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

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 18:43, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Great job on the LGBT Wikipedians category. Thanks. Hyacinth (talk) 03:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

[1] ... you know I've always had a high opinion of your work here, in whatever namespace. :) MastCell ^Talk 18:41, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks ;-) I'm trying not to (and hoping I don't) muck it up - it's undeniably true that I am not now a content contributor or an expert on the tribulations of medical articles. Outside of a small number of articles awhile ago, most of my understanding of these issues comes from years of stalking talkpages like yours and Sandy's. It has been distressing for a long time to see really great contributors get frustrated and withdraw because they get so little support stemming the tide. I wish I had the expertise to be more than a cheerleader, but I thought the least I could do is get the ball rolling faster on a long-term improvement in the status of MEDRS and its dedicated cabal. Nathan ^T 19:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I didn't get into this in the interest of focus, but I actually don't think that content contributions per se are essential to an understanding of these issues. I certainly don't contribute as much article content as I used to. It's more a matter of empathy for the sorts of problems content creators face. Risker and Brad have been two of the best Arbs because, regardless of how much or how little content they create, they have empathy for the challenges editors face in the trenches. You're the same way. But a lot of people who don't edit content have utter, sanctimonious contempt for the difficulties facing those who do. There was a certain Arb (whom I won't name since it would just be spiteful and he's no longer on the Committee anyway) who sort of personified that outlook, and it's always infuriated me. MastCell ^Talk 19:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

You flagged the page on Lawrence Auster to be deleted. Your criticism of it seems vague to me. I have commented on the talk page. -Leonard (talk) 22:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I am still very much a noob when it comes to posting things on wiki and have only done so a handful of times.

When i found out that one of my edits for Led Zeppelin's song D'yer Maker, which had been on there for at least a year, was deleted by this alleged woman, I got irritated

I'm glad to find out that you guys caught and banned her associated IPs. However, I'm wondering if just my little one sentence post never got put back in, how many hundreds of others weren't as well. This goes not only for her obsession, Led Zeppelin, but all the other bands she messed with and even the LGBT community stuff.

If that would take took long to check on, just let me know if I should just simply add my sentence back in, which was factual and relevant, and never should have been removed in the first place.

Thanks in advance!

Mknight74 (talk) 22:11, 1 March 2012 (UTC) Mknight74 3-1-12

You should feel free to redo any edits you think were undone in error. While policy allows us to revert the contributions of banned editors and their socks, it doesn't require it... and more often than not, it isn't done simply because no one volunteers to do so. Even when it is done, it's usually limited to removing material added by the banned user; it is quite rare, as far as I know, for anyone to systematically undo removals of text. Nathan ^T 01:52, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello Nathan, thanks for your comment on the affiliation-models interview in the recent signpost. What questions did you want more detailed answers to? – SJ + 21:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

	New England Wikimedia General Meeting
	The New England Wikimedia General Meeting will be a large-scale meetup of all Wikimedians (and friends) from the New England area in order to discuss regional coordination and possible formalization of our community (i.e., a chapter). Come hang out with other Wikimedians, learn more about ongoing activities, and help plan for the future! Potential topics: What is a Wikimedia chapter and should we work towards one? Planning of regular Boston meetups (any other New England cities?) Planning for upcoming coordinated events (Wikipedia Love Libraries, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiknic, etc.) Outreach to universities (WikiProject Academical Village) and cultural institutions (GLAM) Wikimania DC is this summer. Your ideas!
	Sunday, April 22 1:30 PM – 4:30 PM	Conference Room C06, Johnson Building, Boston Public Library—Central Library 700 Boylston St., Boston MA 02116
Please sign up here: Wikipedia:Meetup/New England!

Message delivered by Dominic at 08:50, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.

Please see User_talk:VegaDark#Category:user_female where I have mentioned you. Cheers, John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:51, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Now at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2012 August 27#Category:Female Wikipedians. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:24, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:19, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

U.S. Ada Lovelace Day 2012 edit-a-thon, Harvard University - You are invited!

Now in its fourth year, Ada Lovelace Day is an international celebration of women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), and related fields. Participants from around New England are invited to gather together at Harvard Law School to edit and create Wikipedia entries on women who have made significant contributions to the STEM fields. Register to attend or sign up to participate remotely - visit this page to do either. 00:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I note your action here. Müdigkeit is not banned; he's indefinitely blocked right now, but as the blocking administrator I would be happy to consider unblocking him if he agreed to discuss his ideas rather than try to act on them without community consensus. By putting forward his proposal on minimum support for success for Arbitration Committee candidates, he was discussing his views and seeking community input. This is something that we as a community generally support. We don't have to support his ideas to support his efforts in trying to communicate them. I ask you to reconsider your removal. Risker (talk) 20:16, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. Clearly I'm out of the habit of using Wikipedia lingo if I've used banned in place of indefinitely blocked ;) Reverted. Nathan ^T 20:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Nathan. Risker (talk) 20:51, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited

Date Saturday, December 8, 2012 Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m. Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104 Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand. Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki. Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration. Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 04:19, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

You are invited to the 2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, on 20 July 2013 in Boston! We will be talking about the future of the chapter, including GLAM, Wiki Loves Monuments, and where we want to take our chapter in the future! EdwardsBot (talk) 09:29, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, re your comment, can you please add the actual link to where Ana Ivanović herself posts in an English forum using no ć, and note also how she refers to other Serbians with surnames in -ić, does she not bother typing their ć also? Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:16, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

I cannot find such a link. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:53, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Nathan (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I use a VPN to access the Internet from home to improve privacy and security; my VPN is evidently blocked from even editing user talkpages. I've been an editor in good standing for a long time, so I'm hoping I can get IPBE so that I can continue to use my VPN and make the occasional edit. The IP most recently was 108.61.59.19, the block applies to the /16. Thanks! Nathan ^T 13:59, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You are able, if you wish, to edit without using a VPN. You will have to do so if you wish to edit here.--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 20:22, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the ((unblock)) template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Looks like you were able to edit after making this above request: [2]. Can you confirm if you are still blocked? Singularity42 (talk) 19:28, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

I am, I turned off the VPN to make that edit so I didn't forget later (and to make this comment). Nathan ^T 19:42, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Must be nice to have IPBE by default and not have to expose your network information to the world simply in order to edit Wikipedia. I guess from atop the pedestal, such concerns must seem quite plebeian. Nathan ^T 20:46, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree, that was pretty silly. I've given your account IP block exemption. You're clearly in good standing and the request sounds entirely reasonable to me. MastCell ^Talk 21:01, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey, thanks MastCell, appreciate the assistance and glad to see you are still keeping a close eye on the wiki! Not sure I will be editing any more frequently now; it's hard to get into it and stay into it when the tone of "discussion" across the project often turns my stomach. But I do still believe in the ultimate goals and the enormous value of this place, and I use it myself all the time, so I would like to be able to make the occasional edit from home when I get the urge ;) Thanks again! Nathan ^T 17:22, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

That was pretty low-down of you to smear me on a public mailing list without even informing me you'd done so. It happens that someone noticed and alerted me.

You don't mind if I smear you on a public list, then, without informing you?

Tony (talk) 06:38, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't agree that it was "smearing" - to me it was just the facts. I guess reasonable minds can differ on that. But I should have informed you, you're right. I apologize for the oversight. Nathan ^T 13:04, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

And I've replied on the list. Nathan ^T 13:17, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

You've apologised for the procedural failure. But really, you're going further down in my estimations the more you write. Tony (talk) 13:20, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

That's the fourth time you've referred to your opinion of me. I suppose I'm sorry you don't like me, and that's too bad, but it's not my chief motivation. Constructive criticism from an uninvolved party about journalistic ethics is not bullying or smearing or ranting or hounding. I even agree with you about the substance of the article, but that's beside the point. Nathan ^T 13:29, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

It's not constructive. I had a very high opinion of your posts on the Wikimedia mailing list. But that has now dissolved into distaste. You should be motivated to gain good opinions of fellow editors, since it's primarily a social process. You've lost it. Tony (talk) 13:33, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm not running for office or anything like that. If I screened every possibly critical post against the chance that it might upset someone, I'd never make another post about anything in my life. Like I said, it's too bad that you receive criticism as a personal attack and that this has influenced your opinion of me. But it doesn't deter me from offering criticism to you or others in the future. Being "all comers" critical isn't going to line up friends outside my door, but then it isn't meant to. Nathan ^T 13:37, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Aldo Bensadoun, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yellow Shoes (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) 09:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Nathan, thanks very much for your support for my RfB. Yes, I do seem to recall you telling me that you thought I had withdrawn my previous RfB too early. Did we also work together to help a certain former admin (who later regained the tools) to get his sanctions lifted? I'm pretty sure we did. At any rate, thanks for your kind words. :) Best. Acalamari 23:20, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I saw you created the article National Security Law Journal and assessed it as B-Class, but now it is being proposed for deletion altogether - thoughts? The escalata (talk) 19:04, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I think it's a little debatable. The guidelines for academic journals are fairly lax, and I prefer to err on the side of inclusiveness when it comes to this kind of topic. I'll remove the prod, and if the editor persists in having it deleted you can chime in on the AfD discussion. Nathan ^T 20:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I've revisited what I posted, and you're right, it was far too narrow in scope and conflated an ISP report with a legal investigation. I'm not sure how that happened... regardless, my prior espoused belief has been stricken. Kurtis ^(talk) 21:35, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

biographies of living persons
Thank you for quality contributions to biographies such as Wyclef Jean and Norman Finkelstein, for page moves and help with articles for creation, for clarifying what can be added and the value of a talk page, helping living persons, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (13 November 2008)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:38, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

I do not understand the revert of my edit on Gaza War article for the section "Casualties". What is the issue? American vs British spelling of "center"? I'm assuming that the other reason of non-neutral and unsourced info, probably refers to the Ron Paul quote not mine, since it is hardly believable that the version sitting right now is more neutral than the one after my edit. There is a discussion on the talk page on this. Kingsindian (talk) 15:31, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

@Kingsindian: Thanks for the heads up. Rejecting the pending changes wiped three edits; my edit summary referred to the other two. I've restored your adjustments and the change should be live without further review. Nathan ^T 15:36, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gaza War (2008–09), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SPME. 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) 08:55, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello. Please don't add KBE to the article. Bloomberg is American, not British, and it's only honorary. Both Bill Gates and Rudy Giuliani have been given the same honorary knighthood, and if you check their articles, you'll find that there's no KBE there... Thomas.W ^talk 17:52, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

@Thomas.W:, I'm not sure what difference it makes, if he's authorized to use KBE and has the order (honorary or not). But, ok. Typical Wikipedia decision-making I guess. Nathan ^T 17:59, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

It's an honorary knighthood, not a full knighthood, so it doesn't give him the right to add Sir in front of his name, and probably not KBE after the name either. Thomas.W ^talk 18:06, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

@Thomas.W: A "full knighthood" is mostly honorary as well, wouldn't you say? Is there an MOS somewhere that says you can only add KBE to your name if you are also to be called Sir? If so, that's an odd conclusion, since we could simply refrain from calling someone "Sir" while using only that which they have been authorized... namely, the KBE. Indeed, using KBE in his name is explicitly authorized by an honorary knighthood. Nathan ^T 18:14, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Charliehebdo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:21, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I thought you might be interested in participating in Wikipedia:Meetup/Brattleboro, organized by User:Sadads.--Pharos (talk) 18:21, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Cool, thanks Pharos! Nathan ^T 18:57, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

biographies of living persons
Thank you for quality contributions to biographies such as Wyclef Jean and Norman Finkelstein, for page moves and help with articles for creation, for clarifying what can be added and the value of a talk page, helping living persons, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (13 November 2008)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:38, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 879th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:58, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

You are invited to join the Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA on October 16! (drop-in any time, 6-9pm)--Pharos (talk) 18:29, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

You may be interested. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:36, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Nathan ^T 20:04, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Dear Wikipedian, you recently voted in the ArbCom election. Your username, along with around 155 other usernames of your fellow Wikipedians, was randomly selected from the 2000+ Wikipedians who voted this year, with the help of one of the election-commissioners. If you are willing, could you please participate (at your option either on-wiki via userspace or off-wiki via email) in an exit poll, and answer some questions about how you decided amongst the ArbCom candidates?

  If you decide to participate in this exit poll, the statistical results will be published in the Signpost, an online newspaper with over 1000 Wikipedians among the readership. There are about twelve questions, which have alphanumerical answers; it should take you a few minutes to complete the exit poll questionnaire, and will help improve Wikipedia by giving future candidates information about what you think is important. This is only an unofficial survey, and will have no impact on your actual vote during this election, nor in any future election.

  All questions are individually optional, and this entire exit poll itself is also entirely optional, though if you choose not to participate, I would appreciate a brief reply indicating why you decided not to take part (see Question Zero). Thanks for being a Wikipedian

The questionnaire

Dear Wikipedian, please fill out these questions -- at your option via usertalk or via email, see Detailed Instructions at the end of the twelve questions -- by putting the appropriate answer in the blanks provided. If you decide not to answer a question (all questions are optional), please put the reason down: "undecided" / "private information" / "prefer not to answer" / "question is not well-posed" / "other: please specify". Although the Signpost cannot guarantee that complex answers can be processed for publication, it will help us improve future exit polls, if you give us comments about why you could not answer specific questions.

Detailed Instructions: you are welcome to answer these questions via usertalk (easiest), or via email (for a modicum of privacy).

We do promise to try hard, not to make any mistakes, in the processing and presentation of your answers. If you have any questions or concerns, you may contact column-editor GamerPro64, copy-editor 75.108.94.227, or copy-editor Ryk72. Thanks for reading, and thanks for helping Wikipedia. GamerPro64 14:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

The objective of the poll (one of them anyways) is the reverse, actually... I think the fears of mass-messaging messing up the election are waaaay overblown, and expect the datasets will prove it.  :-)     I also hope it becomes standard procedure, since it seems a no-brainer; I'm not sure we should mass-message 107k usernames *every* year, however, since only 2800 people actually responded... seems a lot of server-load / watchlist-load, for a 2% response-rate. Maybe sort them into tranches, and mass-message all people with edits in the past N months, plus one-third of the 107k, or something? Or perhaps the fear of server-overload is also overblown, too, though I did see some complaints about watchlist-clogging from folks who monitor many usertalk pages. My personal objective, though, in running the poll, was to get answers to question#7, and find pointers to people who ought to run for the seats which will open up in 12 months. Only about half the arms I twisted this year, were receptive to running. Best, 75.108.94.227 (talk) 15:15, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Four years ago ...

biographies of living persons
... you were recipient no. 879 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:23, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 11:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Nathan. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

There is an ongoing discussion about the use of files on Wikipedia that are not protected by copyright in the US because there is no copyright relations between the US and the country of publication. You commented in a 2012 discussion on the same topic that resulted in no consensus. You are invited to share your views in the ongoing discussion. AHeneen (talk) 21:20, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Precious

Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:49, 7 June 2017 (UTC)