing to try to do better (and we can always reblock if necessary). In fact, since there is a clear consensus here, I will go ahead and unblock. JamesBWatson (talk) 18:24, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Great, thanks -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:46, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Greetings

So Zebedee, I had asked yo to check out a block with referenced statements i'd added, and let me know if it's fine. Seems you deleted it. Thats fine anyways, just wanted to check if you were biased. Thanks a lot.

Regards, Vineet Nayar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vineet Nayar1 (talk • contribs) 19:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I did not delete it, I replied to it promptly on Dec 27. And then after several days with no further response from you (and because my Talk page fills up very quickly), I archived it. You can find it at User talk:Boing! said Zebedee/Archive 11#Small review needed -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:50, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Ohh OMG thanks a lot for the reply. :) Vineet Nayar1 (talk) 20:09, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
No problem - just a minor misunderstanding ;-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:14, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
  • I'm transferring your latest response on the archive page over here...
Whom do I ask for review ? I'll add my points and let you know. You can check and review when you can spare some time maybe. Thanks a lot Mr Zebedee.
You would need to present your proposed change on the Talk page of the article to which you would like to add it, and ask for a review by whoever is following that article. Unfortunately, I won't be able to review it myself, because I have chosen to act purely in an admin capacity on caste-related articles, and that prohibits me from taking any part in content decisions (per WP:INVOLVED) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:20, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Hey thanks a lot. I'll see if I can find someone who can review it. Wish you a happy new year, have fun.

Vineet Nayar1 (talk) 20:26, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

User:PassaMethod

Thank you for relaying my message to User:Herostratus. I don't don't like any of PassaMethod's editing. See these discussions or topics for why.[1][2][3][4]. He is a horrible, horrible editor, often including WP:OR or outright falsehoods (as witnessed at the Virginity article where he was reverted [5]) or misrepresentation of sources. In addition to the examples you recently dealt with -- at Category:Erotic fiction[6] and Elvis Presley[7][8][9] -- other examples include this edit which was reverted to the Child sexual abuse article,[10] this edit which was reverted to the Human article[11] (which was also discussed[12]), and the discussion of synthesis regarding his edits to the Pedophilia article.[13] There are a lot more, some of which are documented on his talk page.

Now he's created the Sexually suggestive article. Ugh, I don't feel that this user should edit any topics, let alone sexual topics. Can't we get a topic ban for this user? I wish he'd just stay away from these topics because he isn't that educated on them and it's only a matter of time before he adds OR/synthesis to them. He also recently had his user name changed from User:PassaMethod to User:Pass a Method. Something needs to be done about this because the new name doesn't carry his previous contributions. He shouldn't get a WP:Fresh start. 50.19.178.57 (talk) 19:54, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not sure there are any specific things here that I could take action over. The Sexually suggestive article, for example: If you think it is inappropriate, you'd need to take it to WP:AfD, as there's no obvious speedy deletion reason - we can't ban people for not being experts in the subjects they edit. As for a topic ban, I couldn't do that even if I thought it was warranted - you'd need to get a community consensus for that at somewhere like WP:AN or maybe WP:RfC/U. I'm also not sure there's a problem with his new user account - what he's done is allowed providing it is not used for illegitimate reasons. All I can suggest you do is report any specific action that you think violates policy at the appropriate noticeboard, or if it's general overall behaviour, initiate a report at WP:RfC/U (but do check out the guidance page first, if you decide to follow that route). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Will you take a look at his edits to the Puberty article, the "Morning wood and random erections section" in particular? "Morning wood" seems like a very unencyclopedic title. 50.19.24.180 (talk) 22:56, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
I know that users can be blocked if their editing is damaging the encyclopedia. This user is constantly adding poorly-sourced/unsourced material, and original research or synthesis. As for his user account, if it is still separated from his old account's contributions, that's a problem because it means his past problematic editing is harder to detect. It's like getting a clean start, something he's not supposed to have because he's still editing the same topics he was before. 50.19.24.180 (talk) 23:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Never mind about his user name since that matter was finally fixed, before I even commented again about it here. But if you don't know already, I've also commented about him at User talk:Jimbo Wales. 50.19.24.180 (talk) 04:41, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Please note this is an IP evading a block via a proxy and has been doing so for weeks while whack-a-mole is being played. It's now rangeblocked. -- DQ (t) (e) 18:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
    Folks, thanks for the updates, but I can only reiterate that there is nothing I can or would want to do unilaterally here - complaints about a user's behaviour need to be taken to the appropriate forums -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

AGF - indeed

Regarding your public comment about WP:AGF. First, I’m familiar with it. Second, when I see “I'm honestly not trying to be argumentative here”, I read that as equivalent to “With all due respect” which, in the modern sense means that what follows is likely to be anything but with respect, especially when it includes the derisive adverb “actually” which enhances the mocking undertone further, to the point where you come across as disbelieving and sneering. At that point I simply read your request as WP:AOBF. Finally, I thought your comments on the subject were fatuous and your closing remarks a further attempt to cause embarrassment. I see that you are an Admin. I’m not a big fan, a bit like the subject of the Arbcom case. I would urge you to demonstrate respect to all contributors, not just those in the gallery to which you are playing. I've posted this to your talk page - to show respect. Bye. Leaky Caldron 22:04, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I was open, honest, and never disrespectful to you - if you are not prepared to accept my good faith in that and are only able to read my words through your own incorrect interpretation, I must ask you not to talk to me here -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:14, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello Boing, I've been chatting a bit with Leaky Caldron regarding his reply and I agree with him that your reply, it's such a shame you're not more familiar with WP:AGF, was quite hostile. Now, I can see that you felt attacked, but, as I've just told Leaky Caldron, in these cases people should try as hard as they can to deescalate or they run the risk of starting a vicious circle of snarkier and snarkier comments... Salvio Let's talk about it! 15:05, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
My second comment was a little hostile, yes, but that was *after* he had accused me of bad faith, and, I think, called me a dick. (And there was no chance of escalation on my part - as soon as the person I'm talking to refuses to accept my good faith, I stop talking to them) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
As I've told Leaky Caldron, I don't believe your question was a provocation; but I believe him when he says he perceived it as such: the worst limitation imposed by this medium is that you cannot hear your interlocutor talk or see his facial expressions/gestures, so it's easy to misunderstand — and I believe this was just a misunderstanding —... Salvio Let's talk about it! 16:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I'm familiar with all of the problems of online communication, the lack of body language, etc - and that's why you should assume good faith and not call people dicks. But what I don't understand is what you want from me now? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:12, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Actually, I don't want anything from you; I was just hoping to get you and Leaky Caldron to talk to resolve this difference, because I have a deep respect for you both... Salvio Let's talk about it! 16:46, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
OK, that's cool - as far as I'm concerned, it was already forgotten. I see he has redacted his comment now, so I've redacted my reply - and I'll go add a comment to his talk page -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:57, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for springing over! There is a bit of coverage in our own article, that is if you believe Wikipedia! The stuff on the Arbcom case is far too deep, IMO. The fact is that the word does carry baggage wherever it is used. It might be tolerated, used in different ways and hurtful to women in some places more than others. My feeling as far as WP is concerned that it is never acceptable written in a public forum. It will inevitably be offensive to someone and whatever is written here is going to be read by someone. The subject editor in that case is not a stupid man. He would have known that repeating it in a derogatory way would trip an alarm sooner or later. It's fine down the pub when used to people who you are familiar with. In writing, anywhere in the public and private sector that I have worked in, it would be the first word on the list of the corporate email abuse detection software, even to the extent that Scunthorpe was blocked by one of my clients! It's a pity that the Arbcom subject couldn't be mediated by Salvio in the same way! Leaky Caldron 17:44, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
I do understand your position, and I'm not unsympathetic. I'm just concerned that the comment is dealt with in its actual context, and not in an "American taboo sexism/worst word in the world" context", when there was clearly no sexism intended -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:42, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

GOCE 2011 Year-End Report

Guild of Copy Editors 2011 Year-End Report

We have reached the end of the year, and what a year it has been! The Guild of Copy Editors was full of activity, and we achieved numerous important milestones in 2011. Read all about these in the Guild's 2011 Year-End Report.

Highlights
  • Membership grows to 764 editors, an increase of 261
  • Report on coordinators' elections
  • Around 1,000 articles removed through six Backlog elimination drives
  • Guild Plans for 2012
  • Requests page report
  • Sign up for the January 2012 Backlog elimination drive!


Get your copy of the Guild's 2011 Year-End Report here
On behalf of the Guild, we take this opportunity to wish you Season's Greetings and Happy New Year. We look forward to your support in 2012!
– Your 2011 Coordinators: Diannaa (lead), The Utahraptor, and Slon02 and SMasters (emeritus).

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 05:58, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

Talk:Nair

Do you think that another off-wiki campaign may have begun regarding Nair? There are some peculiar goings-on at the moment - both on the talk page and in the article itself - and it comes off semi-protection in a couple of days' time. - Sitush (talk) 16:28, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Could be - I'll be keeping an eye on it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:46, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
That might be handy: a fair few admins were watching it at one point but I suspect that some have drifted away. And, hey, I very boldly deployed WP:CLOSE a few hours ago at WT:INB - I've never done that before but, so far, no protests! At my rate of learning the gubbins, I'll be set for WP:RFA when I hit to 400k edit mark ... assuming that I manage to get through the 360,000 remaining without being yanked to ANI again. It is dark, but I am sure I just saw a pig fly past. Definitely not a straggling reindeer! - Sitush (talk) 21:33, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
A Close, eh? Wow :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Where?

where r u live? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Praveen rajput (talk • contribs) 05:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

As it says on my user page, "Domicile: Liverpool, UK, and Bangkok, Thailand" -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:47, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Yadav

Hmm, I'd have thought that something like indef would be more appropriate, given their edit warring in the past over the article, and refusal to get the point (that historical texts are primary sources). But it is of course your call, just my 5c as an observer. Steven Zhang Join the DR army! 20:16, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Possibly, yes, but I'm trying to be as lenient and uninvolved as I can - best leave it to discussion on his Talk page, I think -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:23, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
And he seems to be self-destructing now, which is quite sad -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:28, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Yeah. I've had that article on my watchlist for a few months, it's pretty much all the same, users inserting info saying that Yadavs are kings, citing ome ancient text from 3000 years ago. I mean, we don't write in our article on Earth that it's flat or it's the centre of the universe. As for his last comment, not really a legal threat but editors of that article have levied them in the past. Just FYI. Steven Zhang Join the DR army! 20:39, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Earth is not flat? Woah, I must go check the sources for that article ... - Sitush (talk) 20:42, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
What strikes me about all these inflated caste claims is that if we believed them all, India would be populated with a billion kings and warriors, and there'd be nobody making the tea. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:46, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
It is the culture of oral history, which even the ancient texts relied upon. Psst. Wanna join my cabal? I feel silly being in a cabal of one. - Sitush (talk) 20:53, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Indeed, but most modern cultures seem to understand that (and I'm sure most Indians do too). No, go away, I've already got my own cabal and nobody else can join -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:57, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Can I join? I've never been in a cabal, and I know that's what admins are supposed to do. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:46, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
My one-man cabal has no administrator involvement as yet, JBW, but if the hat cap fits ... - Sitush (talk) 10:32, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Email

Hello, Boing! said Zebedee. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— JamesBWatson (talk) 21:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Notable??

Are you seriously asserting that any of these stories are notable? So far nobody has made any such case; nobody has even attempted to make such a case-- if you are saying that there is "controversy" over the notability of the stories, you are it. 02:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guy who reads a lot (talk • contribs)

No, *I* am not making any notability claims at all, I'm just trying to help you follow the appropriate deletion route -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

So, you don't think they're notable... in nine months, nobody else has asserted any of them are notable... the articles doen't give any reason to think the subjects are notable... but nevertheless, you think that notability by wikipedia standards is "controversial." OK.

I looked at the process you linked me to; my estimate is that with about two hours of work I could probably move the process of deleting the articles forward, assuming that there's not some other roadblocks hidden in the procedure that will come up. I'm trying to think of a reason that this would be a good investment of time, given that the whole point is that the articles aren't notable and as far as I can tell nobody is likely to care whether they exist or not.

I may try one, just to get some practice and see how the process works, but right now I've spent far too much time already on a process that I'd thought would be pretty quick and uncontroversial, and I will probably just log out and go do other things for a while. Guy who reads a lot (talk) 14:13, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

  • I can list them at AfD for you in minutes using Twinkle, if you like - just let me know -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Ikonoblast

Your opinion: will it help if I apologize? I suppose that edit summary could be considered unnecessary, even if it's not quite incivil. Or should I just let him make his case to Jimbo or whoever else he thinks has some authority here? Qwyrxian (talk) 08:13, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I think it's probably best just leave him now - it was the edit-warring he was blocked for -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:57, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

EENA

17:53, 1 January 2012 Boing! said Zebedee (talk | contribs) deleted "EENA" ‎ (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.eena.org/view/en/AboutEENA.html)

Hello, I would like to have your help concerning the delete of this page EENA for infringment reasons. I am working for EENA and I personally created the content/new entry on Wikipedia to share with the community important informations regarding the european emergency number association. It was my first entry on Wikipedia, so I would likle to know how to restore the page and what could i do to modify the entry in a way it won't deleted. Thank you very much for your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arossieena (talk • contribs) 14:25, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. The problem is that, for copyright reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere unless it has been explicitly released under a license at least as free as a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. If you wish to recreate the article, there are two ways you could go about it. Firstly, if EENA wish to release their site content for re-use according to the required license, they can do so by following the procedure outlined here. The alternative is for you to write the article entirely in your own words, with nothing copied from the EENA site (or from anywhere else) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

...for your participation in the discussion regarding User: Bless sins' block for sock-puppetry. I'm always impressed when an individual holding a given opinion is presented with new evidence and willing to reverse their position, and that's exactly what you did. Since I've only ever interacted with Bless sins I limited my participation to just his portion of the case. Is it safe to assume that if they are found to be 2 independent editors the indef block against User: Vice regent would be lifted, or at least reduced to an appropriately equal period? Thanks again, Doc Tropics 17:38, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

What I find more remarkable is people who, when presented with new evidence, don't change their mind! But yes, if one is unblocked, clearly the other one should be too. Hopefully we can get some resolution over the next day or two - I might contact the blocking admin and the checkuser to see what they think -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:53, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Intothefire again

I have no idea if you are watching User_talk:Intothefire but they seem to have responded/challenged/asked a question of you earlier today. - Sitush (talk) 20:27, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I mean, it is underneath a warning from me, but it makes no sense if addressed to me. - Sitush (talk) 20:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm watching it - don't really know what he's talking about -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:32, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
OK, then it makes no sense to either of us! Sorry to bother you, & that you have it watchlisted is noted. - Sitush (talk) 03:14, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

My name is Boing! Said Zebedee

And I'm a complete cockhole! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.20.239.35 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 7 January 2012‎

No, your name is not "Boing! Said Zebedee" - but your other assertion about yourself is something I can neither confirm nor dispute -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:03, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Per your recent involvement

You may be interested in this discussion on ANI. Toddst1 (talk) 23:18, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know - I'll have a look tomorrow (it's late here now) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:57, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for assuming good faith, and spending time reviewing all the evidence. Bringing it to AN/I, something I wouldn't be able to do, was definitely a good call on your part.Bless sins (talk) 20:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem, happy to help -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

You do good work. Nobody Ent 21:57, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:58, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

User:Srobak

I first wanted to thank you for your block of User: Srobak. He has been disruptive and combative for a very long time, and probably should have been blocked long ago for biting newbies and tendentious editing, but that is neither here nor there. I would like to caution you about your post-block sentiments regarding your hope that you will be able to unblock him soon. I feel that there are many in the community who are none too glad to see the back side of this editor, and it would be unfortunate if Srobak were to only have to make a token effort to have his editing privileges reinstated. I truly believe that the standard offer is all we owe to this editor, and that a ban on templating user talk space would be warranted if he ever decides to come back. This is my opinion, and as I said before, I appreciate the work you've done and respect your judgement in this matter, but I would be remiss to the community if I did not bring my concerns to your attention. VanIsaacWScontribs 11:29, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for your feedback - I'll certainly take it into account should I consider any further action. What is sad is that Srobak has made some good article contributions, and it's always disappointing to lose a contributing editor, so I do hope there can be some genuine progress on the civility front. But please be assured that I won't be fooled by any "token" effort, and should I be persuaded to unblock, it would be on the strict proviso that repeating the same behavior would lead immediately to another block - and I would be watching. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:10, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Boing! said Zebedee. Would like to point you in the direction of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Srobak. I know nothing of this editor, but this does seem like an open-and-shut case. Cheers. memphisto 23:52, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 01:25, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I apologize for getting you into this situation. I had no idea that I was setting a trap for him when I made my edit, but a malicious lobe in the back of my brain secretly revels in the fact that he just plain doesn't seem to be able to understand how what he does is unacceptable. Thank you for taking my edit in the vein it was intended - as a simple good-faith grammatical fix. VanIsaacWScontribs 00:20, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, no problem at all. I saw your correction and thought "Duh, yes" - I meant to thank you, but I got distracted and forgot, so, er, thanks :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 01:00, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Semi-pp of an article talk page

Jadoon is not protected but I am wondering whether it would be reasonable to semi-pp its talk page? I am getting fed up of reverting IPs who refactor comments there. The page consists mostly of pretty irrelevant/unnecessary sniping etc. Although a lot of it is fairly old, the refactoring goes on and on. - Sitush (talk) 11:59, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Don't really like protecting Talk pages, but it does look like it's been pretty disruptive - I've just reverted another IP refactor myself. I've semi-protected it, but just for a week, and we can see if that manages to dissuade them -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:06, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
I am not too keen on the idea either but think that needs must right now. Would it help if I tried to set up an archive and moved the old comments into that? Can an archive be protected, so as to stop them meddling with the stuff once it is there? - Sitush (talk) 13:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
As it happens, I was thinking exactly the same thing myself (but I didn't fancy doing the work ;-). I think it's a good solution - just being an archive might itself be sufficient deterrent, but we can certainly protect it if people try to change it. And there really is very little of value in that old stuff anyway. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
I have manually archives all but the last message & also set up Mizabot. I've had problems doing this before but Wwoods has helped me out when it has gone wrong. We will see what happens. - Sitush (talk) 13:53, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Good stuff - I've unprotected the talk page now and I'm watching the archive page -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:04, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Optometry

Hello. Would you please have a look at semi-protecting this page again. Cheers, Chrisieboy (talk) 12:27, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I see the slow-burn edit war is continuing. The latest editor looks almost certain to be a sock, so I've indef blocked that one. I've also semi protected the article for a month - it won't stop new socks, but at least it will force them to jump through the autoconfirmed hoops first. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:00, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Chrisieboy (talk) 17:36, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

Talkback

Hello, Boing! said Zebedee. You have new messages at Salvio giuliano's talk page.
Message added 21:35, 10 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Salvio Let's talk about it! 21:35, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

What alternatives are there to BLPN

I realise that I am being a little impatient but if a query is raised at WP:BLPN and is effectively ignored then what alternatives are open to me in order to get some sort of broad input regarding a BLP issue? It is a rumbling-along type of problem - see Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Amitabh_Bachchan - and it affects a "List of" article also, so I think that using WP:DRN might be inappropriate. - Sitush (talk) 21:55, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Samundri, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chowk (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:42, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Cleaning Up Katia Tiutiunnik

I have just begun the job of cleaning up Katia Tiutiunnik. I have removed outdated references and replaced them with better ones. I have also put page numbers in large ones. I have also begun to modify some of the sentences to make them sound more dispassionate. Could anyone assist me with this? It would be good to get the "promotion" tag removed from the page as there are many other composers' biographies that sound far more promotional than this one.LivingMuse (talk) 09:21, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I'm afraid I'm too busy elsewhere to work on this article myself, but I'll be happy to take a look over it once you're done with it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:06, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I empathize with you--I, myself, am to busy to do any more work on the article for the next few days. If you could spare the time to look at it today, and give me some feedback, I'd be very grateful. Thanks again.LivingMuse (talk) 11:20, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
I've done as much as time permits to improve and clean up Katia Tiutiunnik. If you look at the biographies of other composers you'll see that many are more "promotional" in tone and far less well referenced than this one. I'd be really grateful if you could take a look at Katia Tiutiunnik and consider taking down the "promotional" banner. If you decide not to, I'd really appreciate some more advice and feedback. Hopefully other editors will work on the article as well--even though, as I mentioned, many other composers' biographies need far more attention than this one does.LivingMuse (talk) 05:47, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think I left my last message in the correct fashion. Hence, here it is again: I've done as much as time permits to improve and clean up Katia Tiutiunnik. If you look at the biographies of other composers you'll see that many are far more "promotional" in tone and far less well referenced than Katia Tiutiunnik. I'd be really grateful if you could take a look at Katia Tiutiunnik and consider taking down the "promotional" banner. If you decide not to, I'd really appreciate some more advice and feedback. Hopefully other editors will work on the article as well--even though, as I mentioned, many other composers' biographies need far more attention than this one does.LivingMuse (talk) 10:07, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry it's taken me so long to reply, but I've been very busy in real life and have had no real time for Wikipedia. I've had a quick look at that article, and it looks quite a bit better, and has lots of sources, so I think it's fine -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:18, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Meetup - I'll come along - time Kudpung showed his face.

On the other hand, it's probably a good thing I live in Thailand - I might be the one with the glass ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:08, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Hehe :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 01:02, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Boing! said Zebedee. You have new messages at Codrinb's talk page.
Message added 16:27, 15 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks for the notes. See my page Codrin.B (talk) 16:27, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

That spammer again

[14]. I suspect they get paid to do this because the links seem to differ, plus they never seem to talk, so it might even be an automated process. ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 16:57, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

admin needed

Could you chime in here as an uninvolved admin and with your excellent skill for DR? There don't seem to be any admins watching the thread and a solution of some kind needs to be found. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:30, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry I didn't manage to help there - I've been so busy of late that I've had no time for Wikipedia at all. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:57, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive736#Incivility and disruption of an RfC (No 50 on the archive list). This was archived 2 days ago unresolved because there have been no recent edits to it. The RfC is still getting worse - summat needs to be done, because it's escalating across the Wiki. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:02, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Peer review of Pope John Paul II

Hi Boing!, I thought you might be interested in participating in this peer review. Kind Regards -- Marek.69 talk 01:16, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Marek. I would be interested normally, but I've been so busy of late that I've had no time for Wikipedia at all. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:58, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

December 2011 wikification barnstars!

The Iron Wikification Barnstar
For wikifying 10 articles during the drive, Boing! said Zebedee, I hereby award you the Iron Wikification Barnstar! Congratulations! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 07:05, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

My turn to take a break. Dunno how long it will last, but I need to wean myself off the Wikidrug. Keep the wheels turning mate! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:07, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

Hat

Well, I suppose I could be angry... but instead I'm just glad it hasn't disappeared. I had given up on it. Thanks. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:28, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Fæ

A request for comments has been opened on administrator User:Fæ. You are being notified due to your prior participation in ANI, RfA, or RfC discussions regarding this user. Thank you, MadmanBot (talk) 19:35, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Optometry

Would you mind having a word with User:3tanman3 who doesn't seem to understand how Wikipedia works. I'm pretty sure it's the same sockpuppeteer up to his old tricks again. Cheers, Chrisieboy (talk) 09:33, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

February 2012

GOCE barnstar, January 2012 drive

The Modest Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Boing! said Zebedee for editing 5 articles with a total of 6095 words during the January 2012 GOCE drive. Thank you for participating! --Stfg (talk) 20:56, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Coventry

Hi Boing, how are you getting to the Coventry Wikimeet? If you're driving down then could I have a lift please? Or if you're on the train then perhaps we can get the same one. I won't need a lift back - I've got to be in Bristol the day after. Cheers, Dan. Bazonka (talk) 22:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Dan. I won't be driving, sorry, but the same train might be an idea. However, I'm not sure if I'll be able to make it now - I may have some work on that weekend that I can't get out of. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:26, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Possible ban evasion by justamanhere

I suspect justamanhere continues to edit wikipedia in circumvention of your ban. The subnet matches the other two socks and the editor submitted changes to Mormon related and orchid related articles. What are the odds?

I also suspect that justamanhere is yet another sock puppet of Jeff Merkey. Reason being the aggregate pattern of behavior (POV editing, botany and Mormonism topics, hate speech, legal threats, "I will be nice, I promise" and ban circumvention) in addition to the final commit note as justamanhere referencing Pamela Jones and Tim Ransom who Jeff reserves special hatred for.

Apologies for the anonymous edit - Jeff is known to stalk people he runs into online. He's gone as far as calling folks' employers trying to get them fired (see final post). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.89.100.247 (talk) 12:06, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Unfortunately, I'm extremely busy in real life at the moment and I don't really have any time for Wikipedia. All I can really suggest is that you use WP:SPI if you think you have enough evidence for a sockpuppet investigation. Sorry I can't be of any direct help just now -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:25, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

MSU Interview

Dear Boing! said Zebedee,


My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 15:53, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Yep, happy to help - I've added myself to the list. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:46, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

GOCE drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors January 2012 backlog elimination drive
GOCE January 2012 Backlog Elimination progress graph

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors January 2012 Backlog elimination drive! Here is your end-of-drive wrap-up newsletter.

Participation

45 people signed up for this drive this time; of these, 35 participated. This is similar to the number of editors who helped out in November. Thanks to all who participated! Barnstars will be distributed in the near future.

Progress report

Recent drives have been focusing on the oldest three months in the backlog. During this drive we were successful in eliminating our target months—July, August, and September 2010—from the queue, and there are less than 300 articles remaining from 2010. End-of-drive results and barnstar information can be found here.

When working on the backlog, please keep in mind that there are options other than copy editing available; some articles may be candidates for deletion, or may not be suitable for copy editing at this time for other reasons. The {{GOCEreviewed}} tag can be placed on any article you find to be totally uneditable, and you can nominate for deletion any that you discover to be copyright violations or completely unintelligible. If you need help deciding what to do, please contact any of the coordinators.

Thank you for participating in the January 2012 drive! All contributions are appreciated. Our next copy edit drive will be in March.

Your drive coordinators – The Utahraptor talk, S Masters (talk), Diannaa (Talk), Stfg (Talk), Sp33dyphil (talk), and Dank (talk)

Your December 4th Message

According to this ([15]), I believe you mistook the issue and thought I kept it there for the purpose of showing off. I intended to replace the admin userbox this user has been on Wikipedia for 4 years, and I forgot all about replacing that so there was no need to tell me off in such a manner, since I already knew it before hand that I needed to remove it. Assess the situation clearly before telling me off. I never meant to claim I had four degrees, I meant to keep it for the purpose of future reference that those were the degrees I was hoping to obtain. Abhijay (☎ Talk) (✐ Deeds) 11:00, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I wish you well in achieving your educational ambitions -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:49, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
thanks. Abhijay (☎ Talk) (✐ Deeds) 03:26, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

Sanctions

Just noticed tha you are around. Are you aware that sanctions have been put in place for a broad range of caste related articles? If not then FYI Template:uw-castewarning and Castewarningtalk contain the gen. - Sitush (talk) 20:11, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

That looks like a good development, thanks for letting me know -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:24, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Join the Community!

Hi Boing!_said_Zebedee,

Belated welcome to WikiProject India. Thanks for joining our WikiProject community! I'm a volunteer for the WikiProject. :)

Do consider joining the WikiProject India Mailing List (https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-in-en) which provides communication for the community.

For other lists which may be of interest to you, see http://wiki.wikimedia.in/Mailing_Lists.

You may also like to add WP:INB to your watchlist.

AshLin (talk) 17:40, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for the welcome. I'm already watching WP:INB, and I'll check out that mailing list. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:48, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Name that Clone Speedy Delete Tag

Hi, you recently turned down a speedy at the article Name that clone, with the rationale that it was not a hoax, and to see the article on Todd Wilbur. I had actually already checked the article before tagging it as a Speedy, and while Todd Wilbur DOES have a TV show that involves "cloning" fast food meals called Top Secret Recipe, I found no reference to any sort of gameshow he hosts with that title. Likewise, doing a search on google gives me no hits for any sort of segment, or anything else with that name, that Todd Wilbur is involved with. So, my rationale was that it was either a hoax, or is such a minor part of the show that it in no way merits its own article, especially seeing as "Top Secret Recipe" doesn't even have an article of its own, and only a redirect to Todd Wilbur's article. What are your thoughts on how I should procede? Rorshacma (talk) 18:39, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Speedy deletion CSD:G3 is only for blatant hoaxes or vandalism, and this is not blatant - as you say, it might easily be a minor part of the show. I agree it probably does not merit its own article, but speedy deletion is only for a very specific set of reasons, and I don't see a category that fits. I'd suggest you go for Proposed Deletion, which accommodates any deletion reasons. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:47, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

A couple of further updates for you

Given your recent on/off situation:

  • No Indic scripts in the lead section, per RfC here. On the one hand, I am being a little cautious about this one (I can see no real harm for the script at Shudra, for example - Hindu concept, Hindic script - but will not object if someone else removes); on the other hand, I am boldly extending it to include infoboxes for towns/cities etc because the issues discussed affect those just as much as the lead section and they, too, are a summary item.
  • Unresolved as yet, but this and this should hopefully clarify what I have been doing all along re: caste statements for individuals. The latter arose from a rather surprising (to me) series of reverts by DGG. When the matter is settled I am pretty sure that I am going to have to revert DGG's actions. They know of the thread but have not participated in it, so I may give them a nudge: it seems odd to revert so many lists and then not want to comment in a centralised discussion that they proposed should take place, so perhaps it has been forgotten or lost among other user talk page messages. - Sitush (talk) 20:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and there is this thread at WP:RSN, which appears to be building a consensus that James Tod is not a reliable source. That will have quite a wide-ranging impact and is going to give rise to a few more problems akin to past removals of Tod from articles. There will be a fair amount of wailing and gnashing, I suspect. - Sitush (talk) 20:27, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, that's a useful update, I'll keep my eye on those -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:44, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Why are you threatening to ban me?

Please explain what mistake have I made? If you want to see how Qwy, Drmies and Sitush debate has progressed just go through the last 100 or so edits I have made and it will be clear to you. I have been adding counter points to James Tod article each one of which is well sourced. I really don't understand why you are threatening me. Regards. Ror Is King (talk) 13:25, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Your two recent comments, "Your POV getting in the way?" and "..your assertion that I deleted Frietag was obviously a lie", are violations of WP:AGF. Violations of WP:AGF on India-related articles have been like a plague on Wikipedia over the past couple of years, and the community has enacted discretionary sanctions to try to put a stop to them (and to all of the other personal attacks, harassment, and accusations that have been going on). Read WP:AGF carefully, abide by it, also have a read of WP:CIVIL and interact with others in a civil manner, or you will be blocked. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:16, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

3PO

You're the "lucky" winner. First admin to appear at the top of my watchlist just now.

User talk:jc37, user talk:Nightscream, User talk:Daniel Case, User talk:Cerenok9919, Talk:Jennifer Grey, and the page history of Jennifer Grey.

Need a 3PO, please : ) - jc37 22:57, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll have a look over it and let you know what I think -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:10, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Right, here are some thoughts...
  • Overall, I think you've handled this well, in a perfectly acceptable "uninvolved" fashion.
  • I think it most likely that Cerenok9919 was not sufficiently clued up about the way we resolve content disagreements here, and was not deliberately being disruptive. I admire Daniel Case's patience, but I think the block was necessary in the end. Cerenok9919 does finally appear to have understood that discussion on the article Talk page is necessary before trying to re-apply any changes, so I guess we'll see. If he wants to be unblocked, I'd make it a condition that he agrees to discuss any contested changes on the article Talk page, and make it clear that further edit warring will result in another block.
  • I think Nightscream was indeed involved in the content disagreement and was wise to ask others for admin help, but it was unfortunate that it got a little too heated - frustration is perhaps understandable, but getting angry with other admins doesn't help.
  • Since the "Reckless" thing was dropped, the edit-war over grammar looks pretty lame to me.
  • I think you, Jc37, are still uninvolved in terms of content, and can continue to act in an admin capacity.
Hope this helps - please let me know if there is any way I can help or anything specific you'd like a comment on -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:20, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I meant to say, I don't know if you want a 3PO on the actual content disagreement on the article Talk page about the grammar to be used or the order in which to list those two movies, and I haven't offered one yet in order to remain uninvolved should that be required - but let me know if my opinion on the content is what you want, and I'll be happy to offer it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:26, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much.
And No about the content, I think Daniel Case has that well in hand (in my opinion showing, as you said, quite a bit of patience with both editors).
(Though of course you are obviously welcome to comment on whatever you want : )
One of the several reasons I was asking for your 3PO was because it concerned me when an admin was using the tools in a discussion that he appeared involved in. Blocking, and even protecting the page. And even now seems unrepentant of that.
Ignoring the mess with asgardian several years back (and it was a thorough mess - mostly thanks to asgardian, and perhaps to me probably showing way too much good faith and patience all around), my sincere hope is that this is an isolated situation and we won't see a repeat.
I very much appreciate your insight into this. Thank you. - jc37 17:50, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I agree - an admin who is clearly involved in a content dispute should not use admin tools on the article. Let's indeed hope it was just a "heat of the moment" thing that won't repeated. (And yep, Daniel Case is very experienced and pretty cool under fire :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:59, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Remy Ong

Thanks for protecting the Remy Ong page until cooler heads prevail. Have been trying to go in to correct stuff on the page (like removing the facebook link and the spelling of the name) but keep getting hit by edit save conflicts due to the enthusiastic anon IPs. Some of the questionable edits were coming in from the editor Szalazor who seemed to have created his account just to "work" on this page. Me and another editors have dropped warnings on his talk page, hope it deters him. Zhanzhao (talk) 15:25, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem - I've got it on my watchlist now, and I'll take further action if necessary. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:48, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

RIK

I think that I have waited long enough for a response from RIK regarding the Tod edits, so I am going to revert and leave that note. - Sitush (talk) 16:00, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Yep, sounds good -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:38, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

2/19/2012

I don't know which 'we' you are referring to in your note, or why you claim to know of a subject matter that was not previously in Wikipedia. Your signature represents 1 person, it doesn't represent other people, or general media content where the disambiguation page material came from that you are erroneously threatening or hoping to delete!! I request that, unless you're trying to get Wikipedia into suable territory, that you remove the deletion tag immediately. Blurbzone (talk) 21:06, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

The "we" is the Wikipedia community, which has developed polices regarding the content and format of articles, including disambiguation pages - and it is clear that you do not know how Wikipedia disambiguation pages work or what they are for. I appreciate the work you have been doing, and I would have been very happy to help you learn and understand, had you approached me in a collegial and friendly manner. But sadly, you instead chose to bluster and make legal threats. I suggest you have a read of WP:Disambiguation to find out how Wikipedia handles disambiguation pages. Oh, and you are now blocked from editing and will remain so until you withdraw your legal threat -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:15, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

roads in Banbury

Waller Drive (AfD discussion) is right next to Crouch Hill, Banbury, and the same person created both articles, obviously wanting to have articles about local items of interest without knowing anything about local history. I recommend simply pointing the former to the latter, for reasons that should be obvious from the article. Jonathan de Boyne Pollard (talk) 13:31, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

  • That's a possibility. The only problem really is that Crouch Hill, Banbury doesn't mention Waller Drive, and we usually redirect titles to articles that actually mention them. But as William Waller is mentioned, perhaps something like "..and Waller Drive was named after him" might make the link? I think you should suggest it at the Deletion discussion. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
    • It's a fairly obvious hypothesis if one looks at the map. But I don't have anything in writing to confirm it. So I'm not going to write that today. ☺ It's a shame that there's no decent Waller Drive to write about. I'd include it in the test if there were … . Jonathan de Boyne Pollard (talk) 18:50, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

That message

Saw it and chose not to reply. It's by a sockpuppet, see my entry at WP:SPI. And a huge COI I think, all edits by these 3 and the IP are about one fringe author.The article has been created several times recently, twice in the last 2 days (the latest without a capital letter for the surname). I've salted it. Dougweller (talk) 17:13, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah, ok, sounds good -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:14, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Alld2012

Since you are the one who posted the uw-castewarning, you may be interested in this revert that I have just had to make. Alld2012 reinstated what amounts to a fake reference as far as the claim of caste is concerned. I had removed it earlier today, around the time when there was to-ing and fro-ing on the Kayastha article itself. - Sitush (talk) 17:19, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Alld2012#Blocked -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:37, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
OK. It is a bit unfortunate. I did try to explain that they needed to check the sources, not just assume that they were correct. My bet is that they did not do this but relied instead on their personal knowledge & an assumption that the source was ok. It is sad that we even have to check sources like this but, hey, there are some areas of WP where a rather twisted version of AGF seems to be required. - Sitush (talk) 17:45, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, it's sad, but if we want to put a stop to the constant disruption, we need to start being harder on people and use the sanctions we have available. And if he hadn't made a vandalism accusation in the edit summary, I would probably have given him one more warning - but that was an open violation of WP:AGF into the bargain -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:51, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

GOCE March copy edit drive

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their March 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on March 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on March 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goal for the drive will be to eliminate the remaining 2010 articles from the queue. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, Stfg, and Coordinator emeritus SMasters. 19:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

Paravar

As one of those handy uninvolved admins, could you take a look at the recent history of Paravar and see if it might benefit from semi-protection? Qwyrxian (talk) 10:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think so - the disruption is perhaps not major, but fixing it is yet another task that's taking productive editors away from more important things. I've given it a month. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:42, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! Qwyrxian (talk) 13:35, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Admin action needed

Please see the recent history at this page. LeadSongDog come howl! 15:24, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. It doesn't seem clear to me what admin action is currently needed - at least, I see nothing obvious from recent actions on that user talk page. But if you can tell me specifically what you think is needed and why, I'll be happy to consider it. (Though I am unfamiliar with that particular area, so it might be better if you asked one of the admins who has worked in it). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:09, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Looks like it's been dealt with, perhaps by a TPS. Thank you.LeadSongDog come howl! 16:11, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Ah yes, it looks like there were a bunch of rev deletions done before I got to it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:13, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for your kind words in support of my RfA, which was successful and nearly unanimous. Be among the first to see my L-plate! – Fayenatic L (talk) 18:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Very welcome - I'm sure you'll make a great admin -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:25, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

2/19/2012

I don't know which 'we' you are referring to in your note, or why you claim to know of a subject matter that was not previously in Wikipedia. Your signature represents 1 person, it doesn't represent other people, or general media content where the disambiguation page material came from that you are erroneously threatening or hoping to delete!! I request that, unless you're trying to get Wikipedia into suable territory, that you remove the deletion tag immediately. Blurbzone (talk) 21:06, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

The "we" is the Wikipedia community, which has developed polices regarding the content and format of articles, including disambiguation pages - and it is clear that you do not know how Wikipedia disambiguation pages work or what they are for. I appreciate the work you have been doing, and I would have been very happy to help you learn and understand, had you approached me in a collegial and friendly manner. But sadly, you instead chose to bluster and make legal threats. I suggest you have a read of WP:Disambiguation to find out how Wikipedia handles disambiguation pages. Oh, and you are now blocked from editing and will remain so until you withdraw your legal threat -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:15, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

roads in Banbury

Waller Drive (AfD discussion) is right next to Crouch Hill, Banbury, and the same person created both articles, obviously wanting to have articles about local items of interest without knowing anything about local history. I recommend simply pointing the former to the latter, for reasons that should be obvious from the article. Jonathan de Boyne Pollard (talk) 13:31, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

  • That's a possibility. The only problem really is that Crouch Hill, Banbury doesn't mention Waller Drive, and we usually redirect titles to articles that actually mention them. But as William Waller is mentioned, perhaps something like "..and Waller Drive was named after him" might make the link? I think you should suggest it at the Deletion discussion. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
    • It's a fairly obvious hypothesis if one looks at the map. But I don't have anything in writing to confirm it. So I'm not going to write that today. ☺ It's a shame that there's no decent Waller Drive to write about. I'd include it in the test if there were … . Jonathan de Boyne Pollard (talk) 18:50, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


National Atheist Party

What is the deal - I hadn't even finished adding my links from USA TODAY- what is the problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CaptainKramer (talk • contribs) 20:02, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

What is your issue? YOu are going to delete my work before you even get started without asking questions or making suggestions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CaptainKramer (talk • contribs) 20:13, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. The National Atheist Party article contained a significant amount of copyright infringement, and we are obliged to remove such material when we are made aware of it. Also, it was written in too much of a promotional style (written in the first person plural, "We...", for example). So that's two speedy deletion criteria met without even considering the question of notability. If you wish to work on a new version of the article, it will need to be written in your own words, in a neutral and non-promotional way, and in keeping with the WP:MOS style - you can take a look at how other political party articles are written to get an idea. I'd suggest making a draft in your own user space might be a good way to start - then you can ask for review before moving it into article space, and it won't be as open to speedy deletion -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:37, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I am changing content- youd didn't even let me adapt it - I was only 10 minutes in.

You claiming there is copyright infringement is meaningless please provide one example.

What words need to be in my own - when it is relating the mission- I am posting their mission statement- why would I reword their mission statement - how is that unbiased or helpful?--CaptainKramer (talk) 21:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I have replied on your Talk page - it would make sense to keep all discussion there - I am watching it, so I will see it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:29, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

The charter is an open public document for reference filed with the IRS and open for view and use of everyone. You are wrong.--CaptainKramer (talk) 21:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

It is NOT stating that the Mission statement or FAQ are my words it is saying it is the NAP and giving full credit. SO what is your issue with it? Public documents filed charters of non-profit organizations such as the NAP are open for full view and access of citizens by FOIA - this is not copyright infringement. Please point to something that is copyright infringement. You have cost me all my content - why should I have to start from scratch?--CaptainKramer (talk) 21:34, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

On Your Talk Page Please! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Heavy sighing in Mankyland

See User_talk:Moriya and their past edits to Kushwaha. They've also left a note on my talk page. - Sitush (talk) 15:57, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

48h -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:04, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
OK. If it is who I think it is then they'll be back within the next 3 or 4 hours. - Sitush (talk) 16:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Yay! - Sitush (talk) 17:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
IP blocked for 24 hrs - will protect the page if it continues -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:16, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and Moriya block increased to 1 week -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:19, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The article is already semi-pp'd. Given that, protecting the talk page would be unusual. What I need to find out - and have been asking for some time, on and off - is what those who oppose the content think "Kushwaha" actually is. I am merely trying to source an article which was originally unsourced and POV-y but it is not beyond possibility that there are two groups that share a similar name. So far, my research hasn't demonstrated this to be likely, but it remains possible. - Sitush (talk) 18:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
We can semi-p the Talk page for very short periods -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:23, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, but when that happened on one caste article, all hell broke loose. Mind, I think that Mango was in the mix then. Anyway, they're evading again. - Sitush (talk) 21:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
I've temporarily protected the page - after it expires, I suggest revert on sight and not give the troll the platform they want -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:35, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
I've removed all the disruptive trolling, and your replies - I hope you don't mind -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Can I do that without bringing the wrath of ANI on me? I mean, I do revert stuff on articles talk pages but only when it is in breach of NPA or something similar. Otherwise, I either ignore or find someone to whom I can complain and let them deal with it as they see fit. In this instance, as bizarre as some of their points were (ie: trolling), they could be addressed in a rational manner. I have, btw, no problem with your reverts of my stuff - perhaps we are in fact at the WP:RBI stage? - Sitush (talk)
Well, you don't need admin tools to revert trolling (and that's what it was - some of it might have been addressable, but there were personal attacks in there too), so I guess anyone can do it really. But I suspect it might be better to leave it to someone who isn't involved in any actual content discussion - it would at least keep you clear of tendentious accusations -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:45, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Yep. It is the tendentious bit that sometimes makes me leave stuff that ordinarily I would remove. It can be a bit of a bugger but I keep the faith, and things are getting better now that there are more admin eyes etc. - Sitush (talk) 01:31, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

another IP sock

You blocked User Moriya, then blocked 115.242.22.60 for disruptive socking. New IP editor 115.241.166.170 has begun to make the same demands for correction or speedy deletion at Talk:Kushwaha. JanetteDoe (talk) 21:44, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I've temporarily protected the page - after it expires, I suggest revert on sight and not give the troll the platform they want -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Removing residents

As you are unaware of notable residents from rural towns, please do not delete sections as they are being built upon. I will add it again and make it proper, but cite a problem next time instead of removing it.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unlisted-user (talk • contribs) 16:23, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Notable residents must have some indication of notability supported by either a Wikipedia article about the person, or a reliable source, and there needs to be a statement of why the person is notable. Also, we do not add photos of notable residents - that would be undue weight in an article that is not actually about them. If you can show why the person is notable with a reliable source, please do add it back -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:27, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
PS: You might find the Notability guidelines of some use too -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:28, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, modifying now and will provide everything you discussed...including removing the pic — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unlisted-user (talk • contribs) 16:34, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Also, policy (WP:NLIST) says that we also must have a reference verifying the person meets the inclusion criteria; that is, you need a source to prove importance, as well as a source (same or different) that verifies the person is/was a resident of the town. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:38, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Islamic Golden Age

Hi dear Boing! said Zebedeev

They were meant for people like you to correct such vast incorrectness.

1. The commentary was there because I thought it's not a good job to delete all the things that I think is incorrect right away. One should have the time to write another correct one. The commentary just informs people like you, who do correct articles, to go and check what it says.

2. The list was duplicated just to inform the ones that see the commentary that another article says quite upside-down to that. I know I shouldn't duplicate lists (and it wouldn't go in the lead anyway) I usually keep my things very tidy, and I'm not comfortable with that at all.

I didn't have the time to write the whole article, and I didn't think everybody that sees the page will go and check the discussions page to see if there's any opposite view, so it had to be informing.

About attacking, if you knew how much upside-down that article is, (perhaps if it was about your own civilization, what you have seen, heard, and read from a thousand places) you knew the people who wrote that couldn't be just misunderstood.

Sorry if I broke some laws. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord'sServant (talk • contribs) 00:40, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, no problem - I'll make some suggestions at your Talk page -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:42, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


Thank you for the help. I understand what you say about accusations. I'll write some of the reasons that made steam come out of my head on the article's talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord'sServant (talk • contribs) 01:03, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

About your message

I agree with you. There is one odd thing that i was doing which was that my account was jointly operated by me n my cousin. "t" in my user name is her 1st letter in her name. I m very very sorry for all that. You can see my previous edits, in that you wont find anything careless n pettish that hapend today. Now i m not sharing my userid with her. I know that u wont belive me, ofcourse no1 will, but its true n my big mistake. I assure you that i would never do something silly like her cuz i have changed my password. I was wondering 1 thing that can any1 change 1s username? Please kindly rep. Thank You. Again sorry for the trouble caused. Yasht101 14:58, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, a Wikipedia account should represent and be used by only one person, so your cousin should register her own account. And yes, you can ask for your account to be renamed - you can find the details of how to request it at Wikipedia:Changing username. (And good luck with your upcoming exams :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:05, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

my page The shroud of gaia

you deleted our page. all of the information given was verifiable and avaliable online. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garynthompson (talk • contribs) 17:07, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Being verifiable is not sufficient if the article does not make it clear why the band is important enough to justify a Wikipedia article. Have a look at WP:NBAND to see the notability requirements for a band - if they do not satisfy those, I'm afraid they cannot have a Wikipedia article -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:11, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
You r a wonderful admin...thanks for guiding me. BTW i wont change my username cuz 't' can also b used for 'talk page'. Keep up the good work!!! :) Yasht101 07:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that's very kind - and yes, "t" for "talk" sounds good -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:41, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Re: Slovenian Armed Forces

OK, thanks for reply. Regards, --Klemen Kocjancic (talk) 10:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

What do we do about ITF ?

ITF created Punjab Education in 19 and 20th Century a few days ago. It was a complete mess then but I just tagged it alone in the hope that they might improve the thing. I've just been through it now and, aside from the many stylistic issues etc, it consisted entirely of copyright violations from various sources. This is by no means the first time that ITF has done this. Their continued lack of competence despite > 5000 contributions is pretty concerning.

And what do we do with an article that is now pretty much empty? It does potentially fill a gap because our other articles on the subject relate specifically to the post-independence Punjab regions of India and Pakistan, whereas I think that ITF intended this one to represent the Raj period (the title should probably have been Education in the Punjab during the British Raj). - Sitush (talk) 15:37, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I think what's left should probably be tagged for speedy deletion reason CSD:A3, as there is literally no content left. I'll also give him another warning about copyright. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:42, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Boing! said Zebedee. You have new messages at Yasht101's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Yasht101 03:11, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Please note

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ror Is King (talk • contribs) 08:30, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!

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

Sorry for the form mail but you get the idea! :) AshLin (talk) 18:11, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, got it :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:20, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

IP problem at Muslim Rajput

I've just issued a 3RR and sanctions warning to an IP editing at Muslim Rajputs, having discussed the problems on their talk page and the article talk page. They are replying purely by edit summary ... and they are getting it wrong. I have one revert left but am reluctant to force the issue. - Sitush (talk) 21:14, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I've given a warning. I suggest you leave it as it is for now and get opinions from other content editors on the Talk page. Then if you can show a clear consensus, we can take it from there. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:35, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes. Problem is, the Britannica reference is a fake ref. It does not mention the items for which it is being used as a source; and WP:MOSFLAG is quite specific. Still, I'll live with a few days of bleurgh info - there is almost certainly not going to be a meaningful discussion. - Sitush (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Just get someone else on the Talk page to have a look and see if they can confirm the source is fake, then it can all be sorted - without delving into content myself, I'd really need to see a consensus regarding the source -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and if he won't discuss it after being allowed a little time, he can be reverted and will be blocked if he re-reverts -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:40, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
That check might actually now happen. Muhandes has just reverted. Is it acceptable for me to ask Muhandes to check the EB source or would that be canvassing? - Sitush (talk) 21:42, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
If you just ask neutrally for an opinion on the source, that should be fine -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:43, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

Help me

{{adminhelp}}

I would like to request the assistance of an admin. Please advise. Thanks! (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 06:03, 26 February 2012 (UTC))

You'll need to actually say what you need help with, as different admins work in different areas -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:38, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
(non-admin comment) I suspect this is about the previous section here. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:58, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
I don't see anything here that requires admin attention. Joseph, if you have a specific question or concern, please feel free to ask it and re-activate the {{adminhelp}} template. --Chris (talk) 19:03, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks to each of you. Apparently, the other editor (Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556) has stopped harassing me. So, there is no issue at the moment. Thank you for your help and input. Much appreciated. Best, Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:17, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

joining

would you like to join our disscuion its at:User Talk:Worm That Turned/Adopt/Walter55024--Walter55024 (talk) 22:22, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye on it, and will be happy to join in if I can help with anything -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:34, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

just reply there thanks for joining.--Walter55024 (talk) 22:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

1 question

Sir, article Balbash, i dont think will come under G11 as it was not Unambitious advertizment, the writer intented to keep it. I also agree that it was advertising but rather it was mis-information. Cant it be considered under Vandalism as it was obvious nonsense?? Yasht101 09:48, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't really matter - it was getting deleted either way, so I just went with the way it was tagged -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:54, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Okay, but I tagged under G3 and then i saw that it was deleted under G11 so I just asked. I dont know who removed g3 n used g11. Anyways, its not important, Thank You n sorry for disturbance caused! Yasht101 09:57, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Ah, yes, it looks like it was changed by User:Σ from G3 to G11. I think either would have been fine. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Beverly Jo Scott

I've also added CSD G12 to Beverly Jo Scott. Thanks for the help re these two articles. Callanecc (talk) 10:20, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

OK - I've removed the copyvio text and left it as a stub rather than deleting it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:21, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Whatyourneighbourpaid.com

Hello Zebedee

Would you be so kind to give us more insights about the reasons for the deletion of this article ? Whatyourneighbourpaid.com is a Neighbour community fostering sharing among Consumers.

What is exactly the issue there, beyond the name, and what can we do to get our article re-published?

Thanks in advance for your reply — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcvoisin (talk • contribs) 13:25, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. It wasn't the name that was the issue, but a couple of other problems...
  • It was written in a very promotional tone. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and does not host "business directory" type entries. Articles need to be written in a totally neutral, straightforward, factual way, and must not read like they are written by, for example, a marketing department.
  • There was insufficient justification of the importance of the subject. A Wikipedia article must make clear the notability of its subject, and support it with reliable independent sources (that is, sources that are independent of the subject and write about it in an editorial manner). Having had a look at the site itself, the fact that it is still in beta strongly suggests that it will not have achieved the required notability yet.
Relevant guidelines include...
  • WP:GNG for general notability guidelines
  • WP:NWEB for notability guidelines for web-based topics like web sites
  • WP:RS for guidance on reliable sources
  • WP:NPOV for guidance on writing from a neutral point of view
Finally, a couple more points.
  • You talk about "we" and "our". A Wikipedia editor account must only represent an individual person, and generally cannot be used for joint, group, or company accounts.
  • The conflict of interest guidelines at WP:COI might be of interest to you. People are generally discouraged from writing about topics in which they might have a vested interest, and companies, groups and organizations are discouraged from writing about themselves - generally, when you have caught the attention of sufficient reliable third-party commentators, it is likely that someone independent will write an article about you in due course.
-- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:52, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Biased opinion

Hello, Please see who has used the word "Nonsense" first in my talk page, it is Mr Sitush who has used and reverted the sourced historical content from Rajus page. I wonder why you dont see the arrogant comments by Sitush on my talk page first. Wiki is for everyone and every author should be respected, it doesnot belong to some x caste or persons. I respect genuine authors, rules should be same for every one, unless and until some one writes scrap. Indianprithvi (talk) 16:45, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

There is a difference between calling content "nonsense" and calling a person "senseless" - and Sitush marked your additions as "good faith" when he reverted them. You should also assume good faith in return, and discuss your proposed changes on the article Talk page rather than engaging in an edit-war to re-add them after they have been reverted. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:50, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

March 2012

Happy Adminship Anniversary

Wishing Boing! said Zebedee a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 01:10, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
A year already? Wow. Thanks -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:21, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Couple of things

You were quick off the mark on Zack Fuss - I was going to re-AfD it if I found it. Secondly, a technical query. How does one block a user when they've got no contribs? None I can see, anyway. I deleted the user page (created by someone else now spamublocked) which had the same content as the blocked one's page. Obviously a sock account but hardly worth an SPI (quack!). I probably ought to know this, but it's never arisen for me. Peridon (talk) 19:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Congrats, by the way... Peridon (talk) 19:40, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, the Zack Fuss article clearly had no claim to importance, and they were rapidly recreating it. As for the block question, if you go to the non-existent redlinked user page, you should still get the "Block user" link in the Toolbox on the left, and that should still work. (And thanks for the congrats :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:45, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for that - I'll remember it. Never thought to look there. That'll save me time when deleting userpages and blocking the perpetrator. (I spend quite some time following Mean as Custard around. I still plan to get a tee shirt with that on it... Just found one I thought I'd lost - "So many cats, so few recipes". I got seriously told off by a young cousin about that.) Peridon (talk) 20:00, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
"Mean as Custard" is a great name :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:07, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Is twaddle a reliable source?

Well, is it? <g> What a great name! Can you imagine him interrupting a schoolteacher, who then replies "I'm talking, Twaddle!" Me and my schoolmates would have encouraged that sort of behaviour. - Sitush (talk) 20:56, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

That's made my day... Peridon (talk) 21:14, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Haha, excellent :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:17, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Page on Christopher Granville

hi, I think you might have recently deleted a page I made on Christopher Granville, citing copyright infringement. I can confirm that I was given the express permission of Trusted Sources UK Ltd. to cite their website for this page, and am happy to provide proof of this if requested. I can even contact Christopher himself for this if this would help? How should I next proceed? Thanks, Alex — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexharman (talk • contribs) 09:43, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Boing! has already given you the instructions on your own talk page - just click on the blue links in their last message to you there. Please be aware of Wikipedia's attitude regarding conflicts of interest and note that even though content can be copy/pasted from other websites if they have the appropriate permissions etc (described on your talk page), the idea is still generally deprecated. It would be better to use your own words. - Sitush (talk) 10:04, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Yes indeed, I've given you a link detailing how to proceed on your Talk page. Permission given to a contributor, even with proof, is not legally sufficient for Wikipedia to reproduce other copyrighted material. But putting that aside, copying other sources to make a Wikipedia article is very much discouraged anyway - it's far better to write it in your own words (with a citation of the original source). But having said all that, there is another major issue concerning that article - there was insufficient indication of the notability of Mr Granville. To qualify for a Wikipedia biographical article, a person needs to have been written about by multiple reliable sources which independently attest to their importance. Have a look at WP:N for guidance on notability, and WP:RS for information about the kind of source needed to support an article. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:32, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Dear Boing, Thank you very much for this information. This is all gratefully noted. I will rewrite the page using my own words and citing independent sources (there are enough online to do this). Thanks, Alex — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexharman (talk • contribs) 13:35, 2 March 2012 (UTC)


Palmitoleic Acid

Hi

I'd like to make some updates to the Palmitoleic Acid page... I'm a newbie to Wikipeidia, so still learning how it works.

The information about the Breakdown Product is not correct, so I removed it. It looks like it has to do with Vaccenic Acid (not Omega 7) on the surface of the skin, and not a breakdown of Palmitoleic Acid that has been ingested by dietary means... so it's not only confusing it's misleading.

REMOVED: "Breakdown product ~ A 2001 study proposed that omega-7 unsaturated fatty acids, such as palmitoleic acid and vaccenic acid found on the skin surface, were oxidatively decomposed to 2-nonenal, which may be the cause of the phenomenon commonly known as 'old person smell', an odor apparently similar to the smell of old books.[3][4]"

We have conducted a good deal of research on Palmitoleic Acid (a monounsaturated fat with broad pharmacological properties) as well as Palmitic Acid (a saturated fat that is found in meat, cheeses dairy). And I'd like to update the page with our research.

The old person smell does not come from Palmitoleic Acid. It may come result from people who take high dosages of Sea Buckthorn (which is equal parts palmitoleic and palmitic acid). The old person smell may come from people ingesting high quantities of saturated fat (a toxin), and it's a by product of the waste material from the desaturase process. But I can tell you it's not coming from Palmitoleic Acid.

I've got research to show:

Increases HDLs (good cholesterol) Lowers LDLs (bad cholesterol) Lowers Triglycerides Reduces Inflammation Reduces buildup of Atherosclerotic Plaque Increases Insulin Sensitivity Boosts Metabolic Function

May I start adding it? I might need someone to mentor me on how to add references, etc.

Thanks!

Les Proctor 14:02, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. Firstly, I reverted your removal of that content only because there was no explanation for it - when you make a change, you should add a short note in the "Edit summary" box, which you should see directly below the text box itself. And if that is too short, you might consider adding a few words on the article's Talk page (and you could then say something like "See Talk" in the summary box). However, there is still a problem here - Wikipedia does not publish original research. As a encyclopedia, Wikipedia only includes material that has already been published elsewhere by reliable sources, and such sources need to be cited in the article. So if your research has been published by an appropriate source, you can use that to add to articles. But if you only have your own unpublished research, then I'm afraid you would not be able to include it in Wikipedia articles. To learn about how Wikipedia uses sources, WP:RS should help you identify the kinds of sources we'd need, and WP:CITE should help you find out how to cite them. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:31, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi... this is all published research... I've got about 6 different sources... from "Metabolism" and "Lipid World", etc. We've done some of our own research... but we're pulling together a lot of research from others too. For example, we've uncovered research done independently by 2 other published research groups that shows how Palmitoleic Acid is 5x stronger than Omega 3... Thank you! Les Proctor 13:23, 5 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by LesTP (talk • contribs)

If it's all properly published research, it should be fine. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:25, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Please be very aware of wp:NOR, wp:MEDRS and wp:PSTS. In particular, we avoid using primary sources for sourcing of biomedical assertions. We prefer secondary sources such as independent reviews in peer-reviewed journals or prominent textbooks because it helps us avoid hidden selection biases favouring our own viewpoints. Using a source of which you are the author is also clearly not going to help this. Accordingly we have specific guidelines on editing in the presence of a wp:COI, which are significantly different from what journals require. If in doubt about this, I'd suggest a talkpage comment to identify the sources you propose to use. If that doesn't get any response, a query at wikipedia talk:Wikiproject Medicine should do the trick. LeadSongDog come howl! 16:31, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that's very sound advice - thanks LeadSongDog -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:36, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

You were mentioned in an ANI discussion

I brought up your name and just wanted to let you know. Not a complaint, just an observation of your good faith actions. Wikipedia:Administrators noticeboard/Incidents#Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/It Must be Nice Dennis Brown (talk) 21:18, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:39, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

On your marks ...

... get set, go. Or, if you prefer music to sports, there may be trouble ahead. - Sitush (talk) 12:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, OK, thanks for letting me know -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:11, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

And now someone's decided that socking is a good idea

Here. JanetteDoe (talk) 16:52, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

I suspect that was accidental. Now that he's posted yet another unblock request (and I've commented on what I think is wrong with it), I think the best we can do is just leave it for another admin to review now. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:18, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Rajput clans

I think that the IP who was inserting at Rajputs has now registered and is inserting at Kshatriya. - Sitush (talk) 18:18, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Eyes peeled -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:31, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Admin Help!

I made it by mistake while creating page for my editor review. I made a wrong page User:Yasht101/Editor Review and actual page is Wikipedia:Editor review/Yasht101 which i created properly afterwards.

So, Can u please delete this: User:Yasht101/Editor Review Yasht101 09:46, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Sure, it's gone -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! Yasht101 09:52, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Eyes required

If you do not yet have the Meenas article on your watchlist then it would be appreciated if you could add it. There have been some difficulties with a contributor over quite a few days now, and I have just left them a note regarding blanking of user talk pages. - Sitush (talk) 15:41, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, got it watchlisted -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:44, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

Re:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Pol430

Hello, Mr. Boing!

I'm sorry! I've not read that sentence. Thanks for the correction. Sincerely. Wagino 20100516 (talk) 16:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

No Problem :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:16, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Bonzoi in Wikipedia

My name is Armen Chircorian, founder of Bonzoi.com. I have been attempting to create a page, and have been repeatedly unsuccessful. Is Wikipedia interested in knowing what Bonzoi is offering to the whole world? i offered my email through my secretary and need assistance in creating this Wikipedia page. Any content i put was to be a test anyway, as i am entirely unaware of this presentation format. Let's see what the Wikipedia authors can do for Bonzoi in presenting Bonzoi as a page with a description of its services to the world. The Sandbox did not even work for us to test content and see a page, so how would we present data or material to you is really the important question at this point that needs to be answered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.168.211.92 (talk) 18:21, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

  • (talk page stalker) Be sure to read WP:COI before proceeding. While editing articles about yourself or your website isn't strictly prohibited, it is strongly discouraged. Articles are best written by someone who doesn't have ownership or work for the subject matter. Dennis Brown (talk) 18:29, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
    Hi. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and only hosts articles about things that have become sufficiently notable to be written about by multiple reliable sources - it is not a business directory, and is not interested in describing everything that exists on the Internet. The Bonzoi article was deleted because it gave no indication as to why the website was important or notable - and a previous version was deleted because it also consisted of promotional-sounding material copied from elsewhere. To create an article that does not get deleted, you will first need to satisfy the notability requirements of WP:NWEB, and then find multiple reliable independent sources that write about the site in a way that shows that notability - you can find information about identifying reliable sources at WP:RS. Finally, as Dennis Brown suggests, you should read Wikipedia's Conflict of Interest guidelines at WP:COI, which generally suggest that you should not create articles about subjects in which you have a vested interest - if it's notable, it is very likely that an uninvolved person will write about it in due course -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:37, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify March Mini Drive

Delivered by benzband (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Wikify 18:35, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Typo?

Here [16] you say "you will not be blocked", but don't you mean unblocked? JanetteDoe (talk) 20:09, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, got it, thanks! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:13, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Redirect of Talk:Nuclear model

Did you redirect my talk nuclear model as of 11:14 1 March? It says you did but doesn't show up in your history. I'm curious to know how you got involved in this. Thank you.WFPM (talk) 21:40, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, I remember now. It came up at articles for speedy deletion as a Talk page of an article that did not exist (reason G8). I checked and found the article itself had been redirected, so I redirected the Talk page too. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:47, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Oh, the article itself, Nuclear model, was redirected to Atomic nucleus#Nuclear models on March 15 last year, so there hasn't been a valid article at Nuclear model for quite some time -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:51, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
But a deletion noticed was filed on 04:24 1 March and then bang you come along and redirect it at 11:14. Isn't there a protocol that involves some discussion about the subject matter during the notice period? I originally tried to get it into Nuclear model and they pushed me into the talk section. So all you redirected was the name and none of the discussion material.WFPM (talk) 22:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)You'll notice that there is no mention of nuclear models in the articleAtomic nucleus.WFPM (talk) 22:33, 7 March 2012 (UTC)Excuse Me! I did find the section which doesn't merit discussion.WFPM (talk) 22:37, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Speedy deletion is for articles that fall into one of the categories that doesn't need discussion, and a leftover Talk page for a non-existent article is one of them. However, in this case, I redirected it rather than deleting it, and so it is all still there in the history of the page. If you think there is any discussion there that would be relevant at Talk:Atomic nucleus, you'd welcome to copy it over - you can get it from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nuclear_model&oldid=478791686. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:43, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Could you send me that link to my talk page so I could have it in my talk page for further reference?WFPM (talk) 23:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll post it there shortly -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:13, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Problems at Kaul

See this, which is the third time that they have entered this stuff, despite me starting a discussion at Talk:Kaul and twice mentioning some of the issues on the user's talk page. - Sitush (talk) 13:37, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Blocked - will unblock if they agree to not re-add it until they have a Talk page consensus -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:09, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Fine by me, thanks. - Sitush (talk) 14:11, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Oh, btw, I found a list today. There seems to be no end to these various attempts to align names with groups! - Sitush (talk) 14:34, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Sigh! I've commented on the AfD -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:50, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Simon Raymond/ Raphael Bouchier

HI I see you have edited the Simon Raymond page. I have to ask you to add the initial actor Raphael Bouchier to this page. Initially Raphael portrayed a much younger Simon and lived at home with his abusive dad Terry. His Sister Tiffany visited her dad and saw how badly her younger brother was treated and brought him home to Walford. It was then he started his affair with Tony. He was a lot older and Simon and this was another cause of controversy. Due to several complaints by the general public Raphael was replaced with Andrew Lynford who was more Tony's age. Raphael now does the odd acting part and is a successful abstract artist.

Hope you do not dismiss this because this story was a important part to Simon and Tony, Many thanks

Ollie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.195.37.220 (talk) 12:00, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. It was the Raphael Bouchier article I deleted, and I have not edited the Simon Raymond article. I deleted Raphael Bouchier because it looked like a hoax - there isn't a single mention of a "Raphael Bouchier" playing that character, or indeed doing anything of note at all, that I can find via a Google search. It is possible I was mistaken and that there really is a notable actor called "Raphael Bouchier", and it is possible that he played that character. But you will need to provide a reliable source to support your assertion if you wish him to be added to the Simon Raymond article, and you will need to provide sufficient evidence of notability if you wish to create an article about him -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:11, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey you did not even Google Raphael Bouchier and you deleted that page. He is a real actor singer and artist. Please reverse the deletion because you did not even research him. Please do not discredit this actor. Ollie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.195.37.220 (talk) 12:08, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

See my reply to the message above -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:12, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=hts&oq=&hl=en-GB&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GPCK_enGB357GB357&q=Raphael+Bouchier If only you did this before deleting. He has done so much for LGT communities too. I have reported this deletion by email so I hope the deletion is reversed Ollie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.195.37.220 (talk) 12:18, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

A random search of all occurrences of "Raphael" and "Bouchier" is of no use at all. I searched, and I did not see a single reliable source that supports any of the claims you make. However, if I missed it, all you need to do is identify the actual source that supports your claims - the onus is on *you* to provide sources to support your claims -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:34, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Also The storyline that included Raphael was rewritten due to the public outcry and hence he was replaced. If anyone remembers the scene where Tony goes into a gay club and he starts to talk to Simon. Later Simon asks Tony "do you want to come back" Tony says "I dunno" but follows Simon anyway. You then see Simon at the top of the stairs and looks down to Tony and says "coming up" the scene ends with Tony walking up the stairs and the door closes. The next scene with Simon it was not Raphael and but was Andrew. It was a shame but Raphael was a lot younger than Tony and this was another complaint. Ollie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.195.37.220 (talk) 12:31, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

If you cannot provide a reliable source to support your claims, I'm simply not interested - and I have no interest at all in the storyline. So please either provide a reliable source (you really should read WP:RS), or stop bothering me - I shall simply ignore or any further communication from you that does not provide a source to support your claims. (Also, please note that you should not start a new section here every time you wish to reply - just add your comment to the bottom of the existing section.) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:37, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and if you wish to contest the deletion, WP:DRV is that way -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:39, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

뭐래

뭐래니 짱깨냐 짱깨새끼 짱깨짱

짱깨새끼 중화사상 꺼져 짱깨야 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdfsdsdfkdngkjfd (talk • contribs) 14:14, 10 March 2012‎

This is the English language Wikipedia, and I do not speak Korean, sorry. If you wish to communicate with me, you will need to use English -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:19, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Pass a Method and ANI strike

Is this strike appropriate? He's striking one IP's comments but pointing to a different IP, thus somehow connecting the two. I was tempted to revert but don't feel comfortable enough doing so. Please take a look. Thanks. (As I was writing this, the IP reverted Pass's strike.)--Bbb23 (talk) 19:47, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

I've warned him, and will block him if he does it again -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:54, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
I guess my instincts were right, but I prefer to tread carefully, particularly in this area. Thanks for your help.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:56, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
The blocked IP is blocked purely for being a Chinese proxy, not for "stalking" - the IP he struck a couple of times is in Seattle -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:02, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
I came here to alert you to something, but after reading the above it seems that this style of edit may already be familar to you: [17]/ Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes, thanks - I'll keep an eye open as and when I have the time -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:49, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

what da hell man

my articles are good i bet your articles suck — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiggggaaawommmaaaa (talk • contribs) 20:24, 10 March 2012‎

I'll take that as a request to be blocked, and I am happy to grant it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Sorry to butt in but i just cant stay away from commenting. Really its the best reply any stupid editor can get. Good one sir!
:-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:19, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

valdalism

i did not - i put a valuable entry in about the future fa youth cup ties this month — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4evarovers (talk • contribs) 20:42, 10 March 2012‎

You removed half of the article! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:43, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

so changing a few words and adding useful info is half the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4evarovers (talk • contribs) 10:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

No, you also removed 38,023 words from the article. You have just done it again, and are now blocked. I'll explain further on your Talk page -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia suddenly using ads

Hi, Boing! said Zebedee. Do you know why Wikipedia is suddenly using ads? I thought the project was generally against this. I would ask this at User talk:Jimbo Wales, but I feel that one of the administrators there may block me for being an open proxy. And though I will be through with this proxy after today, I'm currently still using it (obviously). 50.17.15.172 (talk) 23:50, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

I've only seen the Wikimania promo, if that's what you mean - and as that's a Wikimedia thing, I doubt they'd include that. Or is there anything else? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:55, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm seeing regular ads, like the type you see at various websites -- video games, food, and so on. I figured it must just be me since I don't see any post about it on Jimbo's talk page, but I wasn't seeing this yesterday. It's happening on Internet Explorer and Mozilla Firefox, and I'm sure that it'd be like that if I opened any other browser. 50.17.15.172 (talk) 00:03, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
That is weird - I'm not seeing anything like that at all (on a Mac using Firefox, Safari or Chrome). And yeah, I'd have expected there to be lots of complaints about the place if everyone was seeing them. Sure you've not been infected with any malware? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:08, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, I'm using Norton Internet Security protection and it says that eveything is clean/safe, so I don't know. I did download a few things yesterday, so maybe I caught something that isn't a virus or otherwise malicious? I don't know, but I'll see what I can do to figure this out or just get rid of it without an explanation. Thank you for your help. What I do know is that at the right-hand corner, it says AdChoices, like at other sites. Looks like legit ads, except that I'm seeing them on Wikipedia. 50.17.15.172 (talk) 00:22, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, AdChoices is Google ads, I think - how bizarre. If you do figure it out, I'd be interested to know what it is. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
I Googled "How to remove AdChoices" and came across this advice suggesting that I install Adblock Plus, as well as this video instructing me how to control AdChoices. I opted out of AdChoices, but that didn't remove the adds. So I went ahead and downloaded Adblock Plus for all of my browsers, which worked. 50.17.15.172 (talk) 01:57, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
The only downside I've noticed thus far is that it makes YouTube look pretty lifeless while using Internet Explorer. I'll have to see what I can do about that. For Firefox, I can disable its use on YouTube (and it doesn't even make YouTube look lifeless whether on or off); I just need to do that for Internet Explorer. 50.17.15.172 (talk) 02:08, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm sure those ads really aren't supposed to be there - I wonder if it's related to the proxy? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:53, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Drama on a caste talk page

At Talk:Khattar, borderline PA. I've added the caste warning template. Also, can you find the link to the specfic rfc or policy decision for removing Indic scripts? I've looked but haven't been able to locate a specific link, which would be useful to add to talk pages when the subject comes up. Thanks. JanetteDoe (talk) 13:17, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I think it's firmly over the borderline, and he now has 1 week in the cooler, with a warning of escalating discretionary sanctions if there is any repeat of this kind of behaviour. I'm really not sure where the Indic script removal decision was made, but I'll look for it when I have the time and will let you know if I find it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:52, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Of course, and thank you for acting so quickly. Itf apparently learned nothing on his break. Also, thank you for the link. JanetteDoe (talk) 17:09, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Yep, I found it, thanks :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:00, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

deletion

I asked for the deletion of the redirect of lee james dewyze as hes never been knowen as lee james dewyze, only lee dewyze, you said it gets a small number of hits therefor its useful, buts that only because people are curious to see another name sake of dewyze, therefor takes you away for were you want to go, try to remeber what it was like to edit wiki for the first time way back when, when you first started out, its people/admin like you who make us never want to become possitive contributers, because every thing we do, even good willed things is overed turned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.28.66.238 (talk) 18:24, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I do not respond to personal insults - I did not accuse you of any bad faith, and I was perfectly civil with you -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:29, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

it was not an insult,and you've just made a vandle out of me, block me all you want, the only thing you'll be do is hinder other users as i have a dynamic ip address — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.28.66.238 (talk) 18:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh come on, I have not accused you of vandalism and have not even hinted at blocking you - stop being so melodramatic! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:36, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Darkness Shines

Telling someone to "f off" is not civil either and several times at that [18] he has been blocked many times for his abusive language which provoked me in the first place to break my 6 month chance but I think its worth it since he agreed not to hurl insults ever again I wont be back any time soon so don't stress over this ip thanks for warning him also instead of turning a blind eye to his abuse 86.182.221.157 (talk) 18:40, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject India Tag & Assess 2012 Contest

Hello friends, we are a number of editors from WikiProject India have got together to assess the many thousands of articles under the stewardship of the project, and we'd love to have you, a fellow member, join us. These articles require assessment, that is, the addition of a WikiProject template to the talk page of an article, assessing it for quality and importance and adding a few extra parameters to it.

As of March 11, 2012, 07:00 UTC, WikiProject India has 95,998 articles under its stewardship. Of these 13,980 articles are completely unassessed (both for class and importance) and another 42,415 articles are unassessed for importance only. Accordingly, a Tag & Assess 2012 drive-cum-contest has begun from March 01, 2012 to last till May 31, 2012.

If you are new to assessment, you can learn the minimum about how to evaluate from Part One of the Assessment Guide. Part Two of the Guide will help you learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template, should you choose to do so.

You can sign up on the Tag & Assess page. There are a number of awards to be given in recognition of your efforts. Come & join us to take part in this exciting new venture. You'll learn more about India in this way.

ssriram_mt (talk) & AshLin (talk) (Drive coordinators)

Delivered per request on Wikipedia:Bot requests. 01:10, 12 March 2012 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 01:10, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Your input

Hello Boing, your input and comments would be very much desired at User talk:Phenomer, as you previous commented on the user's unblock request. Snowolf How can I help? 01:17, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Done -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:32, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Move of Raju

I am not sure that your move of Rajus --> Raju has gone entirely to plan. Talk:Raju looks wrong to me, and we've lost a lot of discussion. - Sitush (talk) 10:38, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh, thanks, I'll sort it out -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:39, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Ah yes, Talk:Rajus didn't get moved to Talk:Raju - it should be sorted now -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Legal threat?

Thanks for sorting out ^ above ^. We have what might be construed as a legal threat here. Almost certainly, it is User:Truthalwaystriumphs, who has tried this exact tactic previously, including the reference to the cybercrime division. - Sitush (talk) 11:57, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Block, revert, ignore (I've done the first :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:03, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Aswinjerry

You may be interested in the new development there, if you haven't already seen it. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 19:36, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, interesting, thanks - TNXMan is a Checkuser too, so he's pretty sure to be right about it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:13, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
I knew I picked up on someone's hosiery, even if it turned out not to be the person I initially thought. I've been deliberately heavy-handed in my dealings in caste articles; it's helped deter a lot of determined, if extraordinarily inept, people. Most other places here I'm much more amiable, but there I've found that I need to make liberal use of admin tools to force a bit of sanity. See you back in the fray. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 03:31, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
I still think that the ultimate sockmaster is Pondheepankar, but certainly in instances of their socking in the last 12 months it has been the case that often they were just blocked on sight rather than taken through the entire SPI rigmarole: the original info may now be stale. Feel free to be less amiable than is your wont elsewhere but preferably not with regard to me! - Sitush (talk) 07:25, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm being quite hard on caste article disruption too, especially now we have the special sanctions as backup - there are just too many of them coming thick and fast to spend all day being super-nice. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:31, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Nangparbat

Is back and using a proxy[19] can you block it please. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Are you an administrator? Block his account for deleting content without discussing. I do not have an account he is lying — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.170.106.45 (talk) 13:14, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I'm afraid I'm a bit too busy to help here at the moment, so I suggest you take it to WP:ANI if you need admin action -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:46, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

A Norwegian foundation

References are being removed from an article about a Norwegian foundation.

This version [20] shows that the foundation/"university" has received about 500 000 U.S dollars from Norway's government (two and a half million Norwegian kroner).

The article comes across as a vanity piece. But keeping the references about the government grants would be a good start to improve the article.

Could someone please give a warning to those removing the references?

How can I access the previously deleted talk page of the "university" article? --Chain of koools (talk) 14:40, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

The material removed was added by a sock of a banned user, so it was correct to remove it, and I will not be giving any warnings. Also, I see you have only just registered today and have immediately entered into an edit-war over that addition made by that user - do you have any comment on that? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:57, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
My reference speaks for itself. (I have added an article from 2012-03-09 as a reference to our wikipedia article: Lysbakken involved in another money affair. Another money affair that links to top names (toppnavn) in political party SV, appeared in advance of SV's annual national conference. NRK reports that former SV-leader Berit Ås has received money for a women's project without applying for the funds, which were given by ministers Audun Lysbakken og Tora Aasland.) --Chain of koools (talk) 22:14, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
That's not what I meant, but never mind - I have no interest in the content of the article, and I see no admin action I need to take. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:40, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Weird AfD close

The close at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pak_Watan seems very odd to me. Do you have any idea why what appear to me to be non-policy compliant arguments should be given sufficient weight as to cause a "no consensus" decision? I must be missing something pretty obvious here wrt WP:NOT etc. - Sitush (talk) 01:48, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks like the close has been self-reverted now. Also, Darkness Shines and Top Gun appear to be pretty dedicated enemies and pop up all over the place to have fights - hence their current interaction ban -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:12, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Touareg tea, moving

The article Touareg tea, the English name is Moroccan mint tea, this would be a better name. icetea8 (talk) 17:29, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

The problem was that you created a duplicate article under the title Moroccan mint tea, and we really don't want two of them. If you wish to move Touareg tea to Moroccan mint tea, I'd suggest starting a discussion on the article Talk page, and if you get agreement then I'll be happy to do the move for you -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:41, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:BLANKING

I noticed this series of edits and thought I'd point out that WP:BLANKING doesn't prohibit removal of current block notices, rather declined unblock requests relating to current blocks. Toddst1 (talk) 23:03, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh wow, you're right! I had the idea in my mind that it included block notices too, so thanks for putting me right. I've reverted myself on that Talk page. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:24, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

GOCE March drive newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive update
GOCE March 2012 Backlog Elimination progress graphs

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! Here's the mid-drive newsletter.

Participation: We have had 58 people sign up for this drive so far, which compares favorably with our last drive, and 27 have copy-edited at least one article. If you have signed up but have not yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!

Progress report: Our target of completing the 2010 articles has almost been reached, with only 56 remaining of the 194 we had at the start of the drive. The last ones are always the most difficult, so thank you if you are able to help copy-edit any of the remaining articles. We have reduced the total backlog by 163 articles so far.

Special thanks: Special thanks to Stfg, who has been going through the backlog and doing some preliminary vetting of the articles—removing copyright violations, doing initial clean-up, and nominating some for deletion. This work has helped make the drive a more pleasant experience for all our volunteers.

Your drive coordinators – Dianna (talk), Stfg (talk), and Dank (talk)

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

Baboons

On the baboon point, some would argue that the IP was not far from the mark ;) - Sitush (talk) 12:53, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

For procedural reasons, it's best if I remain WP:UNINVOLVED on that question ;-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:12, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
As if I give Two Hoots. Oh, actually, I do give Two Hoots! - Sitush (talk) 13:23, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Ezhava

I have no reverts left and User:Ἀλέξανδρος ὁ Μέγας is insisting on creating havoc at Ezhava, albeit they are now reinstating their poor edits in small chunks and within those have so far only committed basic errors such as overlinking and poor phrasing, rather than adding back old material as they were also doing earlier. I am not sure what to do with the uw-castewarning that they have copied over to Talk:Ezhava either. - Sitush (talk) 17:58, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Blocked 24h, and I've reverted the additions to the talk page - they were just several messages copied over from the user talk page, and meaningless on the article talk. I haven't reverted on the article, so as to keep myself out of this particular content disagreement - looks like you've only reverted once in the past 24h. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:18, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
WTF?! How the heck did I miscount that? It is pretty dire if I cannot count beyond one. I've obviously counted something else somewhere. Sorry. Mind, the admin action is still justified on the "slow edit war" basis. I'm just glad that someone has got their brain in gear because I sure haven't. - Sitush (talk) 18:41, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Arbitrary heading

Please dont misuse your powers in blocking innocent people.Omkara1188 (talk) 16:16, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

If you believe I have misused the admin tools, then please feel free to explain why you think my actions were incorrect, and I'll be happy to consider it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:21, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
I've just discovered your message at Talk:Meena - please pay close attention to the message I have left you on your Talk page. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:56, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

DRN and caste articles

See this. Not for the first time, DRN has proved to be a complete waste of time in respect of a caste article. - Sitush (talk) 21:45, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, no - doesn't look like it was a lot of help. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:47, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
I've pondered overnight and decided to query the closure at User talk:Whenaxis#Saini at DRN. If this is to be the habitual outcome then there really is little point in referring such disputes to that noticeboard, other than for the purely procedural purpose of saying "it was tried". - Sitush (talk) 10:34, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
OK - it does seem worth making a test case of it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:35, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, even that was pointless. I doubt that I'll be bothering with it in future. - Sitush (talk) 21:13, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
No, it looks like it's possibly not the best forum for such help. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:51, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Replication lag?

Sir, When i go to see my edit counts, a message appears: Caution: Replication lag is high,. What does this mean, is something wrong in my laptop or so? Also, the list of Articles I created is incomplete. Pleases tell me that y is it happening or is it normal? Thank You! Yasht101 12:14, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. It's normal, and just means the Wikipedia server that keeps track of edit counts hasn't been updated for a while - I'm seeing the same thing too. It usually catches up in a few hours. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:17, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Okay, n my apologies as i always ask for help in small things like this. Yasht101 12:32, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Hey, no worries, you're always welcome to come and ask me stuff here - I like helping people when I can :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:49, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

Irksome IP

An IP (probable sock) has voted in the AFD for Inter-Services Intelligence support for terrorism, I tagged his vote as a SPA which he has removed twice[21][22] As I am unable to revert him again would you be so kind s to inform him that re-factoring comments on talk pages is not on. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:41, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. You can issue warnings yourself - admin action is only needed once they have had warnings and are ignoring them. After that, WP:AIV or WP:ANI might be appropriate venues, or perhaps WP:AN3 if they're edit-warring. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:48, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much ...

The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
For helping me fix a small but very niggly problem :¬)
Chaosdruid (talk) 20:13, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Ooh, thanks :-) Your new pages are looking pretty good. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:37, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, next job is to colour the different rows, but as I only got back today I think that might be a job for another day (though I did find this lol). Chaosdruid (talk) 21:52, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
It's too heavy for me for this time of night :-) But I'll keep an eye on your page and see if you work something out. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:57, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Same here, I have just spent the last hour and a bit trying to get the template to go past 9 tabs.
Success! We can now go to 12 tabs per row - Woohoo!!
I will try and add some colours next, maybe tomorrow though, and drop you a line if I manage it. Chaosdruid (talk) 23:17, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Anon at Rajput, again

User:24.23.165.181 is back doing their thing at Rajput and Satinder Sartaaj. You've blocked them twice before and have also semi-p'd Rajput. Where do we go next? I have been doing some research regarding the Saini article in the vain hope that at least some of these issues might be put to bed over the next few weeks, but I wouldn't hold my breath that it would make any difference re: these individual. - Sitush (talk) 08:01, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I've semi-protected both, for a bit longer this time. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:38, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Sock spotting

I am pretty sure that there is some IP socking going on at Namasudra and have left a note at Talk:Namasudra#Requested move regarding one aspect of it. I would appreciate a review of that note. - Sitush (talk) 14:18, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Bit tied up right now, but I'll have a look later when I have time. First glance suggests the proposed move violates WP:COMMONNAME. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:44, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Slight confusion, I think. My concern is that my note requesting that IPs check out WP:SOCK before !voting might be overstepping the mark. I mean, obviously you are more than welcome to join in the actual discussion but that was not what I was asking to be be reviewed. - Sitush (talk) 17:47, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Nah, it's OK, I understood - that comment on the discussion was a bonus ;-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:52, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Highstakes00

You unblocked this guy, fair enough not a lot I can do about it, how long before I can complain about him stalking my edits? As that is what he is going to do. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:08, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Please let's not condemn people for what they haven't done yet, eh? Should a problem occur, I'm sure you know the appropriate forums by now. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:41, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Your right, I have already told him I will give him the benefit of the doubt. Sorry to have bothered you. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:50, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Hello again. Sal says you may be willing to close out an RFC? If you would be so kind it can be found here Darkness Shines (talk) 16:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
    Hi. Judging consensus and closing things like AFD/RFC/etc is something I have not done before, and I wouldn't do it before I'd had sufficient experience of less controversial ones first, sorry. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:38, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Charlie Fern

How do I recommend that User:Thomasehensel be warned and/or blocked? He is adding himself (same name) as a husband to Charlie Fern, bumping the subject of the article's former husband's name. I've reverted it a several times, and I contacted him twice on his talk page and asked that he discuss any changes on Charlie Fern's talk page. He ignored the request. Help! AuthorAuthor (talk) 19:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I think he just didn't understand Wikipedia's need for sources. He has provided an image of a marriage certificate on his Talk page, and I've used the reference details of that as a source in the article. Yes, he should have discussed it, but I can understand the frustration of people who wish to correct details of themselves and their loved ones, but get reverted. Anyway, I think the current solution is probably OK. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I thought that we could not do this (use GRO data etc) because there is not usually a means of determining which Charlie Fern etc might be referred to on the primary source? It could be someone who shares the name etc. - Sitush (talk) 00:13, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, but I think it's in the grey area that Jimbo is often talking about - a BLP subject or someone close comes along to improve the article, doesn't get the sourcing up too scratch, and gets reverted and frustrated. I think it's OK to leave as it is for now, and I'll try to find better sources for it when I have the time. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:47, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Caste system in India

In case you're not watching it, could you take a look at Caste system in India? It looks like it might need full protection soon. I haven't actually read any of the discussion (or the article), but I saw the matter pop up on Sitush talk page and the history and tone of the comments indicates that if this isn't already unacceptable, it may be soon. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:40, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Yep, I've had a look over the recent edits and at the discussion, and there's clearly some frustration developing. The edit-warring doesn't look like it's going to stop without intervention, so I've fully protected it until the discussion gets somewhere. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:56, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Apostle will come round to the Wiki way but the IP may not. Apostle has done much to improve the thing & is conscientious regarding discussion etc but the article is losing its focus now and I have said as much on the talk page. Perhaps surprisingly, I've barely contributed to that article ... and I intend to keep things that way ;) - Sitush (talk) 00:11, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Is the article protected? I see protection mentioned in the talk page edit summaries but no protection in the article edit history. I see it now, my page must have been stale. JanetteDoe (talk) 03:15, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

CSD

If u r online, can u decline speedy deletion of Darshna Vaghela. He is deputy mayor of Ahmedabad and a new comer tagged it under a7 a1. I m getting inquisitive cuz i m the author of that page. Yasht101 07:35, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks like someone beat me to it :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:14, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Lol.. Yasht101

Flyer22

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

The proxy IP has also posted this on the blocking admin's page. [23]--Wlmg (talk) 13:40, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm just commenting there. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:44, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for giving me the information you did. I understand now about not divulging personal details. I just want to clear this up. It's like fighting Goliath. And I should have known that any support my sister gets would be countered by her enemies slinging mud at her.[24] 210.51.43.82 (talk) 20:29, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
I read Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures#Ban appeals, but it says: 2.Appeals must be submitted by email by the editor blocked or banned, setting out the grounds for appeal and the name of the account affected.
So does that mean that I'm not allowed to make an appeal on my sister's behalf? Should I not tell them what has happened to my sister? Do you know what should be done or should I ask another administrator? 210.51.43.82 (talk) 21:34, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Excuse me, but I have another concern. The line before line number 2 says: The Committee hears appeals from editors who (i) have been banned or are subject to lengthy or indefinite blocks and (ii) have exhausted all other avenues of appeal.
But all avenues have not been exhausted, because my sister hasn't gotten a response to her unblock request from a deciding administrator. 210.51.43.82 (talk) 21:40, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm going to be as vague as possible here while I address the situation. If what you have alleged is true, now is not the time for your sister to be editing Wikipedia. When she is able to communicate for herself she is free to ask for her account to be unblocked. IP hopping and using proxies is not doing anything to help your sister, rather it is hurting any chance she has of getting unblocked. You have asked what you should do in regards to this mess. The answer is focus on your sister offline, and encourage her to come back and deal with this when she feels strong enough. AniMate 21:46, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the response (and for being one of my sister's friends?). How is trying to make things right not helping my sister? I feel horrible about what I've done. I was too cocky and now it's led to this. There is no "if," Mr. AniMate. What I say is true. There are emails where she said goodbye to editors before doing what she did. She's suffering because of what I did here and may never edit here again. If her health fails her, then she definitely won't. I've been at her bedside telling her how sorry I am, and it feels like I should be here saying something too. You have no idea how this feels! I can't even use our real IP to make posts about this because my account is blocked and my real IP would be used by editors like Kim-whatever to sling mud at my sister! If there is truly nothing I can do to help the situation here, I will take your advice, but I desperately want to help clear up things here. Am I allowed to sign up for an account that recgonizes me as Flyer's brother so that I won't have to use my proxies? 210.51.43.82 (talk) 00:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
I understand how you must feel, but an urgent attempt to unblock is not what matters most right now. I don't see any harm in sending an email to the Arbcom address to ask how best to proceed, but if it's not possible for you to address an unblock request yourself, then I agree with what AniMate says - an unblock request can be sorted out when your sister is able to talk about it herself. Above all, for now I'd say keep as much of this out of the public eye as possible and respect her privacy - and really, please stop talking about what happened all over different Talk pages. (In fact, I will probably delete or collapse this section soon, as it is already getting more personal than it really should.) And I really don't see any way that you can create an account that in any way proves you are who you say you are. When the time is appropriate, we can ask for an uninvolved person with Checkuser ability to help investigate the block (I'm uninvolved, but I don't have Checkuser, so I can't help directly - but I'm watching the appropriate Talk pages, and if needed I'll be happy to try to advise and/or contact the necessary people when the time is right). But for now, I'm afraid the best thing you can do really is just to back off for a bit and wait. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:26, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
I came upon this independently of BsZ, but I agree 100% with what he's saying. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:20, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Mr, Boing! said Zebedee, I have been trying to clear her name, whether she stays blocked for a month or is unblocked before then. I don't want to leave things like this, but if it is best not to post about it anymore on Wikipedia, I will follow your advice in that respect. Thank you again for your help. The three of you. 210.51.43.82 (talk) 01:31, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
OK, sounds good. I'm pretty sure things won't just be left the way they are - I'll be watching it myself, and I'll try to keep up with what's happening. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:39, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Can you review my Kaul Article in my Sandbox

Hi Boing! Need you to review my 'Kaul' article in my Sandbox. Am relatively new to the wiki world and have been struggling a bit with what can and can not be included. If you could edit out the specifics that you feel are innappropriate, & leave behind the content thats considered acceptable, I could use that to improve the article on the Kaul Page.'Ambar 03:51, 24 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambar wiki (talk • contribs)

Hi. I have a busy weekend (off shortly to a Wikimedia meet, in fact), but I'll be happy to have a look over it as soon as I have the time - I'll leave any comments over on your Talk page. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:35, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
I've commented on the sandbox talk page. There will be more comments to follow but I'm walking Ambar through some basics first. Enjoy the meet! - Sitush (talk) 10:45, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
OK, thanks -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:48, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

My List

I have created a list and i have included ur name in it. I hope u dont mind that. You can view it over Here! Yasht101 :) 04:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey, that's a very nice thing to do - I'm flattered :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:36, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia for World Heritage

I need your assistance in developing and spreading a wikiproject. Can you help me in developing and spreading this page in wikipedia: Wikipedia:Wikipedia for World Heritage

Thank you and Happy editing! Yasht101 :) 06:55, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Pete Holly

The speedy was removed for an invalid reason ("it's been at AFD before"). This is clearly a slam dunk A7, and having to let it slog through AFD for God knows how long is just process for the sake of process. How is this not A7 material? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 16:15, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

I will reply on your Talk page, to keep things all in one place. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:17, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Which I think is a crock. Say an article gets kept at AFD with entirely WP:ILIKEIT or otherwise invalid rationales. The article itself is one sentence long and makes no claim to notability — which under normal circumstances is primo A7 bait. But oh no, it's had one AFD before, we can't ever A7 it even if the AFD itself was totally devoid of policy based arguments! Does that not seem broken to you? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 16:24, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
All in one place, where it started, on your Talk page -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:26, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

Note

Regarding Xanderliptak, it was actually only 14 months ago, not 2 years ago, that he was permanently put on ice over at commons (and here), thanks to extreme disruption, socking, and also because of the outrageous shenanigan he pulled in order to override the licensing rules and get his own images revoked. Namely, he sent a letter threatening legal action unless they were removed... as alleged "copyright violations".[25] Which is pretty funny, since it was he himself that uploaded them. He was trying to use them to advertise his website, and the other editors wouldn't let him get away with it, so he resorted to sordid means to get his way. He has no business ever being allowed back into any part of wikimedia. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:16, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the info -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:09, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Heads-up

See User talk:Bocjrao. My suspicion, based on anon edits over the last few months, is that this one will burn up pretty quickly. - Sitush (talk) 08:20, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Eyes peeled. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:23, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

MSU/US Education Program: Wiki-Project Management Interview

Greetings, I'm Stephen. I am a student at Michigan State University, and working on an exploration of the Wikipedia adminship process under the guidance of my professor, Jonathan Obar. I am contacting you to confirm our interview, as well as thank you for participating in our project.

You can reply to me via email - as my email address is listed in a Wikipedia email form to you - to confirm the interview. My questions should take no longer than 30 minutes to answer. Thank you again, and I look forward to working with you. Tarucstephen (talk) 15:06, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Got your email, and have replied. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:33, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

a request

You recently deleted Trillium (ship, 1913).

I explained here why I think that was a mistake. I request you restore it. Geo Swan (talk) 16:00, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I've replied at the article Talk page. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:12, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Tak SPI

Dude, what are you smoking? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:09, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not following you - if I've missed something, please explain. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:10, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Aargh, got it - hadn't realised who that was. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:11, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

User:Xanderliptak

Hi there Zebedee: Please can you tell me why you left me a disruptive editing warning? The user's banned from editing their talk page; I'm just an uninvolved admin in the AN/I thread who checked initially to see if he was talk-banned; found he was, and figured you'd just forgotten to blank the talk page (there's no point in leaving his comments/refused unblock requests lying around). Have I missed something? --Tristessa (talk) 17:08, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

And it looks like I blanked Sarek's message above trying to copy to your talk, somehow. Sorry! Please don't hate me! --Tristessa (talk) 17:14, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
I've replied on your Talk page - apologies for the minor brainstorm, but his tendentiousness was getting to me. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
I restored the SPI page, as I doubt you actually wanted to delete it. I did undo your edit, though. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:22, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Ah, crossed in the ether - I was just off thanking you for doing that. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:24, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Categorically nudge nudge

A visualy-impaired Scandinavian wanted a new kitchen, so he hired a builder to do a makeover. Unfortunately, while plumbing in the new sink, the builder's apprentice cracked and broke it. The resourceful builder substituted the L-shaped tray that he used for carrying bricks and to the apprentice's amazement, it worked perfectly. The owner couldn't see what had happened, so he was content with the builder's work.

So in the spirit of "a hod's as good as a sink to a blind Norse", I'll just remind you. --RexxS (talk) 03:00, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Reminded :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:02, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Carte de Freycinet

Your rapid deletion of Carte de Freycinet (1811) was most unhelpful and tantamount to vandalism. I was creator of the English version. A collegue (Peter Reynders) arranged for a historian/tranlator in France (Martine Marin, President of Amis de Nicolas Baudin) to translate that and I assisted in posting. We were unaware that is contravened Wiki specifications. The Freycinet Map/Carte de Freycinet was the first full map of Australia, published in 1811. The cartographer who published it was French, Louis de Freycinet, himself and his family quite important in French history. We were trying to make French as well as English speakers aware of its history and significane. If you look at the article you may have notice a picture of Henry de Freycinet, a descendant of Loius de Freycinet, presenting a signed copy of the map to the Governor-General of Australia, to mark the 200th anniversary of the publication of the map. Rupert Gerritsen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupert Gerritsen (talk • contribs) 06:33, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

This is the English language Wikipedia and does not carry translations of articles into French (or any other language). If you want a French version somewhere for French speakers, you need the French Wikipedia at http://fr.wikipedia.org. If you would like a copy of the French translation restored to your user page so that you can transfer it to the French Wikipedia, I'll be happy to do that for you - but you will need to ask me politely and apologise for accusing me of vandalism. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, please restore French version to my user page and we will put on to Frech Wikipedia. Rupert Gerritsen (talk) 03:35, 30 March 2012 (UTC)Rupert Gerritsen

Done (even in the absence of that apology) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:10, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, we have noted that it is now appears in French Wikipedia in original form, much appreciated, that is a constructive outcome. Rupert Gerritsen (talk) 16:25, 31 March 2012 (UTC)Rupert Gerritsen

Weird redirect

We have an incorrectly capitalised article, FREE PRESS, that has been correctly redirected to a more suitable target. Free Press and Free press also exist. Should the over-capitalised article, FREE PRESS, actually be deleted under housekeeping rules? It looks really weird in the search box. - Sitush (talk) 11:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Yep, I think so. If you search for FREE PRESS, the correct case version matches first anyway, so there really seems to be no need for this one. It's gone. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:59, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Cannot move an article

I cannot move Marwaris to its singular variant because a disambig page, Marwari, exists. Would Marwari (caste) suffice? - Sitush (talk) 11:38, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I think the caste article looks like the clear primary target, so I think it's better to modify and rename the disambig page - leave it with me. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Done - what do you think? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:55, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
The tagline for the old American Express ads comes to mind. Thanks for that, and also sorting out FREE PRESS. - Sitush (talk) 12:10, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Restore deleted subpages

Can you please restore User:Abhijay/Menu2 for me please Boing, because I admittedly deleted it in unintetional if melodramatic anger. Ab hijay  ☎ 13:42, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Sure - consider it done. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:44, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. Ab hijay  ☎ 13:44, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Lastly, can you look into [26], because it appears that Humorthisthat2011 is hurling incivility at me. Ab hijay  ☎ 13:46, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw that. To be honest, I think his badgering of other editors is doing more harm to himself than to anyone else, so I'd be inclined to just leave it for the admin evaluating the consensus to see. I'm quite sure your view will not be discounted just because of anything Humorthisthat2011 says. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:52, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Um...

Here: [27]. The whole thing has gone all over the place, and now from a discussion about Yogesh, to a over-reaction about my comment (I was Abhijay, but I have renamed), then to a block of another user. Care to come in and mediate the situation? I've wasted enough time dealing with those guys by myself, even though I'm not an administrator (and don't have any plans to become one as of yet.) Soviet King (talk) 14:28, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I've added a comment, but I can't act in an admin capacity as I'm already involved. I really would suggest just staying cool and ignoring people who get personal or go off-topic - as I said above, it's harming them, not you, and whoever judges the consensus will be able to see that. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:32, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
(Oh, and welcome to your new name :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:33, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
To be honest, this happens every time TT2011 gets involved in a discussion. It isn't assisted by their sometimes poor English language writing/comprehension but, oddly, it seems only to become poor when they engage in some sort of vehement defence. TT's inability to maintain focus was a part of the reason for their own (now expired) topic ban. I guess we'll just have to live with it. - Sitush (talk) 16:12, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Electric Guest

You deleted the page for Electric Guest. I am trying to find the revision history for the page so that I can add to what was already there information on why Electric Guest deserves an entry in Wikipedia. When you deleted the page, was all revision history deleted with it? The URL that I would expect to give me the revision history tells me only that the article has been deleted. Thanks, Pqrstuv (talk) 16:16, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I've "userfied" a copy for you, at User:Pqrstuv/Electric Guest, so you can work on it there if you wish - there were no talk page comments to restore. What you'll need to do is expand the article and provide sufficient reliable sources to demonstrate that the band satisfies the notability requirements of WP:NBAND. Once you're satisfied you have done that, you can move it back to the article title and hope its survives - or you can ask me to have a look over it for you first and I'll be happy to let you know what I think. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:46, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! -- Pqrstuv (talk) 00:04, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit war - Reply

Hi there BOING, VASCO from Portugal here,

first of all, i am sorry for going against WP guidelines (even though i thought EDIT WAR was three reversions in 24 hours, i have not done that). However, have a look at this WP:FOOTY discussion (please see here first here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Sockpuppetry_FOR_SURE then here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Fighting_alone_out_here_people), i think it can bring some clearing up to you hopefully.

We are talking about a SOCK which does not talk to people, not even indirectly (summaries - he writes NONE). Why should i go to articles' talkpage to discuss stuff when he won't reply the slightest? The original account was blocked, proof he was doing something wrong, and WRONG he still does with the User:Steadyfingers account.

Suggestions (further ones i mean) please! Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 17:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I realise you didn't go over 3RR, but edit-warring short of 3RR is still against policy - see WP:EW. The article had been reported at WP:RFPP with a request that it be protected against edit-warring, but if it is two specific editors, the preferred route is to warn and/or block them, and I had to be fair by warning both of you. Even if you don't believe you will get a response, it is always worth adding a note to a Talk page to say what you are doing if anything is disputed - that way, if it comes to dispute resolution, you can at least show that you tried to communicate but the other editor didn't. If you have enough evidence of socking, then you could file a report at WP:SPI. Otherwise, if you are simply failing to get any communication from the other editor, you could try reporting at WP:ANI to see if any admins there think any action would be warranted. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:37, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Hopefully the person will get it this time (not like User:Pararubbas, i kid you not, had 70+ socks!!). Keep it up - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 15:14, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
    70? Ouch! Yes, let's hope things don't get that bad! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:57, 1 April 2012 (UTC)


Archive 5 ← Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Boing!_said_Zebedee/Archive_12&oldid=1090489173"