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. |
Would you please review the "courtesy blanking" by Guerillero of over 1.8 million bytes of community evidence and debate in the recently completed Gamergate case and, if you feel such a draconian step was unmeriited, work towards its restoration? LINK Thank you, —Tim Davenport /// Carrite (talk) 21:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello there!
Upcoming events:
I am also pleased to announce events for Wikimedia DC Black History Month with Howard University and NPR. Details on those events soon.
If you have any questions or have any requests, please email me at james.harewikimediadc.org.
See you there! – James Hare
(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 03:11, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Now that we both have more time(!), I'm following up a talk page discussion from nearly two years ago: User talk:Newyorkbrad/Archive/2013/Apr#Frank C. Newman. It was about the article on Frank C. Newman. At the time you said you might be able to look up some more sources. I was thinking of returning to this article at some point this year. No need to do anything right away, but did you have any more thoughts on what could be done here? Carcharoth (talk) 22:23, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello again!
Not even a week ago I sent out a message talking about upcoming events in DC. Guess what? There are more events coming up in February.
First, as a reminder, there is a WikiSalon on February 11 (RSVP here or just show up) and Wiki Loves Small Museums at the Small Museum Association Conference on February 15 (more information here).
Now, I am very pleased to announce:
There is going to be a lot going on, and I hope you can come to some of the events!
If you have any questions or need any special accommodations, please let me know.
Regards,
(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 18:20, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
Defeating vandalism and harassment in the nick of time. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:45, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
I have been following the GamerGate arbcom process, and through it your participation has always struck me as thoughtful and rational with well-reasoned statements supporting your choices (far above and beyond every other arb). With the size of the case, it's fitting that this should be the last one you sit through as arb.
Conversely I am disappointed that so many external parties are blasting the outcome, but the fact that both of the opposing external parties involved seem to disapprove just goes to show that the decision was probably the right one! Vynwood (talk) 15:15, 4 February 2015 (UTC) |
I see you don't really "do" userboxen (I use only a few myself) but knowing you as I do I thought you'd appreciate this. Note the bananas. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:14, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
This user was on the English Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee. |
I previously shared this within the Committee, but my views on leaving ArbCom might best be reflected in this video reflecting the recent transfer of the Chief Judge position on the Ninth Circuit from Judge Kozinski to Judge Thomas, beginning around 27:50.
Less flippantly, I'd like to thank everyone in the community who entrusted me with this responsibility for three terms, and I look forward to doing other work around the wiki. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:05, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:15, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Congrats from me too. :-) On the Star Trek matter, I left a note on the ANI thread. I'm just popping by here because I left several pings in that edit and I wasn't sure if all those I pinged got the pings. No worries if you did get it, but there are several pings I should follow up from a while ago that I got no answer to if there is some problem with pings. Carcharoth (talk) 23:06, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
I hope we can expect future entries on Newyorkbrad blog, particularly any reflections on the strengths of the arbitration system and where there is room for improvement. Having worked with dozens of different arbitrators, I'd be particularly interested in what you think is the best "makeup" of the committee...surely, there is room for legalistic minds, pragmatic people along with those who take a more long-term or big picture view. Thanks again for your service and I'm glad I had the pleasure of meeting you at WikiConUSA. Liz Read! Talk! 20:46, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
Strong quacking noise coming from this one with regards to User:Osama Bin Laden III. Could we nip this one in the bud as well. Amortias (T)(C) 00:37, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi NewYorkBrad. I think we met at a Wikimania conference a while back where you expressed an interest in BLP pages. I'm trying to work this one up to GA with a COI while following the Bright Line, per my usual, but am encountering some accusations that I'm "trying to spin the article"[1], that I'm canvassing (for using BLPN, IRC, Jimbo's Talk page, and other editors that contribute heavily to BLP pages)[2] and other criticisms[3] from the same two editors, who were advocating that this was not undue (for example).
While I'm sure there's room for constructive criticisms (it is difficult to describe her advocacy for legislation without advocating for the legislation itself in the article). My own little crystal ball is telling me that it might be a very long and drama-filled path to GA. Since you are or were on ArbCom, I figured you had a lot of experience (probably more than you'd prefer) dealing with embattled articles, ABFing, etc. and thought you may have some wisdom on how an editor in my position might proceed without being a jerk, creating excessive drama or violating the principles of WP:COI. CorporateM (Talk) 19:50, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Nomoskedasticity and Hipocrite, this sort of perpetual casting aspersions and unbridled criticism may result in you being sanctioned. Please, if you have evidence of wrongdoing, bring it forth in the proper venue and get it resolved. Otherwise, be silent about this issue. Jehochman Talk 23:03, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
FYI to you and anyone else with threads on this page: I'm suffering from a bad cold this week, and not operating at 100%. I'll try to take a look at the page you mention over the weekend. Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:55, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you all for thinking of me. I've reviewed the article and the talkpage, and don't have anything to add to the discussion right now. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:03, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
...nothing going on, just wanted to say that I hope you're enjoying your release from Arbitratorhood. Revel in it while you can, because in a couple of years (or maybe less) I'm sure people will be bugging you to run again. Best, BMK (talk) 02:23, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification. If my post came across as a disagreement, it was not meant that way in the least. I was trying to clarify my thoughts, and using your post as a reference. I don't have the training to couch my posts as clearly as some, and my apologies if I wasn't entirely clear. Hopefully you know how highly I regard you and your work here. Best always. — Ched : ? 00:36, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Obviously hasn't Googled me lately, has he? :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 01:47, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
You didn't run again?!!
Not that I expect my words or anyone else's might have swayed you, but it's times like this when I'm not happy RL has taken so much of my time and am away from the wiki.
You had an incredible run, and something to be proud of, to be sure.
And now I'm going to go see if I can find you a barnstar, and then find my peril sensitive sunglasses and check to see who else is no longer on the committee. Sigh... - jc37 21:31, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
|
The Newyorkbrad Multiple Barnstar | |||||||
With sincere thanks for your many years of service on Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee. |
With my wish that you keep joining in enlightened discussion, contributing your poesy and other "NYB comments" to talk pages, and in all, just being NYB on Wikipedia.
They didn't have a barnstar for eloquent verbosity, but I thought these were appropriate regardless : )
I find it hard to believe you haven't received a barnstar since 2010 - I think User:Newyorkbrad/Decorations may need updating : )
And I hope anyone who agrees with this comments too : ) - jc37 22:30, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Newyorkbrad: There are multiple reverts of a person's name, which you commented on at the talk page for D.M Murdock, who prefers to be called (and is more commonly known as) Acharya S, would you please look at this? Thanks! Raquel Baranow (talk) 02:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Anent "copyright" and "being legally able to publish":
Being "legally able" to do something is not the proudest reasoning known to man.
(also posted at UT:Jimbo) Collect (talk) 19:21, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
I've sent you one. I may have forgotten to edit the subject line, so my name may not appear in your email header. Best, — Ched : ? 08:28, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Hey Brad, I've topic banned an editor under the GamerGate ArbCom discretionary sanctions for the first time and wanted to make sure I have it right. Do I need to log the sanction somewhere? Is there a notice template? Thanks! Dreadstar ☥ 18:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Please read Template talk:Infobox officeholder and the interesting claim that an RfC which was closed as failing due to "strong arguments" actually passed, and that it immediately negated the prior RfC which fixed the weird "successor not a successor by any stretch of the imagination" close, resulting in the proposer "unclosing" the RfC and ruling the prior RfC as voided. The proposer also asked for the close to be overturned, which I found a tad "out of process" here. See also [5].
Is cloud cuckoo land here? Collect (talk) 16:04, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
I asked Guy whether Kraxler's edit on Rangel was what he expected an editor to do as a result of his close where he noted strong arguments against the proposal, and danged if reading the proposal says "this voids the prior RfC" in any way <g>/
Then K posts:[6]:
Where he says he follows what Guy explicitly told him to do (?) and that my revert to the SQA could be reported to AN/I! Please tell me what the heck is happening on Wikipedia - it took ages to get the first RfC done to make some sense in infoboxes, and now the new "result" would look like hell (IMO). Cheers and apologies.
By the way -- without even waiting a second to see what Guy says see [7] where Kraxler is blatantly edit warring and asserting as a "god-function"
Is this the act of a competent administrator at this point? (Rhetorical question and not a personal attack) Collect (talk) 16:24, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
I asked that partly because of [[8]]. I didn'yt ask with no evidence I asked based on prior history and the admission already of a sitting arb. Sorry that disturbed you and feel free to revert if you don't care. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:03, 26 February 2015 (UTC)