Thanks, Any other suggestions that you might have to improve it's usefulness? --.ιΙ Inhuman14 Ιι.( talk | contrib) 01:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That would be feasible... But I would have to learn a lot more coding than I already know. I'm up for a good challenge. --.ιΙ Inhuman14 Ιι.( talk | contrib) 02:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, thanks!
Thanks Audacity for the barnstar. I think you've done a great job with the portal. I'm pretty technically challenged but I think I can take on a small part and help keep at least the FAC section updated. Anything else I can do for FP let me know. Cricket02 03:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Re: CSS for Template:Hidden messages
Hi, I'll take a look at the CSS, clean it up as best I can and make it vertically minimal yet still readable :-) I'll try to get it done soon. Thanks! trisweb(Talk) 18:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the barnstar and the wolfs! (One of these days I'll put one of 'em on my user page ;-) ). One thing, is intentional that the barnstar is without your name, only the date? «SnowolfHow can I help?» 00:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Horay!
Congratulation's! You've earned the trust of the Wikipedia community, good work; and, for the future, good luck. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 09:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thirded ~ Anthøny 18:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC) Anthony is aware that thirded is not even a word[reply]
Congratulations. Here are what pass for words of wisdom from the puppy:
Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. You will always pick the wrong one to do. (See #5)
Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll.
Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block.
Just wanted to say congratulations of your new administration ship. One day, I hope to become one too. Agtaz 05:04, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Audacity
Since your username is Audacity, does that mean your created the program? Or do you just enjoy using it? --The Juggla 13:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey
I don't know you, and you don't know me, but I came around here because you seem to be avery established user (you even have a badge) and I thought you might be able to help me find an admin, only to find that you are an admin. I was looking for some help on the Zutara article. It's an article about a ship in a TV show. By definition almost it cannot pass WP:V and its impossible to discuss the matter in a way that is not in-universe. I nominated it for deletion, but it was turned into a redirect to an article about a character in the show. Anyway, I've read that admins can simply delete articles. So, that's basically what I was looking for Millancad 22:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm awarding you this barnstar of diligence for your combination of extraordinary scrutiny, precision and community service to wikipedia. Wikidudeman(talk) 15:21, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies. I was unaware of how the authentication was done (Blithering newbie as I am). When I find a printed reference, I'll include it. Thanks for your diligence. Unidyne 01:26, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Smile
Hello Audacity/Archives, Hydrogen Iodide has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Smile at others by adding ((subst:Smile)) to their talk page with a friendly message.
Village Pump: Signatures
I agree with the "instruction creep" reminder, even though I am frequently irritated by a few of the artful signatures that seem to shout "Look at me! look at me." (That is my problem, however, and not a reason to make a community rule.) I did want to know how we, as a community, can address the point or control it without making a rule; that is, unless the matter is left to persoanl choice, how can the "community" make its wish (to the extent that there is a consensus in the matter which is, I predict, unlikely) known without making a rule? Thank you for considering this question. While it follows from the approach you suggested at the Village Pump/Proposals, I don't feel its answer is relevant to anyone but me. If you disgaree, please feel free to copy this question and any response you may make, to the appropriate place in the discussion. Bielle 17:31, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the information. I have amended my comment on the Village Pump page, giving credit where due. Bielle 19:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
List of slang terms for poker hands
Thanks for the heads-up. I get this is what I get for explaining why I felt consensus was the way I felt it was. Cheers, WilyD 00:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
July 2007
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, articles should not be moved, as you did to Colorado Springs, Colorado, without good reason. They need to have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. We have some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Note: Your opinion dosen't override Wikipedia policy. see WP:NC:CITY. WP:NC:CITY also overrides WP:MOS. Feel free to move the page back yourself, or another Admin can make the final decision.
Description: "Moved Colorado Springs, Colorado to Colorado Springs."FastLizard4 (Talk|Contribs) 22:40, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I'm a (little) less confused now. I couldn't move the page back myself, anyway, because a redirect page still exists at Colorado Springs, Colorado. Only an Admin could move it back. By the way, how do you get the "AAAAAAAA" behind the Wikipedia symbol like that? It's really cool!
I've come over the term German Virgin several times, as well on-line as in real play.
This is why I chose to submit it. I should have included a link off the bat, sorry for that.
I looked a bit further and found some other references, the main ones are:
http://www.betyouraces.com/24.html
and the German version of wikipedia, funily enough...
I will not submit it again, to avoid clogging up the edit page.
I'll leave it up to you to include the term or not.
Thanks, Nol 83.83.78.182 00:53, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation, Nol. I'm not sure if I personally agree with this, but the consensus seems to be that most sites such as the one you linked to are not reliable sources for terms in the list. Other language Wikipedias are also not considered reliable sources because of their user-edited nature. Λυδαcιτγ 03:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Album Cover Fur
Note that there are images like Image:Jackiedeshannon.jpg which want to transclude the "Purpose" text to expand on a non-standard "Use". Your changes just broke this. Twice. Jheald 18:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, that came out harder than I meant it to. But it is quite good to be able to use "Purpose" to expand on the standard use texts in various circumstances (including the case of a bespoke use tag). Jheald 18:43, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Though, to be fair, there are only 4 images that I've rationaled that do this; so it might be easier just to decide what the template should do, and then re-write the rationales accordingly. Jheald 18:49, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The last few edits have broken the "Infobox" use, which is mission-critical. Can I suggest Template:Album cover fur/development for test versions? Jheald 19:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I still prefer my last version, with the user-expanded "purpose" added after the first two sentences, or after the boilerplate for a standard "use". What was your issue with this? Jheald 19:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Confused
How do you become an administrator, and what do they actually do?
Thanks for explaining moderators to me and helping me out with my article and stuff.
Danielspencer91 22:18, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
hint
Where can a person go to upload wavefiles or such for others to check out?
Logognosis 23:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My postings
While I would agree that with those postings I am promoting a website, it is a wiki project, and I believe directly relevant to the pages I have posted them on. I have not posted them on article pages, only talk pages, where people can discuss things and I don't see what's wrong with it. As I say, it is a relevant and worthwhile wiki project that obviously I cannot do by myself. It needs more people to help, and the most effective way to let people know about something they may be interested in, in my opinion is what I've done. DMajj 11:41, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You gave the edit summary: rv: page didn't even load for me
While there are probably a few reasons the link to that site probably doesn't belong there, that a site is temporarily down isn't one of them. -- Smjg 11:13, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's permanent, as I'm now getting a 404 error from the site. But you're right that if the only issue was a temporary problem with the site I would have commented it out. I was implying that beyond the other reasons for not keeping it - specifically, the consensus that there are far too many ambigram sites to link to all, and that links shouldn't be added without discussion - the page was broken. I'm not sure if the anon editor whose link I deleted will ever read my summary, but I suppose I should have explained further just in case. Λυδαcιτγ 16:48, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The site works for me as I try it now. That suggests it's an intermittent problem, and you happen to be catching it when it's down. But if you catch it when it's up, you'll see that it actually isn't an ambigram site, but a commercial site whose logo just happens to be an ambigram. Hence it was probably right to remove it - you just didn't give the right reason. Still, it's something to consider next time you remove a link.... -- Smjg 17:10, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
MUSTARD
Thank you so much for the help on MUSTARD. would you be so kind as to protect the Wikipedia:WikiProject Music/MUSTARD/Usage and the Sophomore pages? violetriga keeps changing them to his/her standards, and it's becoming quite frustrating.
Bouncehoper 21:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again for the help! Bouncehoper 16:51, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
...hello there again. were you under the impression that the compromise made would involve the inclusion of sophomore in linked instances? that was my impression. i hate to keep bringing this crap up, cuz DAMN am i tired of it, but i just need to know if i'm in the wrong here or not.
Bouncehoper 07:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ok. that's a little bit different than what i thought. so why is violetriga still reverting things?
Subcats are crucial for readability, stop getting rid of them.
You nazi.
Plenty of reasons?
What "plenty of reasons?" That 78% of U.S. cities require dabbing? So what? A high percentage of films require dabbing too, that doesn't mean we dab all films. What other reasons? --Serge 01:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get it, none of those "reasons" are unique to cities. They are just as true for any other article. I don't get it. --Serge 04:03, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, at least Scott admits that he thinks cities SHOULD be treated differently from how other articles are currently treated, and even goes so far as to say that many other articles should be treated the way he thinks cities should be treated. But most of the other defenders of the comma predab convention don't even seem to acknowledge, or perhaps even recognize, the significance of all this. So it's hard to agree to disagree with them. --Serge 05:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of "defenders of the comma predab convention [who] don't even seem to acknowledge, or perhaps even recognize, the significance of all this", check out this entry. --Serge 07:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fair use disputed for Image:Image:CocaColaHiddenPicture.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Image:CocaColaHiddenPicture.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
Yay, we're now officially featured! :-) Thanks for all your help in getting us there! Best, Madder 19:12, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ScienceApologist and my talk page
Hi Audacity,
You're familiar with SA's actions on my talk page. They certainly seemed like vandalism at the time (espc since the thing is not a personal attack on anyone), but now reading WP:VANDAL I'm not sure whether or not it meets the technical definition- mainly because technically SA could have really believed that was a personal attack. On the other hand, looking at the whole situation, maybe one would have to be quite a wikilawyer to say it wasn't vandalism. I'm being asked to offer him an apology for calling him a vandal. What do you think? ——Martinphi (Talk Ψ Contribs) 22:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It would be sincere if I'm wrong. I just don't know that I am. Need second (neutral) opinion, which is why I came to you. ——Martinphi (Talk Ψ Contribs) 01:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Audacity. A new lesson on templates has been written for the Virtual Classroom. It needs some advanced template users/designers to look at it before it goes live (that is, before I announce it all over the place). I was hoping you would take a look at it: User:The Transhumanist/Virtual classroom/Scartol, on Template use and design. I hope to see you there. Sincerely, User:The Transhumanist 04:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Rain forwards.ogg
Thanks for uploading Image:Rain forwards.ogg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
Political hip hop, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Political hip hop satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Political hip hop and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Political hip hop during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ridernyc 20:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron Brenneman and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach.
But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole.
I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my User:Lar/Accountability page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though.
But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment.
Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in this table as a resource for the benefit of all.
Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled.
I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best wishes.
Larry Pieniazek
NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in the Wikipedia administrators open to recall category. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review the change records to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you.
The guinea pigs having said this is good enough, I'm working my way through the A's ++Lar: t/c 21:42, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Zoso.svg
If you believe that this image is non-free, then see to it that it is removed from the Wikimedia Commons, otherwise, it is free-use across this project in any namespace. — Save_Us_229 22:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Help?
I picked you out randomly. Can you point me to someone that has expertise in templates? I want to change a template parameter to a new parameter but preserving the old parameter. --Jeanenawhitney (talk) 02:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As you were a contributor in the last TFD, I am letting you know that ((Maintained)) is again up for deletion. Please review the current version of the template and discuss it at the TFD. Thanks! — BRIAN0918 • 2008-01-30 17:48Z
Bible code (important notes)
Audacity, FYI on the "codes" and primary sources as editors, please review this characterization of the WRR authors from Brendan's partner in MBBK, psychologist and MBBK co-author Maya Bar Hillel. Please consider Brendan's complaints of "bias" in the context of MBBK's own "bias", especially as Bar Hillel is on record as saying (from my memory) "it does not matter what evidence is presented, I do not and will not believe it". Editor Brendan McKay comes with a highly biased POV and a severe WP:COI, and the recent tags added to the article are already problematic. Please keep the article on your watchlist. WNDL42 (talk) 13:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy deletion of Template:Month-3
A tag has been placed on Template:Month-3 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>((transclusionless))</noinclude>).
Audacity, appreciate your attention to the matter, but you are acting too quickly in response to a primary source's complaints.
(1) Please remember that the "other side" is not represented here. I am in the process of contacting through private e-mail some 'semi-disinterested' parties to comment on Brendan's complaints. His issues are important and deserve consideration, but my extensive (10 year) research history in the topic leads me to the considered opinion that they are mostly baseless.
(2) McKay's POV is highly biased and does significant "harm" to the WRR editors, if the article continues to be a coat rack for McKay, as it has been since McKay himself created the article. As McKay is the "attacker" of WRR authors, his POV needs very careful scrutiny. The most important BLP considerations here are protecting the WRR authors from additional damage, under the "do no harm" clause.
(3) Brendan's vague complaints about a "POV" he does not care for do not justify the extensive edits and content removal you performed. His specific complaint can be dealt with by changing three words. His further specific complaints (should he cite any) can be dealt with similarly.
I am well researched and well connected on the topic, I'd ask you allow me to lead this, if you will be so kind. WNDL42 (talk) 16:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again Audacity... FYI, in the brief period of time before McKay posted his complaint, there were three separate anonymous IP edits, one at least ID'd as suspected vandalism. It's common for primary sources to be a bit sneaky in this regard, McKay (creator of the article) can be expected to be a bit frustrated about losing "control" of the article, so we should be aware that this may possibly not be as entirely "above board" as it appears...fyi see these edits, which appear to be representative of the MBBK POV.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wndl42 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for dropping me a note on my talk page...
For now, let me say here that I don't agree that the section removed (which had it's basis in McKay's own original POV version) was "full of POV" except to the extent that it balanced the MBBK POV with the WRR POV. When I found the article, there was a strongly WP:UNDUE weighting in favor of the MBBK POV, and further...what was there somewhat mischaracterized both MBBK and WRR. It was obvious to me that what I found reflected and carried the bias of McKay's original entry, gave undue weight to criticisms of Drosnin, strangely made no mention of Satinover, (which is the only treatment that approaches "scholarly", IMO. In summary, the article I found was merely carrying forward the original MBBK bias to the extent that it was a WP:COATRACK for the MBBK POV. I believe that my first round of edits corrected some serious distortions, such as this:
"The McKay paper did not go so far as to accuse Witzum and Rips of falsifying their experiment, instead it argues that the ELS experiment is extraordinarily sensitive to very small changes in the spellings of appellations. This fact, when combined with available wiggle room, was exploited by McKay et al. to duplicate the Genesis result in a Hebrew translation of War and Peace."
The above two sentences are a nicely weasle-worded, but utterly false statement. De-weasled, the statement above says "MBBK didn't say WRR cheated, it merely showed how their result was false by demonstrating the exploitation technique they used to achieve their false positives", which is, politely, horse mess. MBBK was an entirely unsubtle accusation against WRR of cheating, pure and simple. The evidence for this is Bar Hillel's "Maddness in the method", which I hope you've read carefully.
BTW, I like some of USER:Jimbo Wales edits to the article, like this, and I think that whatever changes are needed are at that level of subtlety. WNDL42 (talk) 15:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on Template:Verylongtalk requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>((transclusionless))</noinclude>).
I have removed the Hennessy Viper amongst others from this list as I dont think they are suitable as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automotive_superlatives - as the editor who put the Hennessy in there, I thought it would be polite if I informed you of my edit. I am not doubting the Hennessy's ability to get from 0-60 in the stated time, I just dont think it is a true production car as per wikipedias guidelines, however I am interested in your opinion in this matter.Sennen goroshi (talk) 14:57, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Help With Ubiquity Records Page
Hey not sure how to talk to people but im trying to launch the follownig page i have ben working on. Here is the link to the article:
Orphaned non-free media (Image:CocaColaHiddenPicture.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:CocaColaHiddenPicture.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
New here
Hi! I saw your name on the welcoming committee pages. Ive been reading all about the style and substance of how to edit, the mechanics of it. And I think I've got that down pat. My thing is I don't know where to start! There's just so much stuff to do I don't know what would be best. Any advice? I don't want to jump feet first into something I shouldn;t be doing and make a fool out of myself. Thanks! Skubanky (talk) 22:17, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Judas Priest - Stained Class.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Judas Priest - Stained Class.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:19, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hatfield Visual Arts College
The Hatfield Visual Arts College article has been vandalised a lot by unregistered users. I've picked an administrator randomly - you - to semi-protect it against unregistered users for the next two months. Thanks DinosaursLoveExistence (talk) 12:43, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (Image:LedZeppelinFourSymbols.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:LedZeppelinFourSymbols.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Clean-up on prop 4!
You know, Audacity, you spend too much time staring at Axolotl eggs and not enough time mopping. ;) Nice to finally meet you in your glorious online janitor persona. I can't wait for my RfA so I can be an internet janitor, too. Until this post comes back to haunt me at said RfA, at which point the universe will explode with irony, but not before scoring me about 15 opposes. I do feel like an idiot that I had to ask what your username was and didn't just search for your IRL name when you mentioned you were a wikipedian. I did search for people transcluding ((User StJohnsUS)), or in category [[Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: St. John's College, U.S.]], but you used a nice, convienent bullet point to prevent either of those awesome versions of my let-me-find-him-by-looking-for-admins-from-st-johns idea from working. My only other idea was to go through all 1,800 admins with Mr. Randi, a nun with a ruler, and a dowser, and I wasn't sure whether that would score any useful hits or just fun ones. Anyway, I hope this post was funny and didn't just make me sound like an asshole. See you around school. ⇔ ∫ÆSdt @ 00:23, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fair use rationale for File:665 backwards.ogg
Thanks for uploading File:665 backwards.ogg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:01, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fair use rationale for File:665 forwards.ogg
Thanks for uploading File:665 forwards.ogg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:01, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
2009
Hartford Meetup: We need your help!
The next Connecticut Wikipedia meetup will take place sometime during April 2009 at Real Art Ways cafe and arts center in Hartford, Connecticut. Please list on the meetup page whether or not you can go. Also please contribute ideas for topics and dates! Hope to see you there! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:39, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I saw this template in Category:Template loop warnings. I write you about it, because you are the only one to have edited it. If you don't intend to use it, you might want to nominate it for speedy deletion as a test using ((db-g2)). I made a very small edit, just to remove the template loop. That should also help to see the template work the way it was supposed to. Debresser (talk) 14:07, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image tagging for File:Timegoldwater.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Timegoldwater.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
I meant to take the brackets out completely. Sorry about that. Btw, has nothing to do with the tool, which is not automated in any way. Any mistake is mine :) --User:WoohookittyDiamming fool! 04:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!
Hey, thanks Audacity for the barnstar. It has been my sincere pleasure to help out in this very small way. Cheers. ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 01:09, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Recall
Your user page states you are open to recall. What is the procedure you use? Thanks! Hipocrite (talk) 16:28, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This message is being sent out to let all listed members of the project know to re-add your name to the members list, as all current names on the list have been erased in order to find out who is still active on the project. WikiGuy86 (talk) 03:30, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:W.A.S.P - Animal (Fuck Like a Beast).jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:W.A.S.P - Animal (Fuck Like a Beast).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 01:39, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Don't remove maintenance tags
Please don't do this. You have a sense of WP:OWN with this article. --Morenooso (talk) 02:37, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Maintenance tag removal is an automatic revert with Template:Uw-tdel1 warning. I gave you friendly advice. You really need to read WP:OWN. --Morenooso (talk) 06:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)--Morenooso (talk) 06:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Let's stay on your page as I'm busy. You're trying my patience. As this admin put it in his [usertalk DIFF, the "signal to noise ratio" you are raising is insignificant. Read WP:OWN. --Morenooso (talk) 16:24, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've read it, and I don't think I should stop advocating a useful change because of it. I posted an invitation for a third opinion at Talk:Backmasking#Refimprove_template. Λυδαcιτγ 04:21, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination for deletion of Template:WelcomeTemplateTable
I have a question for an audio editing expert. Do you personally know a lot about the science of waves, or do you just deal with the program Audacity? Geeky Randy (talk) 03:19, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Karate backwards.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add ((bots|deny=DASHBot)) to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
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, where 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) 04:31, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The New England Wikimedia General Meeting will be a large-scale meetup of all Wikimedians (and friends) from the New England area in order to discuss regional coordination and possible formalization of our community (i.e., a chapter). Come hang out with other Wikimedians, learn more about ongoing activities, and help plan for the future!
Message delivered by Dominic at 08:27, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.[reply]
New Rational Skepticism WikiProject member asking for look at Theosophy entry
Since you are an active participant in the Rational Skepticism WikiProject, would you mind looking over the Wikipedia entry on Theosophy to see if you find any concerns?
I've been ordered to fix the page so that it accords with my understanding of the NPOV policy. I'm happy to do that but I have a lot of work at my job.
Now I've been told that I must make the changes by April 30th or the NPOV tag will be removed. I simply can't learn how to use Wikipedia as a newcomer, become familiar with all the sources, and make the edits if I must do it all by April 30th.
Would you look over the Theosophy page? Also, can you recommend anything? Thanks much,Factseducado (talk) 15:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're invited: Ada Lovelace, STEM women edit-a-thon at Harvard
U.S. Ada Lovelace Day 2012 edit-a-thon, Harvard University - You are invited!
Now in its fourth year, Ada Lovelace Day is an international celebration of women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), and related fields. Participants from around New England are invited to gather together at Harvard Law School to edit and create Wikipedia entries on women who have made significant contributions to the STEM fields. Register to attend or sign up to participate remotely - visit this page to do either. 00:08, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, Audacity. You have new messages at 辻畠's talk page. Message added 14:11, 4 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.[reply]
Hi Audacity, thanks for the cleanup of LLDM talk page, that talk page has grown incredibly large (and is still growing). Is there an easy way to solve this problem, like by archiving it or through some other method?
Also, I was hoping that my new section "Proposed Revisions" be followed by its respective subsections: controversial content, membership numbers,"The LDM" vs "LLDM". I feel it would be easier to keep track if they're presented as subsections the way you did ithere. Let me know what you think. Best, 06:02, 14 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RidjalA (talk • contribs)
Hi Ridjal. Of course: it's your comment, and I've switched to subsections. As for the talk page, I too was thinking about archiving it due to its length, but it looks to me like the early discussions might still be relevant to the current dispute. What do you think? Λυδαcιτγ 06:30, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
True. Maybe archiving might not be such a good idea after all. I can see how it might become a problem if users have to keep resorting to archives for resolutions. I guess I can live with how the page is now, but I'll get back to you should the scroll bar turn into a dot. Thanks again. RidjalA (talk) 07:10, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I do hope that you have taken an interest in editing the LLDM article. We do need more editors for it even if they don't know Spanish. Please continue to frequent the talk page and the article with your edits and input. Thank you. Fordx12 (talk) 15:06, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Personal attacks
Hi, Since you saw his post in the Luz Del Mundo talk page I think I'll ask you this question.
I am starting to feel very uncomforatable with the personal attacks RobertRosen keeps throwing at me. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard&diff=522992379&oldid=522992245 That link is to the dispute resolution where he has edited his original s the Teahouse, but seeing as he has attacked an editor from there who helped me out, I'd rather not drag others into this in case he does the same to them. What should I do? I feel like he is trying to chase me away from editing Wikipedia. Fordx12 (talk) 15:32, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've just asked RobertRosen to please stay civil. Λυδαcιτγ 17:22, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That didn't seem to help, sadly. [1] And RidjalA's [2] and RobertRosen seems to be spreading these accusations to other parties [3]. I admit that I made a mistake by only editing LLDM. I can't account for Ajaxfiore's, or any other editor, habits and account creation. However, is one not allowed to correct that mistake? Now RidjalA seems to be saying that I am here on a mission of some sort of "militancy" and pretty much discounting any opinion I may have. You can have an IP address check on me if you want. As far as I know, no one else in my household has created a Wikipedia account, and I mostly log in at home. I checked up on Ajaxfiore, and the Spanish Wiki version of the article. He seems to have done a lot of edits in computer program type articles and other religious articles there in the past http://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Especial:Contribuciones/Ajaxfiore&dir=prev&target=Ajaxfiore I have no edits in Spanish wiki because it does not interest me http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:Contribuciones/Fordx12 I just want the attacks to stop especially when they are voiced to other parties. Fordx12 (talk) 21:02, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Email
Hello, Audacity. 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.
Nice, fooled me. I think I got it now. Λυδαcιτγ 22:43, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Athelete
I'm sorry about that. I didn't realise that. I'm afraid I'm not too good with Greek etymology. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 08:27, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Atomic theory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Void (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) 12:13, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In case you don’t notice - I left a decidedly unreserved thanks on my talk for you. I am eager and have found a project! Paul Lir Alexander Just an FYI.Albeit27 (talk) 22:59, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Audacity, no need to respond. I just wanted to leave a quick note to let you know I’ve thoroughly studied Help:Minor edit and was going to go back and correct all of my “minor” mistakes (wow those m’s now stick out like a sore thumb!). Upon further reflection, because there are so many, I’m afraid I may do more harm than good. I now realize how do it correctly. Again, I appreciate your help because the quicker I can look like a decent editor the better! I’m now moving on to more closely study MOS! I’ve ordered an excellent book about the article Paul Lir Alexander (previously mentioned) because I’m interested in the subject and there are few and sketchy resources online. I can hardly wait to get to it! My best.Albeit27 (talk) 23:44, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ajaxfiore. My intent with that edit was to provide a version both sides would be happy with. It's unfortunate that that has not turned out to be true, but at the same time I can understand RidjalA's feeling that the quote in question should be included. So after looking at the current discussion I'm afraid I don't really have an opinion on the matter of whether or not it needs to be included - other than to remind all parties to assume good faith wherever possible. Λυδαcιτγ 04:17, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there! I cordially invite you to participate in the request for comment on Talk:La Luz del Mundo. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! Ajaxfiore (talk) 23:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the barnstar
Hi,
I realize that you were paying me a compliment. At the same time, I looked at your userpage and found some things with which I staunchly disagree. So let me start with a question: do you believe that the damage done by affirmative action policies (putatively, "reverse discrimination") is, overall, lesser or greater in real terms (outcomes so far) than that done by racism? -- UseTheCommandLine (talk) 05:18, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lesser, certainly, but what of it? Λυδαcιτγ 05:20, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a solution for remedying the historical effects of racism that noone would complain about? -- UseTheCommandLine (talk) 05:23, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
or rather, that someone would not perceive as damaging to their interests? -- UseTheCommandLine (talk) 05:23, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm not sure; however, what I think is bad about affirmative action is that it may not be in anybody's interest. Its marginal effect is to put worse students in better schools, and while that's clearly bad for other students who would have gotten into those schools, it doesn't seem likely to be particularly good for the worse students either, since they won't be able to keep up with the work. I understand that diversity is valuable but I think in the educational realm you really have to judge people by their minds not their skin colors. Maybe I'm being too idealistic, or maybe I'm just rationalizing a defense of my own interests - it's hard to say exactly what causes one political belief to feel right to us. Λυδαcιτγ 05:33, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I do appreciate that bit of doubt that I see creeping in there. I don't think that "worse students" is an immutable category, and that being placed in a more robust academic environment can bring out the best in a student, even one who does not come in at parity with some or most of their peers. I also don't think that the marginal benefit of being accepted to a "better" school for someone with the benefit of substantial historical privilege is as much as it's made out to be. I'm certainly not saying people should be accepted to schools solely on the basis of their skin colors, but I feel that the "reverse discrimination" term is not useful to the debate over what constitutes an appropriate level of credence to historical factors and cultural norms. In my view, use of the term is often used to squelch discussion of what appropriate weight should be given to the fact that person A displays X amount of academic maturation given a background of deprivation, versus person B who displays Y amount given a background of less deprivation. Please note that I am not making assertions about you specifically. -- UseTheCommandLine (talk) 05:46, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think what I'm getting at can be summed up in a quote by Paulo Freire:
Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.
Happy to continue discussion here, but I think a venue like irc would be better for this. If you happen to be there and wish to discuss this further, let me know. otherwise I will need to try to squelch my unfortunate tendency to want to save the world by bedtime.
Greetings, Audacity! If we have not met, I'm AutomaticStrikeout. I've come here to ask you to take part in the survey at User:AutomaticStrikeout/Are admins interested in a RfB?. I am trying to gauge the general level of interest that administrators have in running for cratship, as well as pinpoint the factors that affect that interest level. Your input will be appreciated. Happy editing, AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • Sign AAPT) 02:35, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting
You are invited to the 2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, on 20 July 2013 in Boston! We will be talking about the future of the chapter, including GLAM, Wiki Loves Monuments, and where we want to take our chapter in the future! EdwardsBot (talk) 10:19, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)
You're invited: Women's History Edit-a-thons in Massachusetts this March
Women's History Edit-a-thons in Massachusetts this March - You are invited!
New England Wikimedians is excited to announce a series of Wikipedia edit-a-thons that will be taking place at colleges and universities throughout Massachusetts as part of Wikiwomen's History Month from March 1 - March 31. We encourage you to join in an edit-a-thon near you, or to participate remotely if you are unable to attend in person (for the full list of articles, click here). Events are currently planned for the cities/towns of Boston,Northampton,South Hadley, and Cambridge. Further information on dates and locations can be found on our user group page. Questions? Contact Girona7 (talk)
You're invited!
NE Meetup #5: April 19th at Clover Food Lab in Kendall Square
Dear Fellow Wikimedian,
New England Wikimedians would like to invite you to the April 2014 meeting, which will be a small-scale meetup of all interested Wikimedians from the New England area. We will socialize, review regional events from the beginning of the year, look ahead to regional events of 2014, and discuss other things of interest to the group. Be sure to RSVP here if you're interested.
Also, if you haven't done so already, please consider signing up for our mailing list and connect with us on Facebook and Twitter.
On May 3rd, the Peabody Essex Museum in Salem, Massachusetts will be hosting a Native American and Chinese Art edit-a-thon from 9:00-5:00 pm. You are more than welcome to attend, as there will be free food and drink, and an outing afterwards. If you are interested, please sign up here, as we would love to see you there!
If you have any questions, please leave a message at Ed Rodley's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.
Adrianne Wadewitz Memorial edit-a-thons
Adrianne Wadewitz edit-a-thons in Southern New England
As you may have already heard, the Wikipedia community lost an invaluable member of the community last month. Adrianne Wadewitz was a feminist scholar of 18th-Century British literature, and a prolific editor of the site. As part of a worldwide series of tributes, New England Wikimedians, in conjunction with local institutions of higher learning, have created three edit-a-thons that will be occurring in May and June. The events are as follows:
We hope that you will be able to join us, whether you are an experienced editor or are using Wikipedia for the first time.
If you have any questions, please leave a message at Kevin Rutherford's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.
Upcoming events hosted by New England Wikimedians!
After many months of doubt, nature has finally warmed up and summer is almost here! The New England Wikimedians user group have planned some upcoming events. This includes some unique and interesting events to those who are interested:
If you have any questions, please leave a message at Kevin Rutherford's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.
New England Wikimedians summer events!
Upcoming events hosted by New England Wikimedians!
After many months of doubt, nature has finally warmed up and summer is almost here! The New England Wikimedians user group have planned some upcoming events. This includes some unique and interesting events to those who are interested:
If you have any questions, please leave a message at Kevin Rutherford's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.
Thanks for pointing that out! Λυδαcιτγ 13:43, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
June 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Caochangdi may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It was just a mismatch between English and Chinese brackets "(）", but thank you BracketBot, you sexy thing ;-) ;-) Λυδαcιτγ 03:53, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Question
May I please ask "when" you moved to Beijing, and if it's permanent? Supersaiyen312 (talk) 21:41, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Supersaiyen312: Certainly! I came here for the first time in February of 2012, and since then I've been back and forth between Beijing, Taiwan and the US, with my stays in Beijing adding up to a little over a year in total. I'm still not sure about whether it's permanent or not - China has a lot of great things going for it, but it's also a hard place to live long-term.
I take it you're interested in Japan? I'm just starting to learn Japanese now, and I went to Tokyo for the first time last month. Also a fascinating country! Λυδαcιτγ 07:20, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for replying Audacity, that made me feel better. Yes, I like a lot of countries in the world actually, the tops including Japan, Iceland, New Zealand, Canada, etc. I'm just curious why you chose Beijing though, not Hong Kong, Macau, or Taiwan? I've never set foot outside the United States, but Taiwan seems like the more innocent place to me if I had to choose. However, I'm no expert on these countries so it doesn't really matter. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 13:27, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Supersaiyen312:My primary goal was learning Chinese, and I had Chinese international student friends in college, so mainland China was the logical place. In retrospect it was a good decision, since people's English is better in places like Taiwan and Hong Kong, and you don't get as many chances to learn Chinese. But China's also a very exciting place to be at the moment - you can see a lot of fascinating changes happening in front of your eyes. Λυδαcιτγ 13:46, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I understand. And my bad about the edit on the article, I feel stupid now, lol. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 13:54, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@208.54.4.231: Thank you! Λυδαcιτγ 12:46, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete my pics
hello, I uploaded a few pics to get a link to explain a few things to ppl i knw online---- but there are some pic like the reference for swimming club that can be and is being misinterpreted so I would like to delete the pics under my uploads! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tekksavvy (talk • contribs) 04:17, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Tekksavvy: I don't see any file uploads by your account - can you link me to the pictures in question? Cheers, Λυδαcιτγ 01:17, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
appreciate if youd check your email address! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tekksavvy (talk • contribs) 10:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@HarbisonSchwartzkopf: Good. Since Wikipedia is not a social network, we should continue this conversation on Facebook, but it's nice to see one of your edits pop up on my watchlist. Λυδαcιτγ 02:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited APEC China 2014, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Occupy Central. 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) 15:20, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Paul Finch
I saw you removed images from "Paul Finch" with this edit per WP:NFCC#8. One of the images you removed has been re-added with this edit . I'm not really sure what to do here. I've been trying to discuss things in good faith with this editor on their user talk page, the article's talk page and at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Wikipedia - what is it good for?, but have not been having very much luck so far. I've tried informing them of various Wikipedia policies and guidelines that are relevant to the edits being made, but it seems as those explanations are falling upon deaf ears. I believe this editor is not intentionally trying to be disruptive, but that is the direction things appear to be heading. I don't want to come off as biting a newbie, but I beginning to feel that a stronger approach might be warranted. Any suggestions on how best to proceed without creating any more drama than necessary? Thank you in advance - Marchjuly (talk) 11:50, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the situation has resolved itself. Cheers, Λυδαcιτγ 05:00, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, another editor removed the image. Anyway, sorry to bother you. - Marchjuly (talk) 06:40, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You were involved in the de rerum natura article. I invite you to the ongoing discussion. --George Ho (talk) 07:50, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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) 10:13, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Revolution 9 backwards.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:50, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Snowblind backwards.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Request for a gentle deletion
A newbie created Vision for learning using wikimedia, a sweet, naive version of Wikimedia + WP:Welcome. I've welcomed them, and I'd like to make the article's deletion (under WP:A10) as un-bitey as possible. You seem to be a gentle-mouthed admin, so I wanted to ask for your help. Proceed as you see fit. FourViolas (talk) 13:48, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind, it's been deleted and it's up to the author to take it personally or not. Have a nice day! FourViolas (talk) 14:14, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Now that I've bothered you, could I have an expert opinion on my behavior at Revolution 60 on February 4th? I'm pretty sure DivineAlpha and I were within our WP:3RRNO rights, but I'd like your thoughts. FourViolas (talk) 14:19, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, sorry for the late reply. Looks like clear-cut vandalism to me, in which case there's no problem with your reverts. Cheers, Λυδαcιτγ 17:48, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are a nice admin who's worked in Music
So perhaps you could work this out without too much biting or bruising. Basically, it looks like a group of academics (led by one in particular?) has been editing constructively, and also writing a big OR paper ([high-quality WP:NOTESSAY stuff) about charter schools and socioeconomic factors in education. (these are live, contentious issues in US education-policy circles, teachers' unions, etc.)
I'm asking you to use magic admin wisdom to 1) make the unencyclopedic content go away, while 2) making sure the authors have a copy saved somewhere and 3) managing to avoid making them hate Wikipedia, and maybe even 4) recruiting an expert or two.
Hi, sorry for the late reply. From a Google search, it looks to me like a pretty clear neologism, so I don't think there's a place for this article here. Which means that WP:AFD is the way it'll have to go... but doing that while avoiding #3 is tough. Λυδαcιτγ 11:24, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In response to Four Viola's and Audacity's notice about deleting the Learning-Disadvantage Gap article, please consider the following points
The Learning-Disadvantage Gap report at first inspection may incorrectly seem like a document of original concepts, especially by someone not immersed in the convoluted world of educational standardized high-stakes testing systems in use today, and the growing movement in opposition to it, but in fact it is not. The anti-standardized high-stakes testing movement is not my own. I am but a pawn in the movement. The Learning-Disadvantage Gap is a collection of original articles and studies that I have accumulated over the past five and a half years from reliable separately published articles not yet compiled in a format easily accessible to the public. Not even the Learning-Disadvantage Gap words and concept is original, as I have borrowed from references as well.
To clear up any possible misunderstanding, the Gap is compiled and written exclusively by myself with technical assistance by my staff. The name, Music Teacher’s Club, is just that, a name, and this is my very first proposed entry to Wikipedia. I am the owner of a music store, Johnny Thompson Music.com, and chair of Parents and Students for Music and Arts aka AllArtsAllKids.org.
Having studied Wikipedia policies I believe the Gap avoids cherry-picking of reference articles in a negative sense and synthesis of combining separate ideas to reach any conclusions. Actually, the report does not reach conclusions other that what is from any of the two hundred plus references. All two hundred plus references are interconnected by one goal: educational equality for all.
I do not pick references that agree with my personal view, rather, I learn first from each and every reference before I report on it. I am the student and messenger, not the teacher. That said, the report may be the first of its kind that combines original works of others that I am aware of.
This is a neutral report which includes reporting on current educational inequities and non-compliances of statutory and education laws by the United States Department of Education.
The collection of two hundred plus references to the Gap consists of works by U.S. Department of Education, K-12 teachers, principals, and district superintendents, university professors and studies, parents and students, civil rights groups, court cases, constitutional attorneys, statistical groups, arts advocacy groups, and more. Just one reference alone includes a list of five hundred plus university professors who as a group are petitioning the U.S. Department of Education specifically to stop test-focused reforms particularly NCLB (No Child Left Behind).
Although written by a potpourri of writers, each with their own expressed views, the goal of each and every reference, and within the stop high-stakes testing movement in general, is equal learning-opportunities for the disadvantaged and all students in America, without regard to their socio-economic and academic standings.
The Learning-Disadvantage Gap, and in fact big Gov’s standardized high-stakes testing, is not generally known by the American public. The national mainstream media has yet to cover the movement and to spark a national debate. That said, there is a substantial and growing grassroots movement, starting on the East Coast, that has tens of thousands of students “opting out” of March and April NCLB, Common Core, and other state test-based no-excuses high-stakes yearly testing. I will mention at this point that my group, Parents and Students for Music and Arts, has a twitter account and am proud to report that the largest independent anti-high-stakes testing group of teachers follows us on Twitter.
I consider this Wikipedia report, an honor should it be accepted, a very much needed public service article. It is my plan to continue upgrading quite often. Currently, we are doing so almost daily. I believe it to be a wonderful venue for educating people on the subject with limited time to invest. Also I believe it is so important that parents of economic and academic disadvantaged kids have a source to learn from that offers hope. The Gap welcomes contributions as well as other points of view from Wikipedia’s very large at-large contributing public editors. We are looking forward to having an active Wikipedia article.
JCharlesThompson (talk) 05:06, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Mr. Thompson. Thanks for your explanation. However, I think your article may still fall afoul of Wikipedia policy (Wikipedia:No original research), specifically insofar as it is "analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources." Would you mind taking a look at that policy and seeing if you still think your article is suitable for this encyclopedia? Λυδαcιτγ 09:43, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Audacity, for your response. To answer your question, please refer to our reply to FourViolas. I believe I have answered the question you've just asked. Thank you sincerely for your input on this matter.
Delete but merge some sources and information into Achievement gap in the United States (as original red-flag-waver). Unfortunately, "[compiled from] reliable separately published articles not yet compiled in a format easily accessible to the public" is a description of high-quality WP:SYNTHESIS, which is firmly verboten. This report is great and useful, but publishing great original research is not what Wikipedia is for.
Nonetheless, I think the article has a lot of usefully collected information which could improve Achievement gap. I suggest Mr. Thompson looks at that article, which has already benefitted from the contributions of many clear thinkers, and adds info from his report where it would be nonredundant and WP:DUE. FourViolas (talk) 15:08, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Hello Four Violas. Thank you for your kind words and advice on your last talk and articles for deletion pages updates. The sticking point is the topic of originality, so let’s see if we can get to the bottom of that. Wikipedia (WP) title of “No original research: OR is used to refer to material for which no reliable, published sources exist.” I agree with that because all of my references are indeed published previously by reliable sources listed in our earlier communication to you. That said, I respectfully ask you to be very specific and quote WP published policies whereby you reached your conclusion to delete.
As stated in my first response to you, “The Learning-Disadvantage Gap is a collection of original articles and studies that I have accumulated over the past five and a half years from reliable separately published articles not yet compiled in a format easily accessible to the public. Not even the Learning-Disadvantage Gap words and concept is original, as I have borrowed from references as well.” In your response you quoted me, “unfortunately, ‘[compiled from] reliable separately published articles not yet compiled in a format easily accessible to the public’ is a description of high-quality WP:SYNTHESIS, which is firmly verboten.” And then you continued that, “this report is great and useful, but publishing great original research is not what Wikipedia is for.” To this, however, I respond that WP publicly states that “synthesis of published material serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources.” My follow-up to that is that all carefully researched references supply their own conclusions and in numerous cases they are direct quotes.
Apparently I was not as clear as I could have been with my quote. I was somewhat clumsily trying to say in the rush to finish my reply that all the articles have been previously published in a format accessible to anyone interested. But to my knowledge – and I may be mistaken about this – I may or may not be the first person to read and compile these original works referencing each and every one on WP. Furthermore, to quote WP again, “to demonstrate that you are not adding OR, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article, and directly support the material being presented.” I suggest that any and all synthesis that is accomplished fully complies with WP policies that we also touched upon in our first direct communication to you on 24 March 2015.
Thank you for your continued discourse. In all due respect, we strongly believe this article merits a stand-alone WP entry and thereby we must ask you to consider our points and that you defend or alter your stance.
JCharlesThompson (talk) 05:22, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Hello again Λυδαcιτγ and Four Violas,
I’d like to start off by saying that I have not always expressed myself clearly and I have given you and Four Violas the wrong impression at times. Once again I want to apologize for that. Music is my profession, not self expression through writing. I always think that people understand what I mean just because I do, but, I will in the future be more careful.
Having once again reviewed WP policies, I want to reinforce that these are also my policies in both letter and intent. These policies include those of OR, synthesis, neutrality, cherry picking, and verifiability of authoritative references with author notability. Some references may already have reached their own conclusions. My job is to give voice only to their experiences and conclusions regardless of my personal opinion. I have edited and removed throughout my article whatever I think is questionable. I continue to include references from the Department of Education taking in to account their differing points of view and stated policies.
If you find another suspect entry please let me know. I have made so many recent changes that my references have become out of place, and I need more time to reposition, add more, and to continue upgrading in general. In addition, your editors will always have the opportunity to revise as WP allows. Lastly, I am likely going to change the title to “Academic-Opportunity Discrimination,” the reasons for which can be elaborated more in future correspondence.
Thank you for taking the time to engage this important article.
JCharlesThompson (talk) 02:54, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Responding to Nakon's deletion of the article "Learning-Disadvantage Gap"
(Hello Nakon) I consider your deletion of the article “The Learning-Disadvantage Gap” a hasty and inappropriate decision as it was based on a single quote that was taken out of context from a 25 March 2015 talk page response in regards to the proposed deletion of this legitimate and informative article.
Please note in my quote, “The Learning-Disadvantage Gap is a collection of original articles,” of which you focused on, I was referring not to myself but rather to the authors of the two hundred verifiable reference articles.
The seventh paragraph of the same communication went on to address specifically these two hundred references as shown here. Here’s the quote: “[t]he collection of two hundred plus references to the Gap consists of works by the U.S. Department of Education, K-12 teachers, principals, and district superintendents, university professors, and studies, parents and students, civil rights groups, court cases, constitutional attorneys, statistical groups, arts advocacy groups, and more. Just one reference alone includes a list of five hundred university professors who as a group are petitioning the U.S. Department of Education…”
The rest of my quote, “reliable separately published articles not yet compiled in a format easily accessible to the public,” explains that while these independently authored articles are currently and verifiably published and accessible to the public through various online and traditional sources, they are now compiled as a quick-read and convenient WP article.
I'm not making an appealing your decision here, asking only for future editor/administrator fairness and to be judged solely on how well the article itself abides by WP written policies. For all that has been said, I appreciate the opportunity to rewrite the article in our user-sandbox which will hopefully establish itself as a legitimate standalone WP article in the future. Thank you, as well as to Audacity, Four Violas, and others.
JCharlesThompson (talk) 02:05, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
File source problem with File:Sergei Lemeshev cropped.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Sergei Lemeshev cropped.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
ATTENTION: This is an automated, BOT-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate your file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 03:00, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for August 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ruth Duskin Feldman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Human development. 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) 10:14, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Audacity. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.
Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.
In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:
Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you. This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
I have nominated Backmasking for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Ritchie333(talk)(cont) 11:32, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins
Hello,
Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A new user right for New Page Patrollers
Hi Audacity.
A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.
It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.
If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Audacity. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.
Technical news
When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.
JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.
A recent RfC has redefined how articles on schools are evaluated at AfD. Specifically, secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist.
Cookie blocks should be deployed to the English Wikipedia soon. This will extend the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user after they switch accounts under a new IP.
A bot will now automatically place a protection template on protected pages when admins forget to do so.
I reverted your change on the above topic, as acids are not
med that way. It would have to have been hydrogen oxaloacetate. The oxaloacetate would be used for salts or esters.JSR (talk) 18:50, 30 March 2017 (UTC)a[reply]
OK, thanks. I wasn't 100% sure if the change was correct, but oxaloacetate redirects to oxaloacetic acid, which I assumed meant they were the same. Do you have a good understanding of their relationship, as there should be something about that in the article? Λυδαcιτγ 22:53, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And that is an oxaloacetate anion, a salt, not oxaloacetate acid.JSR (talk) 23:19, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. I just bolded the word "oxaloacetate", since that seems to be the commonly used name in biochem. Thanks! Λυδαcιτγ 01:11, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Following a discussion on the backlog of unpatrolled files, consensus was found to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on Phabricator.
The BLPPROD grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following an RfC.
An RfC has closed with consensus to allow proposed deletion of files. The implementation process is ongoing.
After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant IP block exemption, consensus was found to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.
Technical news
After a recent RfC, moved pages will soon be featured in a queue similar to Special:NewPagesFeed and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.
Cookie blocks have been deployed. This extends the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.
An RfC has clarified that user categories should be emptied upon deletion, but redlinked user categories should not be removed if re-added by the user.
Discussions are ongoing regarding proposed changes to the COI policy. Changes so far have included clarification that adding a link on a Wikipedia forum to a job posting is not a violation of the harassment policy.
There is a new tool for adding archives to dead links. Administrators are able to restrict other user's ability to use the tool, and have additional permissions when changing URL and domain data.
Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.
An RfC proposing an off-wiki LTA database has been closed. The proposal was broadly supported, with further discussion required regarding what to do with the existing LTA database and defining access requirements. Such a tool/database formed part of the Community health initiative's successful grant proposal.
Some clarifications have been made to the community banning and unblocking policies that effectively sync them with current practice. Specifically, the community has reached a consensus that when blocking a user at WP:AN or WP:ANI, it is considered a "community sanction", and administrators cannot unblock unilaterally if the user has not successfully appealed the sanction to the community.
Thank you message regarding the contribution about the MUSIC article
Thank you for your contribution about the article, Backmasking, featured portal, Portal:Music.
I also impressed that the very well organised user page - Useful pages,Interesting articles and etc.
- It might be a good wiki edit model for the user page. :) Goodtiming8871 (talk) 04:25, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Appreciate the compliments :) Λυδαcιτγ 16:41, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Fuzzy search will soon be added to Special:Undelete, allowing administrators to search for deleted page titles with results similar to the search query. You can test this by adding ?fuzzy=1 to the URL, as with Special:Undelete?fuzzy=1. Currently the search only finds pages that exactly match the search term.
A newly revamped database report can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to request resysop. Please practice appropriate account security by using a unique password for Wikipedia, and consider enabling two-factor authentication. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Wikipedia – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago on 29 June 2007. Since that time, the English Wikipedia has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.
LoginNotify should soon be deployed to the English Wikipedia. This will notify users when there are suspicious login attempts on their account.
The new version of XTools is nearing an official release. This suite of tools includes administrator statistics, an improved edit counter, among other tools that may benefit administrators. You can report issues on Phabricator and provide general feedback at mw:Talk:XTools.
Following an RfC, WP:G13 speedy deletion criterion now applies to any page in the draftspace that has not been edited in six months. There is a bot-generated report, updated daily, to help identify potentially qualifying drafts that have not been submitted through articles for creation.
Technical news
You will now get a notification when someone tries to log in to your account and fails. If they try from a device that has logged into your account before, you will be notified after five failed attempts. You can also set in your preferences to get an email when someone logs in to your account from a new device or IP address, which may be encouraged for admins and accounts with sensitive permissions.
Syntax highlighting is now available as a beta feature (more info). This may assist administrators and template editors when dealing with intricate syntax of high-risk templates and system messages.
Applications for CheckUser and Oversight are being accepted by the Arbitration Committee until September 12. Community discussion of the candidates will begin on September 18.
Following a successful proposal to create it, a new user right called "edit filter helper" is now assignable and revocable by administrators. The right allows non-administrators to view the details of private edit filters, but not to edit them.
Following a discussion about mass-application of ECP and how the need for logging and other details of an evolving consensus may have been missed by some administrators, a rough guide to extended confirmed protection has been written. This information page describes how the extended-confirmed aspects of the protection policy are currently being applied by administrators.
A request for comment is open regarding the structure, rules, and procedures of the December 2017 Arbitration Committee election, and how to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
A new function is now available to edit filter managers that will make it easier to look for multiple strings containing spoofed text.
Arbitration
Eligible editors will be invited to submit candidate statements for the 2017 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 12 until November 21. Voting will begin on November 27 and last until December 10.
The Wikipedia community has recently learned that Allen3 (William Allen Peckham) passed away on December 30, 2016, the same day as JohnCD. Allen began editing in 2005 and became an administrator that same year.
Following a request for comment, a new section has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking.
Technical news
Wikimedians are now invited to vote on the proposals in the 2017 Community Wishlist Survey on Meta Wiki until 10 December 2017. In particular, there is a section of the survey regarding new tools for administrators and for anti-harassment.
A new function is available to edit filter managers which can be used to store matches from regular expressions.
Over the last few months, several users have reported backlogs that require administrator attention at WP:ANI, with the most common backlogs showing up on WP:SPI, WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism.
The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative is conducting a survey for English Wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser.
Hello, Audacity. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.
An RfC has closed with a consensus that candidates at WP:RFA must disclose whether they have ever edited for pay and that administrators may never use administrative tools as part of any paid editing activity, except when they are acting as a Wikipedian-in-Residence or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.
Technical news
A tagwill now be automatically applied to edits that blank a page, turn a page into a redirect, remove/replace almost all content in a page, undo an edit, or rollback an edit. These edits were previously denoted solely by automatic edit summaries.
Arbitration
The Arbitration Committee has enacted a change to the discretionary sanctions procedure which requires administrators to add a standardizededitnotice when placing page restrictions. Editors cannot be sanctioned for violations of page restrictions if this editnotice was not in place at the time of the violation.
Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.
Technical news
CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
The edit filter has a new featurecontains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.
Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.
Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.
Arbitration
The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.
Miscellaneous
A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zhang Yong (politician) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
A proposal is being discussed which would create a new "event coordinator" right that would allow users to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit.
Technical news
AbuseFilter has received numerous improvements, including an OOUI overhaul, syntax highlighting, ability to search existing filters, and a few new functions. In particular, the search feature can be used to ensure there aren't existing filters for what you need, and the new equals_to_any function can be used when checking multiple namespaces. One major upcoming change is the ability to see which filters are the slowest. This information is currently only available to those with access to Logstash.
When blocking anonymous users, a cookie will be applied that reloads the block if the user changes their IP. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. This currently only occurs when hard-blocking accounts.
The block notice shown on mobile will soon be more informative and point users to a help page on how to request an unblock, just as it currently does on desktop.
There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.
Lankiveil (Craig Franklin) passed away in mid-April. Lankiveil joined Wikipedia on 12 August 2004 and became an administrator on 31 August 2008. During his time with the Wikimedia community, Lankiveil served as an oversighter for the English Wikipedia and as president of Wikimedia Australia.
Following a successful request for comment, administrators are now able to add and remove editors to the "event coordinator" group. Users in the event coordinator group have the ability to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit. Users will no longer need to be in the "account creator" group if they are in the event coordinator group.
IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in June. This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team will build granular types of blocks in 2018 (e.g. a block from uploading or editing specific pages, categories, or namespaces, as opposed to a full-site block). Feedback on the concept may be left at the talk page.
It is now easier for blocked mobile users to see why they were blocked.
Arbitration
A recent technical issue with the Arbitration Committee's spam filter inadvertently caused all messages sent to the committee through Wikipedia (i.e. Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee) to be discarded. If you attempted to send an email to the Arbitration Committee via Wikipedia between May 16 and May 31, your message was not received and you are encouraged to resend it. Messages sent outside of these dates or directly to the Arbitration Committee email address were not affected by this issue.
Thanks for uploading File:Hell Awaits backwards.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Orphaned non-free image File:I Remember Larry backwards.ogg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:I Remember Larry backwards.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Orphaned non-free image File:Nature Trail To Hell backwards.ogg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Nature Trail To Hell backwards.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
@Gerda Arendt: Thank YOU! This really put a smile on my face. Feels great to be appreciated :) And I know I've seen you around before. So thank you for your editing and for taking the time to do things like this. Cheers! Λυδαcιτγ 13:19, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank YOU! - Look, - the smile is on my face as well! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:22, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
An RfC about the deletion of drafts closed with a consensus to change the wording of WP:NMFD. Specifically, a draft that has been repeatedly resubmitted and declined at AfC without any substantial improvement may be deleted at MfD if consensus determines that it is unlikely to ever meet the requirements for mainspace and it otherwise meets one of the reasons for deletion outlined in the deletion policy.
Starting on July 9, the WMF Security team, Trust & Safety, and the broader technical community will be seeking input on an upcoming change that will restrict editing of site-wide JavaScript and CSS to a new technical administrators user group. Bureaucrats and stewards will be able to grant this right per a community-defined process. The intention is to reduce the number of accounts who can edit frontend code to those who actually need to, which in turn lessens the risk of malicious code being added that compromises the security and privacy of everyone who accesses Wikipedia. For more information, please review the FAQ.
Syntax highlighting has been graduated from a Beta feature on the English Wikipedia. To enable this feature, click the highlighter icon () in your editing toolbar (or under the hamburger menu in the 2017 wikitext editor). This feature can help prevent you from making mistakes when editing complex templates.
IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in July (previously scheduled for June). This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
Miscellaneous
Currently around 20% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 17% a year ago. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless if you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
Hi! I just came across your personal page, and some information there struck me as inappropriate. It seems to me that referring to other editors by name and mentioning their relationships while they don't mention any personal details on their pages is a form of outing. I am quite surprised that you as administrator did not notice or care. I hope it is just an oversight. Retimuko (talk) 18:53, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, articles should not be moved, as you did to Colorado Springs, Colorado, without good reason. They need to have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. We have some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Note: Your opinion dosen't override Wikipedia policy. see WP:NC:CITY. WP:NC:CITY also overrides WP:MOS. Feel free to move the page back yourself, or another Admin can make the final decision.
Description: "Moved Colorado Springs, Colorado to Colorado Springs." FastLizard4 (Talk|Contribs) 22:40, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:CocaColaHiddenPicture.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
