Archives

1 - 2004 — July 7, 2007 2 - July — Nov 25, 2007 3 - Nov 25, 2007 — March 6, 2008 4 - March 6 — June 1, 2008 5 - June 2 — Nov. 8, 2008 6 - Nov. 8 — Dec. 31, 2008 7 - Jan 1 — Apr. 13, 2009 8 - Apr. 13, 2009 — July 1, 2009 9 - July 1, 2009 — Dec. 3, 2009 10 - Dec 2, 2010 — Sept. 4, 2010 11 - Sept. 4, 2010 — Feb. 25, 2011 12 - Feb. 25, 2011 — Aug. 29 2011 13 - Aug. 29 2011 — Jan. 2 2012 14 - Jan. 2 2012 — Aug. 15 2012 15 - Aug. 15 2012 — April. 11 2014

Hello, the old draft at User:Raafie/17th Construction Squadron which you found has been loved a bit and should now survive an AfD. I am not sure of the protocol for taking an article off someone else's page. Can you help or advise? Thanks for finding this. AWHS (talk) 11:23, 17 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for working on this. It looks good now. To launch the article, simply move it to mainspace. Do you think there is a fact embedded in it which could be used for DYK? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 11:42, 17 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See also the comments at User_talk:AustralianRupert#17th_Construction_Squadron. --John Vandenberg ^(chat) 01:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Certificate IV in TESOL, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page TESOL (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) 11:58, 20 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi John! Discussion on this proposal seems to have fizzled out; should we post it to Central discussion for some more progress? — Pretzels ^Hii! 18:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at Bonkers The Clown's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Bonjour John, j'ai remarqué ton intervention sur la page francophone Canada aux Jeux paralympiques d'été de 2012 et en consultant ton profil anglophone, je constate que tu es un australien. D'abord toute mon admiration pour l'équipe féminine de basket de ton pays. Dans un match très physique et difficile ( elles n'ont marqué qu'une seule fois dans le dernier quart), les australiennes ont tenu tête aux américaines. Elle ont remporté la demi-finale 40-39 et passent en finale pour la médaille d'or. (C,est mieux que mes canadiiennes). Cet après-midi l'équipe masculine de ton pays affrontent les États-Unis. Bonne chance en cette fin de Jeux paralympiques. In this afternoon the Basketball men's team of your country face the United States team. Good luck. Can be one finale Canada - Australia --UQAM-basket-HP-Sauce (talk) 17:56, 6 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also related: User_talk:LauraHale#Removing_update_template

Please stop the disruptive tagging. Instead, WP:SOFIXIT and spend the two minutes to fix these articles. The IPC sources are readily available. If you want to continue with the disruptive tagging, then at the same time, please ding back the assessments.

on further thought...

... I'll leave your tagging alone. I accept your update tags as a contract with the HOPAU project that in the next month, you John Vandenberg, will be cleaning them up yourself, that you are putting them up merely for your own reference so that you know which articles you will be updating. I will wait for you to update them and remove any further tags yourself. I'll start working on these articles again when you've finished your updates to all the articles you plan on tagging. I thank you for your efforts improving these articles and your willingness to do content improvement. --LauraHale (talk) 04:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you look at my contribs Laura, you will know that I am helping the wikiproject by updating some and tagging others, either with ((update)) or putting As of (({1))}^[update] when staleness is reasonable. They all need to be updated, and of course I don't have time to do them all immediately. The competitors and readers deserve to know that we are aware that these articles are not yet up to date. If you no longer want to help update them for a month, that is your own business. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:50, 15 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

fyi: User talk:Jorm (WMF)#main page redesign.

• Wikipedia:2012 main page redesign proposal/Br'er Rabbit

Br'er Rabbit (talk) 02:37, 18 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• screen shot's a bit out of date :/

With Wikipedia:2012 main page redesign proposal now “closed” and “evaluation” next, few will much understand my submission as they will not be seeing it with the CSS. And the screen grab missed the bottom, the TFL, and doesn't allow seeing the effects of resizing the page. This can be rectified by adding:

importStylesheet("User:Br'er Rabbit/sandbox.css");

to the bottom of:

MediaWiki:Common.js

(just above the dire comment that insists on being the final line;)

Terima kasih, Br'er Rabbit (talk) 04:33, 1 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at Koavf's talk page.
Message added 03:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.Reply[reply]

—Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:55, 21 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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.

Kiss FM Australia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Flemington, Frankston, Mornington, Laverton and Daylesford

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:50, 23 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This edit warrior is removing relevant links from the see also section and making some kind of racist remarks by stating their not persian.[1] Afghanistan is NON persian country but multi-ethnic and majority are NON persian. Afghanistan's constitution states that pashto and dari are the official languages of the country and pashto is also the 2nd major language of pakistan. Not only this, but the culture (especially dress code) of afghans and pakistanis is very similar if not the same. There are also upt to 3 million afghans living in pakistan, and there is free movement between both nations, including heavy trade and everything else. It makes perfect sense to leave the pakistani scout links. He leaves tajikistan and iran but removes pakistani link. please re-block User:Kintetsubuffalo.

Ah, that stupidity... Okay, the reason Iran and Tajikistan are listed is, first, that they are Persic cultures. There is no reason to list Pakistan, as there is a perfectly fine infobox at the bottom which points to the same. Further, Pakistan has always been a member of the world organization since 1950 without a break in continuity. Iran and Afghanistan have both been members and kicked out several times, for political reasons or unrest, though the official line is "nonpayment of dues", and Tajikistan is a member but the membership is tenuous. Pakistan is not related to any of this in any way shape or form. This is some sort of weird WP:POINT-pushing by the IP. It's like someone posting in the article on Titanic that their cousin was an extra in the movie. Great, so what? I'd sooner do away with any "see also" section than let just anybody put random and in this case unrelated information on there. It simply isn't germane.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 15:41, 27 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wow, and being accused of racism, that's fun. That point alone makes this a perfect cap to a rough day.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 16:03, 27 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, thanks for getting back to me. Over at Ittihodi Scouthoi Tojikiston, the intro says "Tajikistan is the only one of the three Persian nations thus far whose Scouting is recognized by WOSM (see Afghanistan and Iran)." It doesnt have a source, but I think this relationship between the three could be an important aspect of all three articles, if some sources can be found for this. And the exclusion of Pakistan is then justified. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:50, 28 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Afghanistan scout association is not persian and Afghanistan is not a persian nation but afghan and its official language is pashto.[2] Afghans feel insulted when you call them persian/farsiwan. In some cases they will attack. The afghan scout's name "Da Afğānistān Sarandoy Tolanah" is not persian but pashto/pashtun. "The Scout Motto is Tayar Osay, translating as Be Prepared in Pashto." Pashtuns (afghans) who speak pashto make up the majority in Afghanistan and come as 2nd largest in Pakistan. Tajikistan's scouts are connected to soviets (russian scouts) while afghanistan's and pakistan's are to America. Therefore, excluding Pakistani scouts from the "see also" section does not make any sense unless the remover has a special agenda.--39.41.157.73 (talk) 17:33, 29 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Conversation at User_talk:Ldavis_(WMF)#Education_program_effectiveness

Contains a generic link to Google.com , was this meant to be a specific preview? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:02, 15 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was a specific preview six years ago ;-) I dare say its changed since then. Its not important except as an attribution of where it came from. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 11:05, 15 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK , It was that I was considering an effort to de-googlise Wikipedia in time Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:24, 15 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Becker Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rabbit Proof Fence (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 19 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

John, I've presented an interpretation of the results of the proposal in which you've posted a number of times. As a senior editor, would you be willing to comment on this, and if you see fit, to collaborate with other editors on finalising a way forward? Tony (talk) 15:09, 20 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• The discussion, but you will not find the cause there which I don't know. Guesses here and here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:00, 21 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

more about a sinking ship --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:10, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you!! (RingARoses (talk) 22:54, 22 October 2012 (UTC))Reply[reply]

I see you're involved in some DYK discussions so I wanted to share this experience with you.

• This new article popped up [3] -- I suggest you read just through the end of lead, where I predict your ears will prick up. Sensing trouble I marked it //underconstruction// and jumped in.
• The article's original author (Found5dollar) was upset by my removal of certain things -- basically some campus legend plus some WP:UNDUE. This RSN post [4] by Found5Dollar gives you the general idea.
• There were three or four other points of contention, the details of which don't matter. (If you're interested -- but not necessary -- check out the Talk for the blow-by-blow and/or the current version -- mostly my work but Hertz1888 gave good help as well.)
• With that as background, what I want to bring to your attention is the series of edits described here (reading from point (3) down to the post beginning "Please don't abandon ship...").
• If I'm reading things right, DYK won't consider an article unless it's new (or substantially expanded) within something like 5 days, and yet the article has to be clear of cn tags and so on. This almost guarantees conflict. Found5dollar thought he had a fine article ready to go. In my opinion it wasn't -- and it certainly wasn't ready for a pointer from the main page. That's a matter for discussion of course, but what we don't need in such a discussion is for one of the discussants to be under some stupid time pressure from some stupid rule about featuring "new content" -- content that's supposed to come out of nowhere and be perfect and tag-free instantly.

Use the above any way you want, if you think it will help. Some related thoughts:

(1) I don't see the main page much, but when I do look, I think a lot of the DYKs are strained, stilted, lame, or all three, and the articles behind them are typically fair to bad, and sometimes embarrassing.

(2) DYK is "Wikipedia's newest content." But how does it help WP to tout that? I have a different idea. Why not forget the "new content" angle and let DYKs come from any content in need of expert attention, and use DYK as a vehicle for attracting such experts (or at least people with a vague interest)? Let's see, how to put this... Make the "Did you know" quesiton no longer a rhetorical one -- something like Did you know this obscure fact?... Because if you did know, you may be especially suited to helping develop this article... See what I'm getting at? Anyway, just an idea.

As I finish up I stumble into the "Template talk:Did you know/removed/\reinstated``/review/upsetnominator" morass. Who are these people? All this falling all over each other to review pages before the reach some phony expiration date, with this tiresome QPQ beancounting thrown in to make it even sillier. What a waste of effort and brainpower!

Cheers. EEng (talk) 06:16, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I could show you many examples of similar problems. The DYKers usually correct the worst examples, but not always. Right now there is a discussion about copyvio that was placed on the front page. Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Our lead hook on the main page leads to Investigation of potential copyright issue / Template:Did you know nominations/Muhlenbergia pungens. I cant comment for you; please go to Wikipedia_talk:Did you know and add your two cents.

Regarding articles needing expert attention, the community will want a proven system before adding something new to the front page. It would be good if the WP:Help desk produced a daily list of tough questions which are not (yet) answered in a Wikipedia article. If the daily list of questions proves to entice experts to read and assist (and I suspect it would), and the list is well maintained with new questions, we could start to give the list higher profile, and finally request that it is added to the front page. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 09:46, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My proposal was unclear. I'm not suggesting adding anything new to the main page, rather a change to the DYK criteria so as to stop encouraging the creation of slapdash, mediocre, Potemkin articles. My suggestion is that DYK articles:

(a) Should be, for the moment, stable i.e. editors already active have put their major energy into it for now -- so that (unless it's already FA) new blood might help

(b) Should be sufficiently unembarrassing to be linked from main page -- this should be defined in terms of the mainstream CBA-Good scale, not some DYK-only criteria -- which my experience above suggests actually militate against article growth and development.

• I'm thinking maybe B-class or better, perhaps plus special check for copyvios and BLP problems.
• A little note on the DYK section might remind readers that these articles, like most, are not FAs and could use help from new editors. "And if you already knew the DYK factoid, you might be the editor this article has been waiting for!"
• Thus articles needing expert attention should be especially good DYK candidates, but this wouldn't be a requirement..

(c) Need not be new content. Indeed, new content will rarely meet (a) and (b)

As I said I don't see wading into the DYK discussion swamp, unless you strongly encourage it, but I wanted you to understand correctly what I had in mind. Cheers.

EEng (talk) 04:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Advice please (after all)

There's really something wrong with these peoiple [5]. Remember, we're talking about [6] (current version) vs [7] (judged "good to go", "well written" and "nice article" for DYK purposes). I really don't care for myself as long as they don't come after me, but this walled garden of self-reinforcing DYK mediocrity is far worse than I thought, and something should be done. I'm tempted to suggest that they either either open a RfC or put a sock in it. What do you suggest? EEng (talk) 07:17, 6 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I'm a bit busy this week. I'll take a look next Monday. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 05:48, 21 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, I was beginning to think I'd offended you with the Pepys bit. Before you spend any time on this let me post an update here for you, but suddenly they've decided to put John Harvard statue on main page 13 hours from now, so I've got a lot to do, and it will be a day or two more before I can post here again. In the meantime, entertain yourself by reviewing this absurdity [8] which is scheduled to be linked from the main page in the next few hours [9] and which was approved [10] with the comment, "The article is new enough and long enough" -- I guess the DYK criteria don't include "in English enough" or "intelligible enough." EEng (talk) 03:05, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/PumpkinSky

Wanted to let you know that I quoted you. - jc37 18:26, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks mate. More questions than answers, unfortunately. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 00:19, 24 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you enlighten me? [11] Prioryman (talk) 03:18, 28 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There's a follow-up question if you'd care to take a look. Thanks for the earlier explanation. Prioryman (talk) 04:30, 28 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	Australia and the world
	Thank you for years of service, adding countless quality articles on literature and journals, in Australia and the world, creating disambiguations pages, caring about people, - you are an awesome Wikipedian! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:05, 29 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Terima kasih. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 14:02, 29 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at NeilBallantyne's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Hi John, I'm not sure if this was ever webcast but I think its relevant to your earlier inquiries. Victuallers (talk) 09:58, 2 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at Billyash's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

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.

Disabled sport in Australia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Rehabilitation and Victoria

2006 FESPIC Games (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to South Pacific

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:36, 11 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would you consider running? --Anthonyhcole (talk) 04:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not a chance in hell. I have more than enough on my plate, especially now that I'm happily married now. :P John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I knew it was a long, long shot. Congratulations btw. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 06:19, 17 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Diary of Pepys, Christmas Day 1665:

To church in the morning, and there saw a wedding in the church, which I have not seen many a day; and the young people so merry one with another, and strange to see what delight we married people have to see these poor fools decoyed into our condition, every man and woman gazing and smiling at them.

EEng (talk) 13:01, 17 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited National Paralympic Committee of Indonesia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Senayan (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) 17:22, 24 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Congratulations on your engagement! Kaldari (talk) 12:03, 26 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Erm, forward one step (after engagement comes...) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regarding this confusion, could you do a history merge for us? The user will be back tomorrow, so I will have a chat. --99of9 (talk) 11:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've gone ahead and history merged the two pages. Graham87 14:26, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Graham. --99of9 (talk) 19:09, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So, are you passing through Singapore between 26 November and 6 December? If not, I think we may arrange the next Singapore meetup sometime later. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 14:39, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I wont be coming to Singapore. Sorry; I only found out yesterday. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:16, 30 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem. Thanks. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 19:00, 30 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi John, I have just posted these questions to Coren. They include quotes from you so I thought I should advise you about them. Regards, EdChem (talk) 10:50, 30 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Follow up - Coren's responses aren't exactly informative on some aspects of the events, so I'd be interested in any comments you might wish to make. Regards, EdChem (talk) 06:17, 2 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I doubt I could add more that Coren has. He now justifies his block because Giano was "offensive and denigrating". Enough said. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 06:39, 2 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS: In your view, was the F&A block an example of the uberadmin problem that I quoted in my questions? EdChem (talk) 06:26, 2 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes. Note that both blocks occurred when Coren was a candidate for election. This is how he impresses people. Not by writing articles. He has seven edits to main namespace in the twelve months, but only three were even his own contributions to content. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 06:39, 2 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I read that Pending changes are on at English Wiki. How about Wikisource? So look at this. I am beginning to mistrust Wikisource. Can pending changes work there? How rampant is vandalism there?

I am not that active here, and not even there, but this vandalism is just amazing. Some protection is needed, else Wikisource cannot be trusted as one reads it. History2007 (talk) 00:22, 2 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am thrilled that enwp now has WP:PC enabled. Wikisource uses s:Help:Patrolled revisions (see also Wikipedia:Patrolled revisions, which was rejected here), but that AS Bible page and many like it are part of a wasteland of old texts without scans. Wikisource is moving to s:Help:Proofreading of texts with scans. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:47, 2 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok, thanks. I will post for help in watching them. History2007 (talk) 10:48, 2 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you very much for sending me the invitation to LangCamp 2012. However, is it possible for me to join while I am not a Balinese or Minangkabau native speaker? NoiX180 (talk) 14:24, 4 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I'm going, and I'm not even a native speaker of Indonesian. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:37, 4 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Hi NoiX180, yes, you should apply. You have been active on incubator, wiktionary, wikisource - all useful skills and experience that will help in both OER and incubator streams of the workshop. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 14:45, 4 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your recent articles, including Advice Polack, which I read with interest. When you create an extensive and well referenced article, you may want to have it featured on Wikipedia's main page in the Did You Know section. Articles included there will be read by thousands of our viewers. To do so, add your article to the list at T:TDYK. Let me know if you need help, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 21:56, 7 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

G'day Piotrus, do you think it is ready? Also, do you have any idea about the copyright status of his police bio pic? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 06:26, 8 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I thought I was doing you a favor but now I'm not so sure [12]. I leave it in your hands. I wonder whether the officer's name shouldn't be simply omitted as BLP1E, especially if this is destined for DYK. (In fact I wonder if a situation like this shouldn't be a contraindication for main-page hyperexposure.) EEng (talk) 23:04, 8 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For the record, I would never have made this [13] change, even with its edit summary advertising its uncertainty, had I not known you were active on the article and would revert if necessary -- if you'd dropped out of sight I would have likely reverted it myself. In other news, I believe that even Australian's don't form plural's using apostrophe's [14] ;P. EEng (talk) 05:24, 9 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No worries. You raised good points. I am still not happy with the part about the prosecution and identity of the person, so I have dumbed it down to what sources agree on. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:32, 11 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It just simply won't work. I can get the button to appear but it won't do anything when clicked. Rcsprinter (natter) @ 16:52, 10 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I also have the same problem, I asked before but never got a response. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 17:06, 10 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please don't ignore me John, I find it rude. Rcsprinter (talkin' to me?) No, I'm Santa Claus! @ 22:49, 24 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry. It needs to be rewritten. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 00:11, 25 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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.

Andrew Fee (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Rochedale

Demotywatory.pl (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Polish

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 12 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

...for finding a good compromise between myself and the editors opposed to linking Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting and Chenpeng Village Primary School stabbing. —Entropy (T/C) 08:23, 17 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No worries. Thanks for starting that discussion; I've been thinking it needs to be discussed, but haven't had the heart to do so. This is heart wrenching stuff. :-( John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:31, 17 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It definitely is. Nonetheless, I'm glad that editors are still willing to improve pages like this. —Entropy (T/C) 08:47, 17 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your recent articles on the subject. Perhaps you'd be interested in the topic I raised here: Wikipedia_talk:POLAND#Restoring_Polandball. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:33, 17 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Replied there. --John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:36, 19 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And then created this [15]? Seriously? I'm quite appalled and very surprised.VolunteerMarek 20:44, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Please do not make articles about a living person that are entirely negative in tone and unsourced. Wikipedia has a policy of verifiability and any negative information we use must be reliably sourced, and our articles must be balanced. Negative unreferenced biographies of living people are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. VolunteerMarek 20:59, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Have you actually ever read WP:DTTR?

You'll have to make allowances for John Vandenberg -- perhaps his two years on Arbcom so sapped his mental powers that obscure policies such as BLP are just a blur to him now. For myself, I know BLP tolerably well, I copyedited the article top to bottom about a week ago, and I have no idea what you could be talking about -- in what way was the article derogatory? And in what sense was it "unreferenced", as your template implies? EEng (talk) 04:55, 18 December 2012 (UTC) P.S. I'll be asking another admin to undelete. ([16])Reply[reply]

Yes, I know John's history. Which is exactly why I was so surprised by this. The whole thing was one big disgraceful BLP violation, including the inclusion of the subject of the attack meme in bold letters in the first sentence of the lede. And it was "sourced" to crap sources, like NIE (weekly magazine), which is basically the Polish paper equivalent of Encyclopedia Dramatica. Not nice, not right, not policy, rightly deleted. VolunteerMarek 05:04, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

And btw, the template was posted because policy requires that article creators are notified via the use of the template, no more nor less.VolunteerMarek 05:05, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't believe that anything you've said even remotely rises to G10. But no doubt we will soon learn what others think. And btw, policy does not require "that article creators are notified via the use of the template, no more nor less" -- "not right, not policy", in your words. Even experts would do well to brush up now and then. EEng (talk) 05:36, 18 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

When you add in the db-blp tag it says "Please consider placing the template: ((subst:db-negublp-notice|Monkey|header=1)) ~~~~ on the talk page of the author." - well, ok, not a requirement but a strong suggestion. If John's offended by the use of the template then my apologies. Doesn't change the fact that the article was rightly deleted on BLP grounds.VolunteerMarek 07:07, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Offense has nothing to do with it, but it calls into question your understanding of policy and ability to apply it with common sense. Because something you insisted "policy requires" turns out in fact to be a "strong suggestion", one wonders whether the content you call "a BLP violation" might turn out to be merely something you would have handled in a different way. Anyway, as I said I'm sure we will soon hear what others think. Why don't we leave it at that in the meantime? EEng (talk) 14:15, 18 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@VM, sorry I have been busy with other things, which I consider more important than trying to engage with you on this, especially after it was deleted so quickly. The article was not a BLP vio, nor was it an attack page or unsourced negative bio, especially not after EEng had worked on it (see section above). It covered the facts, and described him as a model citizen who was a very unfortunate victim, using sources unrelated to the meme in order to do so[17]. It contained many sources other than magazines like NIE and Hiro, such as Fakt.pl & TVN24. He is providing these sources with info, and interviews. He has accepted that in order to fight this he needed to out himself and enter the public arena, because legal approaches were not working. The only concern that I believe you could have justified is that it gave too much weight to the story of the man behind the face, and not enough to the meme itself, but trimming of the bio part could have been addressed with discussion, and by adding more about the meme (of which there is plenty of material, but its not an easy topic for me to work on given most sources are in Polish). I favour including more about the person, as that helps the reader understand the effect that this has had, and the legal reality of this type of meme. Waking up to find it's deleted by you're misuse of CSD is not cool. I expected better. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:34, 19 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The guy has stated that the meme has already affected his job and career as well as personal life. Your version of the article (I do agree that EEng's version was better - but that's starting from a very low point) had the guy's - who's obviously a non-notable person minding his own business and who did nothing to deserve what happened to him - name in bold in the first sentence of the article, together with details about where he lives. And a whole section under the guy's real name. Honestly presenting this as "helping the reader understand the effect that this has had" seems... not sure what the right word to use is... "sketchy". Why? Who went and decided that you're the one who gets to pick which innocent people are to be used as examples of a point about internet memes? Better just not give extra exposure to this thing, per a meta-DFTT kind of thing. Coupled with the extremely ... sketchy sources, and the fact that there really is no way to present this non-notable meme without violating BLP, it was prime material for a speedy.

Quite frankly I thought about making a bigger stink about it (bringing it up at WP:BLP or other venues), since a person with your experience should really know better, but I didn't want to create a Streisand effect for the guy. So having it speedy deleted on BLP grounds seemed - and still seems - like the best outcome. VolunteerMarek 04:12, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Why are you discussing about some old version of the article no one's promoting? Beyond that JVdb's post just above yours answers all your points. In future, if you're... not sure what the right word to use is... to explain your thinking, then perhaps you should give it more thought. Anything which can be thought clearly can be expressed clearly. End transmission <bleep>. EEng (talk) 12:07, 19 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

JVdb, I leave the sourcing controversy to you. You're better at dealing with the self-certain than I am. EEng (talk) 14:49, 19 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I gave in to the temptation to continue engaging on the article's Talk. I swear I'm giving it up now. You keep so much more an even keel than I in the face of foolishness, I hope I haven't said too much you find distasteful. I call your attention to my edit summary here [18] which I think lets the air out of the whole BLP nonsense. EEng (talk) 03:40, 20 December 2012 (UTC) P.S. I still have some things to say re DYK... someday.Reply[reply]

Comparisons to Hitler are a bit distasteful. :P I've found VM to be quite a good editor over the years, especially on BLP topics, so I think it is better to discuss this one slowly but thoroughly, and I'm sure we'll get a good solution on the talk page. As it seems VM feels quite strongly about this one, I expect he'll invest more time to win the content war than you or I combined can spare, so content editing before discussion will fail. I also expect he'll send it to WP:AFD before long, so I've asked other editors to join the discussion with a note over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland#Restoring Polandball. btw, I dont mind when regulars who should know better template me; it usually indicates they were hyperventilating about it at the time and couldnt be bothered talking rationally. I've done it once or twice myself. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 05:18, 20 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

John Vandenberg, I know you've been active in the improvement of the articles Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting and Chenpeng Village Primary School stabbing. A consensus still has not been reached as to whether the speculation in several sources suggesting the events were linked somehow should be mentioned in the articles. I think a vote may be necessary to determine whether or not it's included.

Despite the lack of consensus, an admin closed one of the discussions. I tried contacting the admin who closed it but he still believes closing the discussion was the right choice, and that I could talk to another admin.

The fact that this is still being discussed here, here, and here, plus the fact that the Chenpeng Village article currently mentions the Sandy Hook article and that no clear consensus has been reached, means (in my opinion) the discussion on the Sandy Hook article ought to be re-opened. —Entropy (T/C) 03:29, 18 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm going to defer to others, esp. Dennis Brown, on whether it deserves a mention on the other article. I have mostly been looking at sources about China, so I have only a subset of the sources about Sandy Hook in my mind, making it hard to judge weight and I dont have time to focus on Sandy Hook at the moment. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:03, 19 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cheers. M1921 (talk) 17:49, 18 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No worries. ;) John Vandenberg ^(chat) 23:45, 18 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at Ronhjones's talk page.
Message added 02:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.Reply[reply]

 Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 02:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Atv-logo.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:10, 21 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	Merry Christmas
	Hey John, hope you like your first Christmas in Indonesia. It's... a little different than back home. Ask the Mrs about how "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" is considered a religious song. :-S Keep safe over the holidays, and merry Christmas! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:26, 21 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you please take me off whatever list your bot is using for your Melbourne meet-up notices. I have been asking for a couple of years to be removed form the notifications list, have long ago removed myself from the "interested" list, asked Steve Zhang to stop sending them to me and at this point I consider it unwanted spam. I am no longer even in Australia, let alone Melbourne, and have zero interest in these notices. Thanks. Sarah 16:38, 27 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

just fyi, the list was built from Category:Wikipedians in Victoria, of which you are a member. To avoid others spamming you, you could remove yourself from that category as it is no longer true. However for my own part, I will build a safety check into my bot so it doesnt ever hit your talk page again. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 23:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

however, I'm still happy to receive posts about Victoria. I just don't care to receive notices about Melbourne meet-ups. It's not like my status as a Victorian disappears suddenly because I am based elsewhere, nor do I suddenly stop spending any time in Victoria or having family there. I don't think it's fair or right to assume every person listed in that category wants to be spammed about meet-ups in Melbourne. As I said to Steven a year or more ago, it would make much more sense to use that cat as a basis for inviting people to sign up to the "interested" list and then using the list for sending invitations. Especially when there is no warning on the category page that using that cat will open you to being spammed about meet-ups in Melbourne. Just a thought.74.137.161.81 (talk) 18:01, 28 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

re your membership in the Victoria category, that is fair enough. Regarding the Melbourne meetups and notices thereof, I'll leave that to the people running the Melbourne meetups.

I decided to 'spam' all people in Category:Wikipedians in Victoria this time, as this meetup will be (I hope) not a typical meetup, as the entire WMAU committee will be in town and the 2013 plan will be heavily discussed. It is highly desirable to have as many people attending and participating, including people who may not be interested the usual monthly meetups. Regional or rural Victorian are often in Melbourne during this period, and vice versa, and some people in the Victorian category may live in Melbourne but havent found the Melbourne category that was created ~18 months ago.

For this specific event, I personally would rather one or two complaints rather than one or two people saying 'If only I had known' afterwards. That said, I am sorry that one of the complaints is from you, as I should have remembered to exclude you per your previous complaints. Hope you're well and had a good Chrissy and have a great 2013. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 07:35, 29 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mr Shit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dominion Post (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) 11:27, 29 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See Talk:Edwin Mellen Press. Dougweller (talk) 18:30, 2 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I notice that you have a writeup of the Ulam Quarterly in your User: space. While upgrading the article on Stanislaw Ulam, I put in a link to your writeup, but after a few months, it got removed. It seems that links between Article and User spaces are prohibited.

Is there any chance that you would be willing to make the page an article? I think it is already good enough, and it might be improved by other editors. If you do move it, please let me know, so that I can link it to the Ulam article. Thanks Deer*lake (talk) 19:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unfortunately Ulam Quarterly is not very notable as a journal, despite a few papers that attracted interest for about one year.

The journal editor is also considered not-notable, so it is hard to find a home for this information.

There have been a few conversations about this journal and journal editor, which you can find at special:whatlinkshere/user:John Vandenberg/WIPs/Ulam Quarterly and special:whatlinkshere/Piotr Blass. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 22:25, 4 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your reply. Certainly the content and longevity of the Quarterly are not notable, but I think its status as an early attempt at electronic publishing and as a tribute to Stanislaw Ulam is somewhat notable. I was unaware of the situation regarding the 'journal editor". After looking at the links you provided, I have just left the reference (with link) to the Quarterly's website in the article Stanislaw Ulam. However to document the articles's statement "....which was one of the first online mathematical journals", I have used your reference to the conference paper "Some Aspects of Running a Free Electronic Journal". Thamks again. Deer*lake (talk) 17:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Never heard anything again after emails from you about it... what happened? oh an email reply would be fine... SatuSuro 05:40, 7 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

seeing that I had been invited, and was close to going - it would be useful to understand what actually eventuated SatuSuro 09:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Can't say what John's up to, as I'm waiting on a reply too. He's a little busy right now though, if I'm not mistaken. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:14, 10 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

yeah socialising in sydney - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney/January_2013 at this very minute... SatuSuro 09:25, 10 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• And introducing... someone. I'd enjoy Sydney... or Western Australia. I had an invitation to do my doctorate there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm in meetings today but I should arrive home in Armidale tomorrow. Can't do much before then. Communicating via talk pages on phone is painful, esp. as my battery keeps dying.

SatuSuro, I would prefer questions relating to LangCamp to be over at v:Langcamp, so they are all kept together and others can help answer. Also, that is where a steady stream of information is being collated as people have time. Some of the attendees and some non-attendees have been busy on their respective projects. Most academics and educators involved have have marking to finish, and been on holidays since the event.

ok so now I know something about where to look, will look SatuSuro 09:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Talk:LangCamp_2012 looks like a better link... SatuSuro 12:41, 11 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Crisco, I'm working on it. Will finish reviewing it on my train or bus trip home, and action it as soon as I get home. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 01:05, 11 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Alright, thanks. Enjoy the land of the exploding trees and drop bears. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:07, 11 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

gawd dont the canucks show up their geographically challenged views of the land of vegemite :( SatuSuro 09:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• One of the two is true  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:35, 11 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear John,

it is now one year since WikiProject Open Access was started by User:Bluerasberry on January 10, 2012. Since then, the project has advanced modestly, but we have not interacted much. For the coming year, we certainly want to improve on that.

We also plan to overhaul the project pages to make them more conducive to collaboration, and we are pondering the idea of expanding the concept of a WikiProject Open Access to projects other than the English Wikipedia, e.g. to other languages or to Wikimedia Commons. You are warmly invited to add your voice to all that. We would also appreciate if you would share some of your OA-related activities by way of our news ticker or via the monthly Open Access report that is part of the GLAM newsletter (to which you can subscribe here), or as you see fit otherwise.

As a visual token of the anniversary, I am adding today's Open Access File of the Day. Feel free to nominate files yourself. As of today, commons:Category:Open access (publishing) contains more than 15,000 files, of which about 2/3 are video and sound files uploaded by the Open Access Media Importer.

Thanks for being part of the project, and looking forward to more interaction. With a smile, -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 23:38, 10 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hospital Hill fire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Western Star (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) 11:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As you were one of a number of editors who participated in Wikipedia talk:Did you know/GibraltarPediA Options last September, I thought I would notify you that I have suggested a change to the wording of the restrictions to clarify what is being restricted. Please see WT:DYK#Proposed minor wording change to Gibraltarpedia restrictions for the details. Prioryman (talk) 22:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commented there. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 02:16, 20 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and thanks for tagging this for notability back in Jan 2008. You may want to take it to the Notability Noticeboard or AfD to get it resolved. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 22:58, 18 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have untagged it, but left ((fact)) on some quotes. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 02:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Sportswomen from Sydney, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. ...William 00:32, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You may wish to see my comments at the bottom of WT:DYK#Number of DYKs. Prioryman (talk) 08:37, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As suggested... File:DYK hook numbers Mar 12 - Jan 13.png. Prioryman (talk) 21:04, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lovely. Is the raw data available? Maybe we could categorise DYK pages with groupings like you have done, which would allow automated graphing of this kind (live). It should also be easy enough to parse the hook or article to automatically group the DYKs. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 22:35, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I instituted Wikipedia:Today's featured article/Statistics, which similarly categorises TFAs. The page's compiler has to categorise each TFA retrospectively but that's easy enough to do with no more than 31 TFAs per month. It would be completely unmanageable to do that with DYKs given the number we have each day. What we might be able to do is to add an extra field to the DYK nomination template requiring the nominator to self-categorise their article by subject or country. How would you implement automated graphing, though? Prioryman (talk) 08:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

scraperwiki ? e.g. https://scraperwiki.com/views/occupy_protest_locations_1/ --John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:29, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmm. Well, I certainly couldn't do it myself, I have no programming expertise at all... Prioryman (talk) 08:32, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Sportswomen from New South Wales, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. ...William 12:34, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Sportswomen from Newcastle, New South Wales, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. ...William 12:35, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	Australian Wikimedian Recognition (AWR)
	Thank you for your contributions on English Wikipedia that have helped improve Australian related content. :D It is very much appreciated. :D Enjoy your Australia Day and please continue your good work! Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rolling Stone Australia Awards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bondi (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) 12:01, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at Roarc's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Hello, John, good to hear from you, and I hope you are doing well! :) I've replied at my user talk page. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 06:09, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there, John, I've gone ahead and added two (2) more replies at my user talk page. I hope you have a great day! — Cirt (talk) 12:51, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at Roarc's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ARC Centre for Complex Systems, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Centre of Excellence (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) 00:30, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greetings. You previously redirected Justice for Khojaly to the main article because it was not notable. It has been recreated and I can see with a lot of bias. Should I try to clean it up, or is it still not notable? --Antelope Hunter (talk) 12:32, 7 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I looked at the current Google News Archives, and very few articles were from non-Azeri sources. Those sources are may be ok for simple facts, but even then the publisher is a long way away from the action, so those articles are basically press releases. As a result I doubt whether the Justice for Khojaly campaign is notable.(Imagine hundreds of Azeri creating accounts to defend the article without understanding our expectations on sourcing. And wiki-fights erupting about the underlying facts of the conflict and deaths.)

The article mostly uses the campaign's own material as sources. I see a few other foreign sources, most of which I dont recognise.

I am thinking an AFD is needed, but given the passion involved that could create more heat than light.

The other option is to address the articles use of primary sources, and use the talk page to investigate the sources which may or may not be credible foreign news sources. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 17:12, 7 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I think it's best to wait until after the commemoration. We can find out if the initiative is still alive and if not, I'll file the AFD. Antelope Hunter (talk) 23:00, 9 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello John Vandenberg, You have written before for the newsletter This Month in GLAM. I see Australia and New Zealand is missing regarding the edition about January 2013, do you perhaps have any idea what GLAM activities were done in Australia and/or New Zealand in January? Can you perhaps write about those? Or do you know who I can ask to write about it? Thanks! (Deadline of the January edition is Friday 8 February.) You can reach me the best at nl-wiki talk page. Greetings - Romaine (talk) 15:54, 7 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sending Wikilove :)

Novelspice (talk) 04:20, 8 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Now you have some wiki love. Just don't tell Siska! :-)

Kerry (talk) 04:21, 8 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are in trouble Kerry! B-) Siska.Doviana (talk) 01:29, 25 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A few months ago, you participated in a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Did you know about Gibraltar-related DYKs on the Main Page. I am proposing that the temporary restrictions on such DYKs, which were imposed in September 2012, should be lifted and have set out a case for doing so at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs. If you have a view on this, please comment at that page. Prioryman (talk) 21:47, 13 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion is ongoing about how to implement Today's articles for improvement on the Main Page. A proposal is being worked on with general community support, where TAFI is put it on the left hand side, below the DYK content. In order to balance the Main Page, part of this proposal involves increasing the ITN content by one item per day. Since you are an editor involved in the process, I would ask if you could comment on the proposal. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 17:31, 14 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at Talk:University of Queensland.
Message added 09:03, 19 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

— Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 09:03, 19 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

i'm under 21 but i'm not drink it,i wish you the best and i hope you are happy family Hima fethus (talk) 11:44, 20 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Based on your silence of the past month (assuming you're very busy), would it be safe to assume that the paper from December is not going anywhere? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:01, 21 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've put up the geonotice as requested - sorry for the delay. I've used as broad a box as I could reasonably draw, to get in all of Australia. (Has there been any thought of extending the funding opportunity to NZ, OOI? Lots of close historic ties in that period, and there's no local chapter - it might be worth raising the possibility...)

In terms of on-wiki notification, other than the obvious people at WP:AUSTRALIA, you might also want to leave messages for the WP:MILHIST project, who'll probably be a great source of volunteers, and Ed at the Signpost has been very good at including mentions of open WiR posts in News & Notes - you can submit it at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions. Andrew Gray (talk) 18:00, 26 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi John

The Director of IML-UQ and I have been going over the comments on our new wikipedia page. We are keen to keep our page.

Regarding notability, Brisbane's Courier Mail has written several substantial articles about the Institute of Modern Languages in the early years, visit http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/result?q=institute+of+modern+languages&l-title=The+Courier-Mail+%28Brisbane%2C...%7Ctitleid%3A12 . We have also found an article on the IML in the 1934 Brisbane Telegraph. These articles would suggest significant coverage, they are independent of UQ or IML, and contain lengthy paragraphs.

How do we go about inserting these references? Do you think we need to edit the article to reflect a more historical depiction of the IML and it's contribution to multiculturalism in Brisbane?

Thank you so much for all your help, kindest regards, Julia Imlprwiki (talk) 06:40, 28 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello John Vandenberg, You have written before for the newsletter This Month in GLAM. I see Australia and New Zealand are missing regarding the edition about February 2013, do you perhaps have any idea what GLAM activities were done in Australia and New Zealand in February? Can you perhaps write about those? Or do you know who I can ask to write about it? Thanks! (Deadline of the February edition is Friday 8 March.) You can start writing via the page outreach:GLAM/Newsletter/Newsroom. If you wish to be informed by e-mail next time, please write me at this page. You can reach me the best at nl-wiki talk page. Greetings - Romaine (talk) 00:13, 7 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I started a draft RfC in my Userspace. Please feel free to contribute. I intend to directly ask two people who opposed the proposal to assist in the drafting of the RfC (Prioryman and Yngvadottir) and one other supporter other than myself (you) as a start to ensure it is written in the best way possible while adhering to a NPOV.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 15:05, 10 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Now that pic on your user page (red background) is a lovely one of you and Siska. The photographer must have been good at priming his/her subjects! Tony (talk) 02:46, 18 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. It was a great shot by user:22Kartika, who was part of Wikimedia Indonesia executive at the time, and is now a member of their board. More of her photos from that event on facebook. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:14, 18 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	The Minor barnstar
	thanks! Wuerzele (talk) 22:46, 19 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi John, I have a newspaper type clipping with a caption "A.M. for February 16, 1954". I think this may refer to the Australian Magazine as you have added to the disambiguation page (complete with abbreviation A.M.), but there is no linked page for more info - wonder if you at least have some idea of where I might find out more about it - including whether it was still around in 1954. Mike (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Mike, Australian Magazine was still around in 1954. See [19] and Magazine (A.M.). If you need more info, I can write a detailed article about it. Cheers, John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:02, 20 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I changed the WM-Au member to a single template that can be categorised in the future. Feel free to undo the change. Bidgee (talk) 11:26, 20 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks! John Vandenberg ^(chat) 21:01, 20 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Advice Polack is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advice Polack 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. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:47, 26 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There's reason to believe the discussion might go better this time. At least there are several voices, with actual substantive opinions being set down. Talk:Advice Polack#Let.27s_try_again. In particular, there's one editor, other than Marek, who seems to be familiar with Polish culture and media, so something useful might come out their interactions. Can you keep an eye on it and inject your wisdom as you see fit? EEng (talk) 18:06, 29 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

P.S. Never got back to you about DYK but every time I get a glimpse I get a sick feeling.

If all the links above are still red when you read this then I've sent you on a fool's errand, at least for the moment -- for the second time it's been deleted as G10, which is of course stupid. I've asked Blade [20] to restore, as he did in December. Then can you keep an eye on the discussion? EEng (talk) 21:08, 29 March 2013 (UTC) P.S. Some articles you might enjoy: John Harvard statue (actually, I think you may have run into this before when I as complaining re DYK -- but I'm always enriching), Sacred Cod of Massachusetts, and of course I'm always tinkering with Phineas Gage -- added a lot more Notes.Reply[reply]

Actually, I want your opinion. People keep telling me to go for FA on Gage and maybe the other two just mentioned. But I worry that the unusual style (e.g. the extensive Notes, and liberal weaving of quotations into the text, where sources said it better than I could) will arouse -- well, arouse something. I'd be interested in your thoughts.

Hellllllp! Talk:Advice_Polack#Sources.2C_one_by_one. EEng (talk) 02:49, 2 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. 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.

VєсrumЬа ►TALK 13:31, 30 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, actually I'd like to see you participate on the Advice_Polack AfD page and register your position regarding the fate of the article you created. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 17:24, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for that. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 00:25, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Australian Competitive Grants Register, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (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) 09:42, 2 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on The United States Study Centre, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page, or a redirect loop.

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. - Camyoung54 talk 19:33, 10 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi John

We made a lot of changes to our page, Institute of Modern Languages, UQ, but it hasn't changed the writing at the top of the page. Has no one looked at it? Do I need to do something? It's important to us that the wikipedia entry does not have the writing at the top, and that it is not merged with UQ. If you can write to me at my email also, that would help alot: imlpr@uq.edu.au

Cheers and have a great day Julia Imlprwiki (talk) 05:02, 11 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

John, I notice that BP has been semiprotected for the past two and a half years. Is that still warranted by some policy or program of which I'm not aware? If not, I think that it should be unprotected. I may be wrong, but I don't know of any good reason to extend semiprotection to this article and not to others. Coretheapple (talk) 17:05, 13 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't recall the problems which called for it to be semi-protected back in 2010. I think we can try it being unprotected. Thanks for nudging me. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:43, 14 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. It can always be put back on if there is vandalism. Coretheapple (talk) 11:58, 14 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you very much for unblocking my accounts. Seleucidis (talk) 20:48, 18 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi John. I've sent you three emails, one before the Sydney symposium and two after, and haven't received a reply. Is there a problem? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 01:12, 26 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WP:AURD (Australian Roads), is inviting comment on a proposal to convert Australian road articles to ((infobox road)). Please come and discuss. The vote will be after concerns have been looked into.

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian Roads/RfC:Infobox Road proposal

You are being notified as a member on the list of WP:AUS

Nbound (talk) 05:41, 6 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello John Vandenberg, You have written before for the newsletter This Month in GLAM. I see Australia and New Zealand are missing regarding the edition about April 2013, do you perhaps have any idea what GLAM activities were done in Australia and New Zealand in April? Can you perhaps write about those? Or do you know who I can ask to write about it? Thanks! (Deadline of the April edition is 8 May.) You can start writing at the page outreach:GLAM/Newsletter/Newsroom. If you wish to be informed by e-mail next time, please write me at this page. You can reach me the best at nl-wiki talk page. Greetings - Romaine (talk) 08:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Chariot (Australia) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced article that fails to credibly assert notability of the subject

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AussieLegend (✉) 12:47, 10 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chariot (Australia) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chariot (Australia) 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. AussieLegend (✉) 14:23, 14 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Allisoncornish (talk) 17:01, 17 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi John Vandenberg! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 20:09, 22 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi John! I just wanted to ping you about this post by Francesca Di Lauro on the Education Noticeboard: a user is requesting the course instructor right for a University of Sydney class, and I infer you and/or others from WMAU are working with her.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 16:02, 24 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good inference ;-) Sorry about the delay, and thanks for taking care of this. Frances was one of the organisers of the v:Wikimedia in higher education/2013/University of Sydney symposium, and has run Wikimedia courses before the new toolset was deployed. I havent seen the outcomes of the previous students, as it wasnt documented on wiki, but it seemed to go ok. We'll definitely support her next time she runs the course. She is in contact with Kerry Kilner at University of Queensland, who keynoted at that symposium, and whose students work I have reviewed and can speak very highly off. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:33, 10 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cool, good to know. Let me know if you come across anything related to the course pages extension that is of particular concern for the WMAU higher education efforts.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 13:40, 10 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited IPC Alpine Skiing World Championships, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page La Molina (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) 14:58, 28 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. 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.

--SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:35, 31 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks - I've replied now. ;-) John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:54, 10 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please notice the reasons for a username change here. A simple name change was done here --Enkyo2 15:09, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for informing me. Would you still like 'Enkyo'? I've left a related note at simple:User talk:Griffinofwales#Ongamenet and Enkyo. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:57, 10 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Honorary Chaplain to the King, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. iComputerSaysNo 12:26, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thanks for bringing the duplication to my attention. My article about the King was created first, but only a few months and the other article is a bit more developed. There were a few aspects missing, so I have merged them. Cheers, John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:09, 10 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. I must have been having a bad day for not thinking about redirecting the page. iComputerSaysNo 17:26, 10 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Copyright status of work by U.S. state governments is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Copyright status of work by U.S. state governments 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. Elvey (talk) 02:09, 10 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Having make ten or more edits to the article on Phineas Gage, or commented on its Talk in the last two years, perhaps you will be interested in the Good Article Review currently underway. I am particularly interested in gathering broader opinion on the following comment by the reviewer: "Many sentences are much too long for easy reading and to my mind overuse complicated constructions ... I will very strongly recommend a copy edit with ease of reading in mind, breaking up complex sentences and disentwining some of the flowery language." EEng (talk) 22:35, 12 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Woot! Glad to see this article going through GA, and will re-read and copyedit to help with that specific issue. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 23:13, 12 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As I was just saying to someone else, "since the reviewer said, 'I am not going to fail on this because of the admitted subjectivity of taste of writing,' I was hoping for something more along the lines of unquestioning, mindless endorsement along the lines of [21]." But let your conscience be your guide, not worrying about my fragile ego. Especially since the doctor says I'm not dangerous anymore. EEng (talk) 01:48, 13 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've taken a crack at the introduction. Talk:Phineas_Gage#Revision_to_the_introduction. --John Vandenberg ^(chat) 05:28, 13 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Belated thanks for your work there -- but as you might or might not know there's been some excitement lately WP:ANI#GA_review_trainwrecked_by_overzealous_.22peerreviewers.22_and_Mos_enforcers. Thus I've had time to respond to just a few of your Talk comments. Your encouragement to give more personal background on Gage led to a new section that really helps. BTW, note I've finally acted on your advice of a few years ago [22]. EEng (talk) 05:41, 20 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Visi Media Asia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Android (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) 11:49, 16 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tear gas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Free Press (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 28 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

very underwhelmed by glam and project eds capacity to adequately do their own maintenance and housekeeping - trust my recent edits dont offend as such :) sats 08:24, 29 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your categorisation edits dont look offensive in the least. Enjoy. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:29, 29 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I figure adequate terms of what a cat might mean - shows that some events/projects are state projects alone and others are collaborations... sats 08:31, 29 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Copyright status of work by U.S. subnational governments is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Copyright status of work by U.S. subnational governments 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. Prosfilaes (talk) 06:44, 3 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. I would like to inform you that I have granted you editor flag at the Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato (talk) 02:09, 9 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

John, this edit is so uncharacteristic that I am worried that your account has been compromised. I have filed a report at the vandalism noticeboard. --Randykitty (talk) 12:31, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have blocked this account as potentially compromised until we can sort this out. Hut 8.5 12:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry I misfired when testing User:John Vandenberg/switch editor.js. Serves me right for testing in mainspace ;-) John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:38, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, you're unblocked. Sorry about that! Hut 8.5 12:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No worries. If you had blocked me a few seconds earlier, I might have found a bug in integration between blocks and VE. Better luck next time. ;-) John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:44, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good to hear. Sorry to have gotten you blocked (albeit briefly), but better safe than sorry, I guess :-) --Randykitty (talk) 12:46, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's all good. I shouldnt have been coding while eating dinner and watching tv, and not using testwiki or a sandbox. I didnt see you were editing that article; i just hit random article and saw a journal, and presumed it was an article that nobody will be working on ... good to see I was wrong! John Vandenberg ^(chat) 13:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I checked and the changes were saved. It's strange, because the new visual editor didn't let me save those changes — Preceding unsigned comment added by HeroPsycho22 (talk • contribs) 09:00, 22 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

the $ went through ok in the end right ? sats 09:31, 26 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes; and I responded here: wmau:User_talk:John_Vandenberg#FYI_2 --John Vandenberg ^(chat) 09:34, 26 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for that sats 05:06, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you very much for the Barnstar, it is much appreciated. FruitMonkey (talk) 16:07, 26 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See my first proper edit using your script, didn't forget to mention you in the summary and thought you would like to see this. Thanks a lot! (Works for En-Gb now too) The currently very much bugged VE is good for links. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 18:51, 26 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Ugog Nizdast! I could add that link to the 'switch editor' script automatically if you thought it useful to do so. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 21:59, 26 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	I, OrangesRyellow, confer thee with the Brilliant idea barnstar for the amazing, and much needed script at User:John Vandenberg/switch editor. Truly outstanding idea and technical work !!!! Cheers. OrangesRyellow (talk) 13:38, 28 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Did you know ... that since you expressed an opinion on the GA/DYK proposal last year, we invite you to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the matter? Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Regards, Gilderien Chat|What I've done23:04, 28 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, would you like to elaborate on your !vote? :) --Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 23:09, 28 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not at present; im a bit time poor atm. Thanks Gilderien for setting up a well formulated RfC; I look forward to reading the discussion. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 23:58, 28 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pressed for time, huh? Is that why I left you in the dust? :) Drmies (talk) 18:40, 9 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So far it's working very well.--¿3family6 _contribs 20:27, 19 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, here's the tricky question: Can you get it to work in reverse, to switch from wikitext to VE?--¿3family6 _contribs 16:58, 21 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi! I've re-started the article you deleted:

• 00:32, 29 December 2009 John Vandenberg (talk|contribs|block) deleted page Roger Highfield (G5: Creation by a banned user in violation of ban)

I had a look at the deleted page, but couldn't work out who the banned editor was, quite possibly because I'm not as clever as I'd like to think I am.
Are you OK with the re-creation? Pete aka --Shirt58 (talk) 13:41, 21 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yea recreation is no problems. Search my talk pages for that username if you want to find out about the deletion. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 00:23, 22 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Three fair use images of mine have been removed from an article, causing user:Werieth to template me three times for these files to be deleted. Discussion at Talk:Factory Records discography/Archive 1#Images removed. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! John Vandenberg, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. The Teahouse is an awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us!

Tariqmudallal (talk) 15:33, 15 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg, and thank you for your contributions!

An article you worked on Heidi Bootle, appears to be directly copied from http://www.foreignminister.gov.au/releases/2011/kr_mr_111124.html. Please take a minute to make sure that the text is freely licensed and properly attributed as a reference, otherwise the article may be deleted.

It's entirely possible that this bot made a mistake, so please feel free to remove this notice and the tag it placed on Heidi Bootle if necessary. MadmanBot (talk) 05:53, 18 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Patricia Holmes (diplomat), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.dfat.gov.au/homs/ar.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 05:56, 18 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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.

Heidi Bootle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade

Jean Dunn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade

Patricia Holmes (diplomat) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 19 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, see Talk:John_Green_(author)#Protection_of_article_from_editing.3F. Cheers 222.165.10.84 (talk) 16:04, 26 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[23] And thanks for your comments the other day. I hope you'll be able to stay with the conversation. EEng (talk) 18:26, 26 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi John-- back in 2010, you indefinitely semi-protected John Green (author) due to excessive vandalism. There's been some talk that we might consider lifting page protection here and here and the article has not experienced much in the way of vandalism over the past few years. I agree with that assessment, and think indefinite semi-protection is no longer strictly necessary. Would you consider scaling it back to pending changes or removing the protection altogether? I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 20:13, 26 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi John, did receive your request for a meet up and was not in BKK during the period. Have moved to BLR this year. In case you have some inputs to any of the articles created by me or any of my editings, pls do leave a note on my talk page. -Ambar (talk) 15:02, 6 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect @ladygaga. Since you had some involvement with the @ladygaga redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Steel1943 (talk) 07:01, 23 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Australia and the world
Thank you for years of service, adding countless quality articles on literature and journals, in Australia and the world, creating disambiguations pages, caring about people, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:05, 29 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A year ago, you were the 288th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style. - Normally, when "Precious" is still on a talk page after a year, I don't change the style, but you deserve better ;) - see my talk for more memory --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:14, 29 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Criminal Law (Criminal Organisations Disruption) Amendment Act 2013, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Highway 61, Notorious and Comancheros (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) 20:17, 1 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

John,

Terima kasih atas message dari Pak John tentang AusAID. Actually, as a former staffer of AusAID, it strikes me that the page needs quite a lot of work. My main focus, however, is Wikipedia pages about Indonesia. In principle, there are lots of people who can work on the AusAID page. Salam, Peter Pmccawley (talk) 21:01, 3 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Female Anglican bishops in Australia, which you created, has been nominated for renaming to Category:Female Anglican bishops. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:09, 1 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Busted! So five is the new rule huh...? OK, I voted delete and snow close. ;-) John Vandenberg ^(chat) 01:26, 2 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you lend a hand in resolving this? (And check out the following section re "OR" as well -- this guy's just flailing about.) EEng (talk) 07:10, 5 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Turkish Studies Association Journal has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Tagged for notability since 1.5 years. Not indexed in any selective databases. No independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Randykitty (talk) 11:41, 10 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It might be advisable to disable the switch editor script for users who still have it enabled, since it's now a feature of VisualEditor itself. I just noticed that it interfered with the ability to close the save dialog, probably due to recent VE code changes.--Eloquence* 18:40, 17 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Eloquence, have the bugs with the VE switch editor been fixed? (iirc, it didnt work in Firefox, but that was a while ago). I'll take a look in a few hours, and disable or fix my script. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 00:26, 18 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see bugzilla:56767 has been fixed, so I have disabled User:John_Vandenberg/switch_editor.js, but left User:John_Vandenberg/switch_editor_2.js as is - the latter should still work, but it should be much smaller code, now that the VE team has introduced the necessary code into core. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 02:14, 18 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi John, I am back on Wikipedia and was thinking on working over the break on my last article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Hasan_Mahmud But the first thing that I want to do is to have a proper URL for this like my other article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanika_Karunasekera. THANKS JOHN, I got that from your message. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arifjubaer (talk • contribs) 09:38, 18 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is currently an RFC opened at the village pump to clarify current consensus and policies about the controversial pseudo-namespace redirects that you might want to participate in. TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 23:53, 20 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	Merry Christmas!
	Wishing the three of you a fabulous 2014! Kerry (talk) 06:45, 24 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merry Christmas John! Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:12, 27 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Image markup, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Markup (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) 08:54, 26 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was surprised to see a 2-1/2 month old, resolved situation come back to the forefront on my watchlist this morning ... all without discussion. I can't say I've ever seen you take an action like that, especially without additional discussion. As I don't like to raise ANI's against anyone, especially fellow admins without discussing first, I'm leaving you this message that I'm certain shows my surprise, disgust, and concern ... I'm watching here on this talkpage for more ES&L 12:29, 26 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmm. Disgust is a strong word :/ I appreciate you bringing your concerns here rather than reverting the shortcut WP:FNC again, and thank you for not rushing of to ANI. user:Wbm1058 may have backed down when you raised the issue with them, quite aggressively I must add, but that doesn't make it 'resolved'. It is not "bad, bad form" to edit archives for the reasons that user:Wbm1058 did it: it is cited as appropriate at Wikipedia:Changing_shortcuts#Changing_shortcuts. Also demanding consensus for the changed shortcut is quite odd. Primarily because redirects typically change by someone just doing it, as user:Wbm1058 it, and then the changed redirect is taken to WP:RFD if there is disagreement. In this case it is also odd because it was an inappropriate shortcut to begin with, for the reasons I have outlined, and it became more inappropriate as the years went on without the page User:Tavix/Football naming conventions being moved into project space. It as been six years since that page was put forward for community review and support. It didnt happen. A lot of other naming convention guideline changes have happened, making the userpage quite stale, no longer useful as-is as a potential guideline, but suitable as an essay of course. If you believe WP:FNC->User:Tavix/Football naming conventions was an appropriate redirect, I would like to see your response to my comment at User_talk:Wbm1058#Authority to subvert?, either there or here, or either of one of us can take it to WP:CFD if want to involve more people and obtain a consensus one way or the other. As you know I don't mind discussing these obscure details. As this isnt covered in the guideline, I'd like a day or so to collate a list of WP: -> User: redirects that have been discussed previously as it help establish common ground, whatever that is. Regards and apologies for causing disgust. :/ John Vandenberg ^(chat) 13:42, 26 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, John. I'm in agreement with your comments above. We have a limited number of user-space redirects that are tagged into Category:Redirects to user namespace. The report at User:Largoplazo/WP Redirects, although over a year old, shows that there are likely many more of these redirects that haven't been categorized yet. Wbm1058 (talk) 17:01, 26 December 2013 (UTC) ...oh, I see. Here is the set of reports that is more recently updated and in Wikipedia: namespace: Wikipedia:Database reports/Cross-namespace redirects. At first glance, it appears that these may not completely overlap, so both may still be useful. Wbm1058 (talk) 16:54, 27 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. In answer to your query, I have no objections to your proposal to move the cross-namespace redirect. James500 (talk) 22:44, 27 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	Happy New Year!
	Hello John Vandenberg: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, John! Have a good one! Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:52, 1 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply] Send New Year cheer by adding ((subst:Happy New Year 2014)) to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Pratyya ^(Hello!) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! Welcome the 2014. Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2014 with good health and your wishes come true! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2014 goes well for you.

Spread the New Year cheer by adding ((subst:User:Pratyya Ghosh/Happy New Year)) to their talk page with a Happy New Year message.

--Pratyya ^(Hello!) 13:33, 1 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,

I just fixed a nowiki tag you had messed up on WP:VPP and added ((Unsigned)) instead of your signature. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 02:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at David Levy's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

—David Levy 20:15, 4 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at Nyttend's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

John, thanks for the work on the NLM ID addition to Journal information boxes. -Rhett

Hi Rhetth, the property for NLM ID now exists on Wikidata as Property:P1055, so we can populate it there (e.g. d:Q1470970), and then a bit of voodoo can incorporate that data back into ((Infobox journal)) automagically. But the data needs to be populated first. Please also see the discussion at d:Property talk:P1055. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 23:36, 6 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at Rhetth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Hi, John – On the surface it would be evident to anyone that I am "pro-PNR", as you say. Truth is, I could care less about PNRs, I'm just not particularly a deletionist – nor am I a much of a preservationist, either. In the work I do, I usually don't take the time to judge redirects, I just tag 'em and bag 'em. I've come across many that I thought maybe should be deleted, but my philosophy is that if they're correctly sorted into the proper cats, then someone, perhaps you, John, will notice them and list them at RFD. Let me tell you what I really am as regards pro- this or pro- that. I am pro-consensus. If the present discussion or any "chat" gathers enough support to seriously challenge the longstanding community consensus that exists as regards PNRs, and that results in a new community consensus that is no longer in favor of protecting or keeping PNRs, then I'll list the little bogeys myself – that's where I really stand, that's my "position". Joys! – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 20:36, 7 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Female Anglican bishops, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:48, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comparison of data structures doesn't lead to where it says it leads to. The Transhumanist 20:39, 9 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm seeing all sorts of problems there. The name "Search data structure" is odd to me. 'Search' has big data connotations, whereas those algorithms are mostly used for small data problems. 'Data structure access' or 'Data structure algorithms' would be better. The table at Search data structure is typical of what is included in any intro to data structures unit, but quite poorly laid out (we should check MIT free-libre courseware for what will surely be a better approach). It does compare the worst cases for each, and space consumption of each, albeit quite detached from reality. I cant find a better target. It is a far cry from our typical 'Comparison of .. ' articles that I have seen, but I havent looked through all 'Comparison of ..' articles, so it is hard to know whether this one is abnormally poor and undeserving of a redirect using that prefix. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 01:15, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I did integrate the note and cited it... I actually added two notes by splitting it up in the process of removing that one larger note. I made a much more detailed talk page post. So I don't think I was "removing" it so much as expanding and integrating and presenting even more information in the process. I'd like it replaced, but I have it sandboxed just in case. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:21, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your note on the redirect for Globalization category tree. I do not mind if the redirect is deleted. Let me look at what all needs to be done to compensate. Thanks again! Meclee (talk) 19:46, 10 January 2014 (UTC) Everthing looks OK. Thanks again. Meclee (talk) 19:51, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You commented at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 December 25#Silcone Valley. That discussion was closed with consensus to retarget the Silicone Valley redirect to Silicon Valley. Your opinion would now be welcome about whether Silcon Valley should have a hatnote pointing to San Fernando Valley#Adult ednterainment, the former target of the redirect and only other notable meaning of the term. Please comment at Talk:Silicon Valley#Hatnote, thanks. Thryduulf (talk) 23:53, 11 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey John. Having now spent a bunch of time reading through the interminable history of all this, it seems like a lot of the discussions involve the discovery and summation of other discussions. Would you be up for helping me compile some kind of definitive list cum timeline to assist in trying to move the issue forward? Cheers, — Scott • talk 13:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you can see a light at the end of a tunnel, lead on. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 16:19, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Scott Martin:, in the meantime I have expanded Wikipedia:Shortcut. I would appreciate a review of that. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:08, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Really good work. As you can see, I've just put in a few changes myself, mainly copyedits and styling. That page was in a state yesterday; it's amazing how much better it looks now. A lot of our guidelines seem to be in a similar state, just requiring a few hours of focused work on coherency, tone, and flow to make them much more professional and effective. Without meaning to be unkind, I think that most people simply don't know how to write documentation.

I'm still thinking about how to collate the CNR/PNR discussions; I'm probably just going to do a slab of copy-and-paste and try and evolve some kind of format as I go. — Scott • talk 13:37, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the copy-editing, and for smartly nixing the section 'List of shortcuts'.

For me, the next step is to overhaul WP:CNR. Most of the arguments there are fine, but it is laid out in way that doesnt allow each issue to be re-evaluated and description to evolve and expand as the mediawiki software and web browsing behaviour changes. And, it is on this that I think we can mention additional arguments pro and con that have been presented at RfD. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 14:00, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree. As it looks like it's going to need significant restructuring, I've copied the page text to Wikipedia:Cross-namespace redirects/sandbox so we can start working on it. — Scott • talk 18:50, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Um, hey, thanks for fixing a link that a vandal left on my talk page here. I guess? Just kidding, I'm guessing you were using a script or something -- I just thought it was funny (and I'm sure the IP, wherever they are, appreciates it as well!). SQGibbon (talk) 02:51, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was done by hand, along with 10 others, some old, some new. That redirect is being discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 January 7#Don't be a dick. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:26, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

what is going on with the toodyay material? a please explain this is. satusuro 05:11, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Replied at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 January 15#Toodyaypedia. Please comment there rather than personalising it. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 05:24, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

bah to personalising or not - the problem with a large amount glam/outreach material in wp en space is such a dogs breakfast, they really should have dedicated wikiproject to clean up all the shit that ends up on wp en space in chaos and varying degrees of abandonment. imho. bit like all the glam egos wander in with their minute of fame, splash around a bit, and dissappear into the ether ever after. satusuro 05:31, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm just doing my bit to clean up WP:CNR, which are in main space. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 05:36, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

well that might cleanup that specific problem, however the problem with the outreach mess aint gonna go away that quick, pity someone involved deeply outreach itself hasnt had the project/maintenance sort of headspace to bring a bit of tidy up in their area... satusuro 05:48, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted now as CSD G6, but I'd not have objected to R2 either ;-) Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:29, 16 January 2014 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Yea, however I couldnt do it, as the RfD regulars are opposed to any CSD being applied to CNR, so I agreed a month ago to use RfD religiously. Doing RfD also helps create precedence, which will hopefully bring some consistency to RfD on this matter, but more importantly allows us to write CNR-related guidelines and policies that give good guidance rather than encouraging them to create CNR that have been contentious in the past. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 13:19, 16 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, fair enough. Carry on then, and thanks for working on this particular backlog. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 21:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC).Reply[reply]

As I mentioned before, you very seriously need to review WP:BROKE. I applaud your desire to fix actual problems. Leaving a red link for all of these pages because you feel pangs of OCD is not an actual improvement.

If you very much dislike the present situation, you can create a stub article for Second Lincoln Administration that includes the presently-linked template. You don't need to bother other editors to do so, and (while the notices are very kind of you and huzzah) it would take less time to make that stub than to come to my page and asking me to do it for you. Best of luck, — LlywelynII 05:50, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Llywelyn, that is a bit rude. I did not nominate your redirect for deletion for exactly the reasons you point out. I simply asked if you were planning to do it any time soon? Sure I can do it, and yes I might do it, as i have done in many other cases of redirects that warrant a stub. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 05:53, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Please advise me what to do about things like this. I just can't stand it anymore and am considering to quit English WP alltogether. Specifcally I should note that you never miss an opportunity to highlight that someone is not a native speaker of English, which, frankly, borders on personal attack, where the never miss an opportunity part is so insulting and cruel and unfait that is makes me feel physically sick, and where the accusation of personal attack re: English is beyond my comprehension. It's been going on for a long time now, with that user. Would you please give me some constructive advice that might make me behave and/or feel better? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 06:42, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SergeWoodzing has posted multiple copies of this message to a number of user talk pages. I have posted a reply on my talk page, and a comment at User talk:Mr. Stradivarius#Problems getting unacceptable. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:23, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi John You deleted the page "Ararat" Center for Strategic Research. Please restore that page I am working on it, to make it more coherent and informative . There was New Year holidays, I was out, now I returned. As I mentioned in talk , there is no any difficulty to prove that "Ararat" Center is a notorious page and must be restored. Matenagir (talk) 08:38, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Matenagir:, the page is here: Ararat Center for Strategic Research. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 09:05, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I had no involvement whatsoever in that discussion. Don't ask me ever again.--Valkyrie Red (talk) 02:49, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at DJSparky's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

	A Tesla Roadster for you!
	Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia! Gg53000 (talk) 13:43, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't think I screwed anything up, but it appears I was able to fix the script error generated by ((pagelinks|)). the other way to fix it was to modify ((pagelinks)) to use ((#if:(({1|))}|(({1))}|Example)) instead of (({1|Example))}, but it seemed like a better idea to have the module not generate a script error (but instead a more useful error message) in the case that 'page' is blank. Frietjes (talk) 15:05, 2 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tanzania's first President referred to Tabora School as being "as close to Eton as you can get in Africa." Source: Paragraph 4, page 52. Ali Fazal (talk) 21:20, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am trying to get some reviewers for Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Australia women's national wheelchair basketball team at the 2012 Summer Paralympics/archive2. It had an earlier nomination but failed for lack of reviewers. If you could take a few minutes to post even a short review, it would be much appreciated. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:54, 16 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]