![]() | 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. |
Archive 100 | ← | Archive 102 | Archive 103 | Archive 104 | Archive 105 | Archive 106 | → | Archive 110 |
I see you have fullprotected Penyulap's talkpage, Courcelles. Penyulap doesn't in any case have access to it per the terms (terms just instituted by you) of his block, and I can't see that you have supplied any explanation for why other users shouldn't get to post there. We've had the situation of "page non-protected, user without tpa" before, for a considerable time; we had it from September 28 to October 31; were there any problems with that? Problems on the page, I mean. (Cheatsheet: no, there weren't.) Admittedly, there was a silly request for arbitration about my unprotection of the page, but then that was promptly rejected by the arbitrators, with a generous helping of criticism of the original protection. Since you were part of that process (where you were the only arb who even evinced enough doubt about it to call for a reply from me), I'm surprised to see you now protecting Penyulap's talkpage yourself. All the arguments against Jc37's protection of the page made at that RFAR apply equally to your recent protection, as far as I can see. Would you please explain your rationale or unprotect? Or, as monotonous as this is getting, I will. Bishonen | talk 21:53, 4 November 2012 (UTC).
No idea if there have been more instances of socking or not, but I blocked User:180.181.67.106 a few weeks ago for clear (self-admitted) socking at Jimbo Wales talk page. The earlier block evasions with the same IP at ThatPeskyCommoner's talk page were IMO acceptable (under IAR, no need to become inhuman in such situations), but the later edits at Jimbo's talk page were standard block evasion. Fram ( talk) 08:32, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
I can't believe that this has happened. Elen had no need to go to Pen's talk page, I would say that if anyone is trolling here it is not Pen, at least as far as could see. Elen is quite able to tell me to"sod off" and tell Bish never to darken her talk page again, but constitutionally unable to leave Pen alone.
Or was the "trolling" the letter to the ombudsman? In which case this stinks of Arbcom closing ranks (especially with AGK and Brad chipping in). I know Arbcom has been very slow in seeing the conflict of interest failures that I have brought up in the past, but it would have been wise to have left this to an uninvolved admin. I had not intially noticed that the complaint was against you, but that makes matters much much worse.
Moreover I am deeply unhappy about the lack of thought, the lack of explanation, the general shoddiness with which blocks are handed out and other admin actions taken, quite apart form the total lack of human consideration for one's fellow editors. It is clear that in the first instance a block was made for a good faith redirect, and that subsequent blocks were based on empty headed reading of light hearted comments.
Rich
Farmbrough,
15:29, 5 November 2012 (UTC).
They "dispersed the crowds" at Tianamen Square and the surroundings, as well. Was that right? Pesky ( talk) 07:38, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Adding: of course I realise that Pen has "issues". I;m not denying that for a moment. But he also has talents. One is in the area of visual / graphics work. Another is in the area of sniffing out socks. And I cannot rid my mind of the lurking suspicion that, just maybe, his biggest "sin" was that he got far too close to the scent trail of a mole. A so-far-undiscovered sockmaster, possibly in a high-profile position. Pesky ( talk) 09:13, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
More adding (sorry!): I've been involved in the Real Life situation of investigating and dealing with abuses of power and process, and miscarriages of justice, for over a decade. With years and years of experience and investigation, one develops a "nose" for little things which ring quiet alarm bells, and one of those things is an apparent out-of-scale attempt to "make something go away". On the whole, it tends to occur when someone, somewhere, has something to hide; it frequently gets things brushed under the carpet and "disappeared" for years. The case of the West Midlands Serious Crime Squad, the London Police corruption investigation, and an unnerving array of others, illustrate this. Sometimes the reaction is just too much for the apparent offences. People are "shut up". Pesky ( talk) 09:37, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Pen's admitted joke sock was actually nothing compared to the admitted joke sock of Il Duce of the Featured Article space, Raul654. Which admin is going to volunteer to block Raul, revoke his talk page access, and full-protect his talk page to keep any wayward supporters from complaining there? Show of hands, please.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 23:29, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
There seem to be a rather duff assumption on the go on this talkpage. A blocked user cannot create a legitimate sock. They are blocked. They cannot edit Wikipedia. They cannot legitimately create a different account and edit Wikipedia from that while they remain blocked. Creating an account elsewhere and sneaking in via automatic account creation is common among sockmasters (I believe they think the checkuser tool won't pick it up). I never got a straight answer from Penyulap about the automatic account creation, and he has been editing anonymously on his IP, which definitely is socking. Elen of the Roads ( talk) 13:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Adding: it seems that we may have got ourselves into a kind of circular situation here; along the lines of "the beatings will continue until the whining has stopped". Like treating someone's allergy rash with an ointment made out of whatever it was that causes the rash ... there must be something better that we can attempt. Pesky ( talk) 05:13, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
−
Hi. I was wondering if you could please delete this sandbox User:Conquistador2k6/Lexi. It's just it's been around for a couple years and was not created by me to begin with and it's not really doing anything and I'm not really interested in editing it. Thanks in advance. User:Conquistador 2k6 Talk to me, dammit! 11 November 2012 23:44 (UTC)
Cheers. User:Conquistador 2k6 Talk to me, dammit! 12 November 2012 00:42 (UTC)
- JuneGloom Talk 22:41, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
I wanted to tell at least one member of ArbCom that I have struck and withdrawn my initial report, as the situation has taken an unexpected turn and is in the process of resolving itself. Of course, it is still up to ArbCom to decide if they want to accept the case or not, but the circumstances have changed so much that I felt it was necessary to explain. The admin has asked for his bit to be removed, understanding that this would be considered "under a cloud", and Nihonjoe has complied by removing it. There are still unanswered questions, but there is an ongoing RfC now, and those may be better to leave to the regular community, who now seems interested in seeking a solution. I sincerely appreciate the participation and insight, which ended up being a catalyst for what transpired, but feel that continuing the process may be unnecessary and/or unhelpful now that the circumstances have changed. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 14:23, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm presently considering standing in this year's ArbCom elections (rather seriously, actually...I already have a statement written and have drafted answers to some of the general questions), but I would like the opinion of someone who has been through it before. I've read User:AGK/ACE2012, but is there anything else you would point out about the elections or being an Arbitration Committee member? What do I have to lose by running in the event that I'm not elected? From your experience would the community consider me a good candidate as of now (before my statement and question answers), or do I not stand a snowball's chance in hell? Any advice you can give would be appreciated. Thanks, Ks0stm ( T• C• G• E) 20:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello Courcelles. Requesting page protection for Queen. Since the page became unprotected recently almost all edits by ip users have been reverted. In terms of views the article is very busy and has a history of vandalized edits. Thanks. Chie one ( talk) 23:34 16 October 2012 (UTC)
...are you ok if I change the RobertRosen SPI to checked status? Or are you still chipping away at it?-- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 23:39, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello Courcelles: months ago, we were in contact because of the article on "José Eduardo dos Santos". Luckily, problems with that article seem to have stopped - but now there are problems with the article on his daughter. User: Cavalo Lusitano has been editing this article in en:WP as well as in pt:WP, introducing apologetic POV, unsourced (and wrong) information etc. On the talk page of the article, User:Cruks has now requested semi-protection, and I should like to second that request. -- Aflis ( talk) 15:34, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
The problem are the edits by User: Cavalo Lusitano, all of which have to be reverted. Apparently User:Cruks, the main author of the article, did not do this before being sure the article was protected. I shall now try and do the reverts myself. -- Aflis ( talk) 14:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC) --- Done. Do you think you can semi-protect the page now, thus preventing User: Cavalo Lusitano from messing the text up once again? -- Aflis ( talk) 14:47, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
OK, right you are. So let us see what happens next. On pt:WP User:Cavalo Lusitano stopped editing the article "Isabel dos Santos" after somebody had reverted all his edits...-- Aflis ( talk) 00:14, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low
to High
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 15:36, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles!
Can you please take a look at this for me please? I'm totally confused.com as to what's happened there. When I moved those pages the other day they moved ok but I'm now being told information has been lost? Now it's like the page is on a double redirect? Every other page I redirected that day has gone through ok. That's if I'm understanding what the editor is saying! I'm just totally confused as to what's happened. I'm now off on holiday though for the next couple of weeks. Can you please have a look and advise on my talk page?-- 5 albert square ( talk) 00:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
The Rolex Ranking does not belong in a table showing LPGA Tour performance. The Rolex Ranking is NOT a measure of LPGA Tour performance. It includes LPGA Tour performance for players who play on that tour, but it is actually a measure of performance in ALL professional golf events. Furthermore, it is not at all linked to the LPGA season, so stating the Rolex Ranking in conjunction with LPGA Tour season results makes not sense. I am adding separate sections for year-end World Rankings to players' sites. See, for example, Stacy Lewis and Michelle Wie. I ask that you have patience while I continue this or, better yet, help out with the project yourself. -- Crunch ( talk) 18:56, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi, On Monday I requested that the 2011-12 Bangladesh League was moved to be simply the 2012 Bangladesh League. Something I couldn't rename myself as it was previously called that. This is for a soccer/football article. Later that evening it was moved and called 2012 Bangladesh Premier League ( I can't quite remember if this is the name I requested or not), but what already appeared to be their was this article for cricket. We now appear to have lost all the data for 2011-12 Bangladesh League and the 2012 article refers to a Bangladeshi cricket competition. Can this be restored in anyway back to say Sunday evening? Once restored I will then re-look at what the article can be called? Druryfire ( talk) 19:08, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
At the wiki diff of [1] on the right hand side, first paragraph the words "reports" is highlighted and a mouseover gives me an advertisement. Clicking the link goes to a different ad. I've not noticed this before so I may have picked up some spyware in my firefox browser. This has been happeneing with many diffs I've seen at wikipedia the last day or so. Highlighted words that are ads in the diffs. Can you check this out for me? Thanks. Fyunck(click) ( talk) 07:12, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm a bit tired of raising concerns about these sanctions at administrative noticeboards, so I'm hoping you can give me an opinion on a couple of questions as a member of ArbCom. I realize you would just be speaking for yourself, not for the committee as a whole, but it might still be helpful in avoiding a more full-blown discussion and shedding some light on issues that I'm probably less familiar with than you are.
First question. Can a non-admin notify a user of the sanctions? WP:ARBPIA doesn't explicitly say, although it's implied as the suggested template ({{ Palestine-Israel enforcement}} states: "This notice is only effective if given by an uninvolved administrator and logged here." User:Shrike has notified more than one user, the latest example here. Shrike doesn't use the suggested template but a variant that doesn't include any language about a non-involved admin. BTW, I'm not accusing Shrike of acting in bad faith. I'd just like to know if what they're doing is appropriate.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 18:00, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Second and related question. Can a non-admin slap a notice on an article talk page that the article is subject to sanctions? Again, ARBPIA refers to the notice but doesn't say who can add the notice. It's even less clear (to me) than the logging of notifications to editors.
If you think I should ask these questions elsewhere, please tell me where. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 18:00, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
The IP who was recently editing Assassination of Abraham Lincoln has been a plague on all sorts of articles relating to Lincoln, Kennedy, the Titanic and Alcatraz for more than a year. When engaged they're polite and reasonable, but then they go right back to pointless and sometimes ungrammatical rearrangement of sentences, insertion of OR and opinion, and general disruption. I've probably made more than 50 blocks this year. They edit from a UK Carphone Warehouse range that's highly dynamic but relatively unused. I've tried short rangeblocks, but multiple /16 ranges are needed and I don't like to do that, at least without checkuser input on activity elsewhere in the range. Any ideas? I and other editors have tried patience and reasoning and persuasion, but in the end nothing has changed, and I've gone back to summarily blocking them and reverting everything, despite a certain appreciation that they've been consistently nice when confronted. Nevertheless there was an incident in September when they made an edit implying suicide [2] (turned out to be a quote from The Final Confession of Jack the Ripper), and they've admitted that they understand why we have problems with their editing [3]. I've protected the article that have been hit the worst: Edward Smith (sea captain) and Charles Leale most recently; their histories are littered with 92.x edits and reversions. Acroterion (talk) 22:30, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello Courcelles! You accepted the WP:RFPP for Royal Rumble (2013) [4] however you didn't protect the page. Could you please protect the page? Thank you! Vacation nine 00:00, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Your skills are requested on ACC at request #83563. Thank you. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 00:27, 25 November 2012 (UTC) (Commented in-system, thanks for the heads up. Courcelles 02:05, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Missed at least this one. - jc37 09:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Could you take a look, or have another CU take a look, at User Talk:Danton's Jacobin? The user is requesting unblock, and since its a CU block, only y'all can handle the matter. As a side note, the user evaded the block to edit as an IP. Qwyrxian ( talk) 12:33, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
While I understand that they presumably are all grouped together due to the concern about confidentiality, I think that the removal of checkuser and oversight should be a separate motion for clarity. Since the behind-the-scenes removals (email lists and the arb wiki) are different than en.wp user-right removals. (Arbcom would be using two separate types of abilities.) There's a long tradition concerning arbcom and desysop, for example. and I think you may want to dot your I's and cross your T's on this. - jc37 21:13, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
I have no problem with trusting the committee to do what's right (the spirit of IAR, after all : )
I just think they should be separate.
And honestly, if half passes and half doesn't, then that's the ruling of the committee.
And now that you say that, I'm feeling uncomfortable with the idea of "controlling" the committee through an un-split motion. I'm not saying you are, or even intended that. Just how it's starting to feel. - jc37 21:40, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles, I was hoping to make an article for the 90s PC game Dinosaur Safari, and I noticed it was PRODed last year. Would you mind restoring a copy to my namespace so I can work on it? I may end up completely rewriting it, but I don't want to duplicate any effort that's already been done. If it makes you feel more comfortable, you may want to know that I've previously restored a deleted article into something decent, making Pro-Life (politician) into a DYK. Thanks, BDD ( talk) 22:45, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
![]() Dispute Resolution – Volunteer Survey Invite Hello Courcelles. To follow up on the first survey in April, I am conducting a second survey to learn more about dispute resolution volunteers - their motivations for resolving disputes, the experiences they've had, and their ideas for the future. I would appreciate your thoughts. I hope that with the results of this survey, we will learn how to increase the amount of active, engaged volunteers, and further improve dispute resolution processes. The survey takes around five to ten minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click
HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have either listed yourself as a volunteer at a dispute resolution forum, or are a member of a dispute resolution committee. For more information, please see the page that describes my fellowship work which can be found here. Szhang (WMF) ( talk) 02:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC) |
You're the "lucky" winner to be the first admin to top my watchlist at this particular moment. Would you please take a look at User talk:My76Strat#Question, and please offer your thoughts on the situation? - jc37 07:17, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
![]() Articles for creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are 2854 submissions waiting to be reviewed and many help requests at our help desk.
If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the
reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog. You might wish to add {{
AFC status}} or {{
AfC Defcon}} to your userpage, which will alert you to the number of open submissions.
Plus, reviewing is easy when you use our new semi-automated
reviewing script!
|
You are invited to Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC, an editathon, Wikipedia meet-up and workshops focused on film and the performing arts that will be held on Saturday, December 1, 2012, at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts (at Lincoln Center), as part of the Wikipedia Loves Libraries events being held across the USA.
All are welcome, sign up on the wiki and at meetup.com!-- Pharos ( talk) 07:00, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Is there a case somewhere I can look at? Just wondering about what to do about his edits and any articles he created. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 08:31, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I'm wondering if you would be able to delete User:List of Home and Away characters (1995)? Slight error as I'm working with a smaller screen at the minute. Thanks in advance.
Conquistador2k6 30 November 2012 20:00(UTC)
Any chance of you revisiting? A new IP sock has popped up very soon after the others were blocked. Thanks. -- Biker Biker ( talk) 22:18, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low
to High
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 13:34, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Courcelles, I'm not sure what to make of the new category that you are adding to swimmer bios. It's apparently for the FINA world championships (25m), but that's not obvious from the category name. Using "FINA" in the category name to distinguish it from the world championships (50m) doesn't help, either, because both events are sponsored by FINA.
Here's what FINA calls their two world championship swimming events:
In both cases, it would appear that our category names are confusing in that they do not use the official FINA names of the events, and their meanings cannot be easily distinguished one from the other.
Also, for reasons we have previously discussed, the category name should conclude, not begin, with the word "medalists."
Please let me know your thoughts on these points. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 21:36, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
-- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 18:13, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
It seems that indefinitely blocked user Danton's Jacobin evading block: [6] ( 79.99.144.141 ( talk · contribs)). GiW ( talk) 18:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for semi-protecting 27 Club. That was definitely needed, and I was thinking about requesting it anyway. I believe the indefinite time frame is also appropriate in this case. Anyway, like I said, thanks. — Mudwater ( Talk) 14:32, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
Did you happen to see my email amongst the myriad I'm sure flood your inbox on a daily basis? -- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 19:04, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Did you "oversight" some recent IP edits to " Lung cancer"? If so, may I ask why? Axl ¤ [Talk] 12:11, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Just saw you pop up on my watchlist.
I already dropped a note at AN.
But would you take a look at the situation developing? - jc37 07:17, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles, I saw your comment on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lurulu and have replied to it there. However, a notification on a user's talk page after a block is not mandatory. The main requirement per WP:EXPLAINBLOCK is that administrators must supply a clear and specific block reason that indicates why a user was blocked. If such reasoning is supplied in the block log, when the user attempts to edit, they will see a big splash screen explaining that they are blocked, the reason for the block, provided one was entered, and other useful information. (At least that's the way it looked the last time I blocked my doppelgänger.)
I agree that administrators should in most cases leave a notice on the talk page as well, but that is not mandatory. In practice, I almost always notify the blocked user via a talk page message or more frequently a template, but in vandalism-only accounts, I (and others that I know of) sometimes don't bother since the reasoning is obvious. Toddst1 ( talk) 13:41, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
{{
unblock}}
is usually helpful for long-term users, esp. if doing an indef.) (For the record, I agree with the underlying block, the litany of deletion notices on that talk page meant a stronger message was needed.)
Courcelles
08:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC)Re: this - my sig has just barfed also. A software blip, presumably. Honestly, we just can't get the staff nowadays <g> - Sitush ( talk) 01:47, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Well, Courcelles, if you insist on clogging up the entire "Recent changes" page with your fixes, then I'm just going to go make myself a drink and finish watching Law and Order. Come to think of it, you're probably a CSI person, which is why you're editing like crazy. Drmies ( talk) 04:46, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
When you take care of an issue raised on a talk page, please acknowledge it somehow (on that page) so that other editors aren't looking for the problem on the article page for nothing. Thank you. -- Musdan77 ( talk) 16:58, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi, you speedied 1958 Nottinghamshire Avro Vulcan crash today under G5, but I was wondering if I could have the text of the last revision? There was nothing wrong with the article per se, and I'd like to re-create it. Thanks! § FreeRangeFrog croak 23:49, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello and thanks for doing a check at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Party4321. However, I noticed there might be more users involved, and the master account ist actually User:Whatthedog, but the case has already been closed by an Admin. Im not sure if I should launch a new report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Whatthedog since the case is already closed months ago. Whats the best way to proceed from here? (just need someone to point me in the right direction) - A1candidate ( talk) 19:29, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Dear Courcelles,
There is a current discussion on Penyulap's talk page which involves other people asking the user for information. I don't see a reason for them to be blocked from contributing to the discussion directly; though right now due to being talk-page blocked Penyualp is corresponding through third parties by email. Since everyone involved would prefer for the discussion to be public, could you please unblock talk-page access to facilitate, at least for the duration of the thread?
Thank you, – SJ + 03:47, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
I've just reverted (as two separate edits) an edit by Lockheart1 ( talk · contribs) which felt oddly familiar; checking the page history I find that half of it was very similar to an edit made by Google9999 ( talk · contribs) who you blocked. I suspect that they may be the same person. What do you think? -- Redrose64 ( talk) 19:55, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
At 1958 Nottinghamshire Avro Vulcan crash. Reporting in as requested :) Thanks again for the help. § FreeRangeFrog croak 20:24, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
The WikiProject Articles for creation newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[8] Bishonen | talk 15:18, 19 December 2012 (UTC).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mobeus_Robotica
Only edit is to rag on Malleus.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 21:13, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
as a Mac user. Over at the latest Malleus fandango you have typed a '2' where I believe you intended an '@'. pablo 22:01, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles. I was wondering if you saw my comments at the RFAR page about the idea of a binding RFC, and would ask that you consider an alternative, such as how the dispute on Verifiability was handled. Use mediation to come up with clear proposals for the community, then take it to a binding RFC. At the very least, regular mediation should be attempted again. I'm unconvinced that a straight binding RFC would be productive - historically most have been train wrecks. Please think it over. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 08:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello Courcelles, I hope this messages finds you well and your holidays are doing well. I see that you were the administrator that deleted a page that I created for Justin B. Terry-Smith. I want to revive it BUT of course with your persmission. This time I would make sure that there are more sites and references. I believe one of the issues last time was that it did not have a lot of reliable references. This time I would really like to try to keep his page up and I have also found a picture of him on the Wiki Commons website. I believe I can use this pic instead of finding one of him and getting permission from an outside source. Here is the site where I found his picture http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Justin_B_Terry-Smith_-_DC_Gay_Pride_Parade_2012_(7171057087).jpg if this is granted I wanted to thank you so much and also thank you for even reading my post and request to you.
( Jsmithco98 ( talk) 16:31, 20 December 2012 (UTC)).
I noticed that you had applied a "checkuserblock" to this IP, possibly in connection with a sockpuppet investigation. The IP is connected to indefinitely blocked users Google6666/ Google9999 [9], as can be seen here [10], where the IP identifies himself/herself/itself as Google9999. So if the block on the IP is connected to a sock puppet investigation those socks ought to be added to Google6666's list of known aliases. Thomas.W ( talk) 17:42, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Is it really a good idea to semi-protect an AfD to protect against participation by sockpuppets? WP:AFDFORMAT says that "Unregistered or new users are welcome to contribute to the discussion". I think the closing admin would be able to figure out which commenters are sockpuppets because of their weak arguments or because other editors will point them out. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:07, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
Holiday Cheer | |
Michael Q. Schmidt my talk page is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings. |
TheGeneralUser
(talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! 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
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hello Courcelles! Wishing you a very Happy Merry Christmas :) TheGeneralUser (talk) 13:24, 25 December 2012 (UTC) &Thank you; I hope yoiu had a happy time with your family yesterday! Courcelles
Some Christmas traditions are very difficult to explain. Kind of like Wikipedia policies.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Round My Family Tree ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hey, Courcelles, you closed the abovd AfD as a merge on December 17. Within hours, User:Buck Winston, who nominated the article for deletion, redirected the article to the merge destination article, The Tigger Movie, without merging any content. I have no interest in any of the articles, but I noticed it because Buck was on my watchlist from an earlier block. I reverted Buck's redirect. He has again done the same thing today, with an edit summary in which he says, explain what can be merged before undoing.
I don't know what the proper course of action is in these circumstances. The AfD attracted very little attention, which seems to be the case with the merger. Because of the bot, the Talk page of the destination article states that the merger actually took place, which is not true (not sure why those templates work that way).
I'm not going to take any further action until I hear from you. Hope you're enjoying your holiday break.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 14:42, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Am working on this CCI and while checking files, ran into this one which has been transferred to Commons. When you read the en.WP copy of the file, this user's name appears as the person receiving the photo, but when you go to the file at Commons, the history shows that the photo was sent to this user, who is the subject of the CCI and suspected of socking. This user is not blocked and edited last on 7 October 2012. AFAIK, there was no OTRS done for the photo and I'll note it as such; the issue also seems to be whether the user who is not the subject of the CCI may be another identity of the person who is the subject of it. Can you help? Thanks, We hope ( talk) 01:46, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
OK-have linked this conversation to the CCI page. If it's a problem, these guys File:Beatles in Birmingham 1963.jpg said they'd help us out. :-) We hope ( talk) 18:51, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
User:Chromium Oxide has only made two edits, just to rag on Malleus. Is it the same sockmaster as the one who was doing that a little over a week ago?-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 01:19, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
-- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 00:05, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Hey, Courcelles, User:Deathlaser is on IRC, asking for an unblock. (Obviously not the right venue for requesting one, but whatevs.) I see that you originally blocked him as a sockpuppet, but is this a checkuser block, or just a normal block? I don't want to point him in the wrong direction. Thanks. Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 18:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Oh, by the way, Moe Epsilon also asked BsZ about this, since he was the last person to modify the block. Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 18:17, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
We've got another two (or more?). – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 02:46, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Hey, could you please move/merge User:JuneGloom07/Sense with Sense and Sensibility (2008 TV miniseries) for me? - JuneGloom Talk 00:54, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to celebrate Wikipedia Day and the 12th anniversary (!) of the founding of the site at Wikipedia Day NYC on Saturday February 23, 2013 at New York University; sign up for Wikipedia Day NYC here, or at bit.ly/wikidaynyu. Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues!
We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience!-- Pharos ( talk) 01:41, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
Keep up the great AfD work! Make sure that your not edit conflicting yourself though. ( [13] [14] [15]) -- Cheers, Ril ey 01:04, 3 January 2013 (UTC) |
Hello Courcelles, hope your having a good new year. Will you consolidate these ( SBS Transit Service 243, SMRT Service 307, SBS Transit Service 143, SBS Transit Service 151, SBS Transit Service 284, SBS Transit Service 163) AfDs into one AfD, similar to what you did with Nordic skiing. They're all similar & have had no input thus far, the first one listed above is the initial one. Regards ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 11:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
File:Happy New Year 2013.jpg | Have an enjoyable New Year! | |
Hello Courcelles: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable
New Year! Cheers,
Northamerica1000
(talk)
19:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
|
You relisted this AfD. It appears that a consensus had already been reached prior to you relisting it. Please would you elaborate on your rationale for relisting it? Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 12:29, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Courcelles. You participated at the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of National Wildlife Refuges at risk from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill discussion. The result of that discussion was to merge the List of National Wildlife Refuges at risk from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill into Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. The list was merged. However, there is a related discussion if the Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill was split correctly from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and if it should be merged back there. Relevant sections for this discussion are this and this. Your comments are appreciated. Thank you. Beagel ( talk) 21:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles, you semi protected Christopher Robin ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) just after it had been PC protected by User:Darkwind. I've made a request at WP:RFUP that one of them be lifted. Regards, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 03:49, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I don't know if it's too late, but could you userfy The Speakeasy (Smoke or Fire album) for me? I want to see if I can get it it up to snuff to stick around this time. Jasper420
Hi! Last year, in 17 March 2012 you removed Scotland move-protection, I guess by TW error. I'm contacting you in to let you know if you want either, you re-add it or you left it as it is and let's see how it goes. And welcome back. Tbhotch. ™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:57, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
I received an email from Ryoung122 ( talk · contribs), whom you blocked from editing his own talk page in September. He wants to plea for a modification in his block length from indefinite to something more definite. Would you object if I unlocked his talk page for that purpose? ~ Amatulić ( talk) 23:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Sir, can you please restore this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conqueror_Browser so that I can edit the article with further links and sources and updates about new versions. Thanks a lot akashtaker001 14:24, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Hiya. You relisted one AfD for a fourth time (which isn't supposed to happen) and failed to make a call on another with a more than adequate number of responses to forge a policy-based consensus, holding it over instead. I'd suggest that if you're not ready to pull the trigger on an AfD needing a close, you leave it for somebody who is. Thanks. —Tim //// Carrite ( talk) 00:02, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Someone (70.239.199.2) identifying himself as Matty Staudt recently posted at the Help Desk, asking "My page, Matty Staudt, was deleted and it seems it was a speedy delete by the foundation. I work in media and it is importan that I have my page up. Can this be remedied?" [16] You prod deleted the page. [17] There is US State News September 27, 2006 and Mobile Internet October 1, 2009. There may be other source material that could be found during AfD. I know its not much, but the person indicated that the deletion has had some effect on his life. Given that 70.239.199.2 is contesting the prod and this new source information, perhaps we can send the Matty Staudt article to AfD. -- Uzma Gamal ( talk) 14:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Thankyou for adding people to actresses categories. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 22:08, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Why did you relist Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phoenix (wargaming magazine)? Note that there is followup commentary at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ioannis Diakidis and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Endeavour Programme. As per WP:Articles for deletion#How to contribute, "...a pattern of groundless opinion, proof by assertion, and ignoring content guidelines may become disruptive." The comment attempting to rebut the speedy keep is another proof by assertion. Now that two editors have joined the conversation, I am not suggesting that you should change anything at this AfD, and I expect to change the speedy keep to a comment. The point is that there are 350 related AfDs in the pipeline, and that IMO relisters have a role to play in closing substandard discussions. To repeat a couple of sentences of the comments linked above "Speedy keeps are generally closed with no prejudice against speedy renomination, and one of the purposes of such a closure is to allow the nominator a chance to properly prepare or improve the deletion argument. Leaving such AfDs open for any longer than necessary poses a risk that subsequent editors will invest time in a substandard discussion that could already have been closed for improvement." Respectfully, Unscintillating ( talk) 14:01, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi, would you please consider a revision deletion on the following, due to grossly insulting material? [18] Thanks. Logical Cowboy ( talk) 05:45, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Corcelles. How are you doing? I have started a deletion review on Wildebeest after my request for it's undeletion was denied and I would like you to check it out. Rtkat3 ( talk) 11:33, January 21 2013 (UTC)
Hi Corcelles, in the Socrates page (which is semi-protected), I would like to suggest adding the following final paragraph to the Later Historical Effects section:
Over the past century numerous plays about Socrates have also focussed on Socrates’ life and influence. One of the most recent has been Socrates on Trial: A play based on Aristophanes' Clouds and Plato's Apology, Crito, and Phaedo, adapted for modern performance.
In the Further Reading section, I would also like to suggest adding:
Thanks.
--
Hi Corcelles - The protection of Jessica Ennis has expired and there have been two instances of vandalism already. Please can you re-apply the protection?
It seem that you use a bot ! It's true? -- Gac 06:32, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I was wondering if you could review a discussion re: the exclusion of the National Women's Soccer League on Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues and provide your feedback? Discussion is available here. I'm seeking some impartial feedback from an administrator. Thank you for your consideration. Hmlarson ( talk) 00:25, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Corcelles - The protection of Jessica Ennis has expired and there have been two instances of vandalism already. Please can you re-apply the protection?
It seem that you use a bot ! It's true? -- Gac 06:32, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Corcelles, in the Socrates page (which is semi-protected), I would like to suggest adding the following final paragraph to the Later Historical Effects section:
Over the past century numerous plays about Socrates have also focussed on Socrates’ life and influence. One of the most recent has been Socrates on Trial: A play based on Aristophanes' Clouds and Plato's Apology, Crito, and Phaedo, adapted for modern performance.
In the Further Reading section, I would also like to suggest adding:
Thanks.
(It would be best to propose this on
Talk:Socrates using {{
semiprotected}}
, as I really don't have the background on the subject to easily figure out if your edit would be good or not.
Courcelles
17:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
--
Hello, I was wondering if you could review a discussion re: the exclusion of the National Women's Soccer League on Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues and provide your feedback? Discussion is available here. I'm seeking some impartial feedback from an administrator. Thank you for your consideration. Hmlarson ( talk) 00:25, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey Courcelles - this is to notify you that there is a discussion starting on the Article Feedback RfC talkpage that has ramifications for the RfC itself. Your input is much appreciated :). Thanks! and apologies if I've missed anyone Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 16:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Dear Courcelles, I have talked with Wikipedia editors who think that they can collect the nesessary sources, references and citations to prove Schola Latina Universalis is significant and notable enough to have an article about it on Wikipedia. If I make only a Google search on the exact words (between quotation marks) 105.000 finds on the exact name show that it has a name and a presence. What would be the procedure to restart the page, or what is your opinion? Thanks! -- Gonda Attila ( talk) 11:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Back in July 2012 you blocked an IP address as a sock puppet of banned user User:Racepacket. The block expired a few days ago, and the same IP address is making the same edits to the same pages. So I've raised another sockpuppet investigation. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 18:21, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for going the extra step and updating the photo link here on enwp, when moving the file! - Pete ( talk) 00:15, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm out of my depth with a Commons issue. Could you check your email? Cheers, -- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 18:00, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
I have withdrawn my request but you guys are still voting.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 21:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles. Consensus has been reached at this AfD nomination. Can you please close it? Thanks.-- Jetstreamer Talk 22:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles. I appreciate your effort in changing all the file names in de:Bildtafel der Verkehrszeichen in Schweden etc. But wouldn't it be possible for you to make one big change innstead of making tons of small changes. That's cluttering up the watchlists and making it difficult to single out any problem edits in there. Thanks. -- TZorn ( talk) 07:40, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
A couple of years ago, I was granted the IP block exemption right to allow me to continue to edit, as another user on the network had been blocked and I had been caught in the autoblock. However, circumstances have now changed, so could you CheckUser me to see if I still require the flag and if not, remove it as per Wikipedia:IP block exemption. Thank you very much. -- Gilderien Chat| List of good deeds 19:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC) Worm That Turned suggested I take this to another CheckUser so I thought that you would be able to do this :)
FYI, I spammed you again (OTRS related this time).-- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 02:32, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey, hope you're well. I have a bit of a dilemma that I hope you can help me with. Yesterday, Neighbours announced they would be introducing a character called Brad Willis, however they previously had a character with the same name back in the early '90s. So, my problem is what do I call the article for the new Brad? - JuneGloom Talk 02:03, 8 February 2013 (UTC) (I'd use parantheticals like {1990's Neighbours character) and (2010's Neighbours character) with the current name being a dab page. Courcelles 02:06, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Courcelles. In the process of making an inquiry at WP:RSN, I stumbled across a 2004 ArbCom decision that appears to be relevant to the source in question. I was hoping to ask someone with ArbCom for clarification on what the previous decision means, but an official request for clarification seems to be part of the dispute process. May I run my question by you first, or is there another forum I should consult? Thanks! Location ( talk) 05:45, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
Hey, thanks for all the work at WP:AFD. You beat me in many of them! LlamaAl ( talk) 00:24, 14 February 2013 (UTC) |
Just a heads up since I see "some" indications of a block evasion. I could easily be wrong but since you had handled parts of the block I'm leaving it up to you. I see multiple edits since February 2012 (blocked since sep 2012) by anon editor 96.25.189.9 on tennis pages and longevity pages. There aren't a lot of editors interested in both topics. I'm not saying the edits are a problem but it's the exact same m.o. of indef blocked editor Ryoung122. Coincidence, maybe. He has asked multiple times to be unblocked, which I have no opinion on, but if the rules are no editing (even his talk page) while blocked, I thought I would at least bring this editing to your attention in case it's the same editor. Thanks. Fyunck(click) ( talk) 22:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
You forgot to put the block notice on Zakzoom1992's talk page. -- Starship9000 (roller coaster fan) 01:57, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
{{
checkuserblock-account}}
would have been displayed to him if e tried to edit from that account.
Courcelles
02:36, 24 February 2013 (UTC)![]() You are invited to join
WikiProject Cleanup, a WikiProject and resource for Wikipedia cleanup listings, information and discussion. |
---|
WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1st, 2013 – March 31st, 2013.
Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 2000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the
drive's page and help out!
Delivered by User:EdwardsBot on behalf of Wikiproject Articles for Creation at 14:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Would you mind taking a look at this merge discussion? It's gone on for more than a month and I think it's time that an uninvolved admin. closed it. Thanks. --- The Old Jacobite The '45 01:53, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
You deleted this article per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Atticus Mitchell and I have recreated it addressing, I believe, the concerns raised in the AfD. After 19 months I would not expect that a deletion review would be required as this is basically a new article, but I was advised at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion#Atticus Mitchell where I requested restoration of old revisions to contact you and see if you agree that I have met the AfD raised concerns or if I need to request a deletion review. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 22:14, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
You blocked this editor for disruptive editing and threatenibg behaviour about two years ago. He was, as i read the edits and userpage, twelve years old at the time. He is now, I think, fourteen, and from his unblock request seems to have grown up somewhat. I am minded to unblock, but would first value your opinion. -- Anthony Bradbury "talk" 21:50, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Maybe it's residual confusion from daylight savings time, but you're jumping the gun a little at AfD. Not that i have any problems with any of the closes, but its not a good example. DGG ( talk ) 01:40, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Courcelles. In a dispute over an article's content, I believe a consensus if forming to implement 1RR as a means to ending an edit war and letting show the consensus' preference for the content in question. Can you comment on whether or not you think 1RR can be implemented (i.e. put in place like 3RR with violations subject to blocks) without ArbCom's involvement? Thanks! Location ( talk) 15:53, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Courcelles. I have several articles deletion: Kravtsov family, Talk:Kravtsov family and Pyotr Kravtsov, this articles was wrong redirect by some colleagues and now after I moved back content I don't know how to nominate them to deletion. Can I ask You for help with this problem? Best regards, Kravtz ( talk) 03:10, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Courcelles
Please can you explain why you deleted the article entitled Future Cut in december?
thanks
( Thefrontroom ( talk) 18:04, 13 March 2013 (UTC))
Wikipedia should not be a Gestapo type state [22]. It should not operate on the word of secret informers and in-camera trials. Who was the informer on User:George Ponderevo or was s/he invented by the Arbcom) and please supply diffs for the supposed serious crimes. Then please tell the project how each Arb voted - or are the Arbs ashamed of their actions? Giano 13:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC) Yoiu asked this question to everyone, so I'll just point you back to Kirill's and Risker's answers; there was indeed an individual, who is not (and never has been) an arb who raised this matter, we really can't say who it was. And everyone's vote is recorded on what was posted. Courcelles 21:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Please unprotect Wikipedia:CheckUser; two years is an extremely long time, and it appears that good faith edit requests are being ignored on the talk page. (see Wikipedia_talk:CheckUser#Suggested_update)
Also, please either unprotect your talk page or provide "an unprotected user talk subpage linked conspicuously from their main talk page to allow good faith comments from non-autoconfirmed users." per Wikipedia:Protection_policy#User_talk_pages NE Ent 14:29, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi! How did you create your accounts on every wiki - did you use an automated tool, or just manually visit every site? I'm trying to figure out how people created them before Krinkle's tool came out in early 2012, for an investigation. (In case you haven't figured out, you're one of my go-to people who has a user page and account on almost every wiki
). --
Rs
chen
7754
02:40, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Courcelles! I have a question about your semiprotection of the article Rachel Maddow. This article has been under persistent attack for the past week or so by a sockmaster, using multiple socks a day. First it was the talk page [23], then when that was semiprotected he switched to the article page. [24] The SPI is here Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JoMontNW and is not yet resolved. I've been an interested spectator since some of the attacks have been directed toward pages on my watchlist. Today Bongwarrior, who has been wrestling with this sock for days, semiprotected the Rachel Maddow article page for a month. Shortly afterward you overrode that, semiprotecting the page on BLP grounds for only 9 hours. I'm wondering, did you mean to do that? Or was it accidental because the two actions came so close together? Thanks. -- MelanieN ( talk) 22:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Since you blocked Rollo's last sock, User:Oogie Pringle, I thought you'd want to be aware of this current SPI, possibly involving Rollo. I am notifying you as the SPI clerk is asking for admin assistance. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Rivertorch ( talk) 04:57, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Please take a look at this. Thank you very much. -- Lecen ( talk) 21:06, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello Courcelles,
A few months ago there was an arbitration request about Future Perfect at Sunrise where the arbitrator Sir Fozzie said that FPAS should make no more admin actions related to editors involved in the race and intelligence area, "or the next step WILL be to hand out sanctions." In the same request you said that a wider-ranging case is likely going to be necessary. Sir Fozzie seems inactive now, but I'd like you to please clarify something.
Future Perfect at Sunrise has not followed the instructions Sir Fozzie gave him. About a month ago he blocked my IP range with the explanation that it was to make me register, but the block itself was a hard block that disabled registration for my IP range. He refused to respond to other editors' questions about that inconsistency in my user talk, his own user talk, or in the AN thread another editor posted about it. This issue might seem "stale" now, but that's because his block made it so following his instructions to register took me a month. I finally was able to get an account just a few days ago.
Now that FPAS again did what he was told not to do, I think that "next step" mentioned by Sir Fozzie should happen now. But I don't know how to make that happen. Could you please explain what I need to do to get the arbitrators to address Future Perfect at Sunrise's irresponsibility with his admin powers? I also ask that you please explain what you meant by "a wider-ranging case", e.g. who it must include for you to accept it. Akuri ( talk) 07:03, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
It is I, Alison Weir. I am back. I demand the right to edit my article. By the way, I was born in 1954 not 1951.Yours,Alison Weir — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.237.28 ( talk) 16:07, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
I see that you blocked http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/210.94.41.89
Could you please revert his vandalisms at NYU Poly and elsewhere please? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kateapply ( talk • contribs) 02:04, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
Could I have 2 mins of your time? As I’ll be working on some other projects for Wikimedia Germany as well from now on the time I can spend on Wikidata will be reduced. This means I’ll have to figure out what is useful to spend time on. If you’re reading this could you let me know for example on this discussion page? Also if you have ideas how to improve the weekly summaries please post them. -- Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) ( talk)
Hi there,
In 2010, you closed Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Boris_Pelekh as "redirect". The redirect target doesn't really make it clear why Boris is directly related to Nat & Alex Wolff, and I think it might be better to delete the Boris Pelekh article instead. I'm not sure whether WP:RDFD is the right venue, or whether you can amend the discussion conclusion and just delete the redirect instead. L Faraone 18:05, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Based on feedback for last week’s call for comments we will continue this newsletter. However more community help will be needed. From now on they’ll be drafted at d:Wikidata:Status updates/Next and your help is very welcome.
Hi -- I notice you've been active in nominating at RfA over the past year, and would like to invite you to join the WikiProject for Nominators, which aims to support editors interested in nominating there. We'd be glad of your expertise in getting this new project off the ground. Apologies for the talk-page spamming if you've already seen this message a dozen times. Regards, Espresso Addict ( talk) 23:25, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles! You're invited to our next meeting for Wikipedia Meetup NYC on Sunday April 14 -this weekend- at Symposium Greek Restaurant @ 544 W 113th St (in the back room), on the Upper West Side in the Columbia University area.
Please sign up, and add your ideas to the agenda for Sunday. Thanks!
Delivered on behalf of User:Pharos, 17:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello Courcelles, this is notification of a
WP:AN discussion regarding an editor you have dealt with. The thread is:
WP:AN#Community ban for BLP-violating, sock-hopping conspiracy theorist from Hyogo, Japan. Appreciate your input, thanks!
Zad
68
18:04, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Based on feedback for last week’s call for comments we will continue this newsletter. However more community help will be needed. From now on they’ll be drafted at d:Wikidata:Status updates/Next and your help is very welcome.
Thanks for oversighting an edit--
I dream of horses @
03:32, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Another flower for not only protecting my userpage, but getting that I wanted it to be temprorary.--
I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{
Talkback}} message on
my talk page. @
19:24, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
the page Darkorbit has been deleted last by you. I was thinking that it should be redirected to the page DarkOrbit. can you fix that? -- Echoblast53 ( talk) 05:31, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Could you do a CU on User:Do Not Delete, checking him against User:98.204.145.138, User:Hollisz and User:Zimmermanh1997, please? SPI regarding this can by found here. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 18:32, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles. I'm giving some serious thought to unblocking this user - I'm inclined to believe his story, based on certain dissimilarites between him and his supposed sockpuppet (most glaringly, their completely different approach to edit summaries). Obviously checkuser will show a match, given the circumstances, so this a behavioural call. I'd appreciate your thoughts before I take any action. Cheers, Yunshui 雲 水 13:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles. I found a decent 2011 pic of Maria for the article: File:Maria Kirilenko 2011.jpg. If you have time, can you do a quick Flickr review of it on Commons? INeverCry 21:01, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Dear Courcelles,
I do not understand why you gave granted Robotje - the reviewer - status as if you look at his talk page - there seems to be a list of people he argues with ! He does not seem to read the - References, Links and Sources - of the pages he criticices at all before he starts with his negative comments - which he has been doing on my newest page Adrianus Johannes Lemmens. He brings this wrong attitude from the Dutch Wikipedia web site where there is a very bad Cyber Bullying culture and I would have thought that we do not want that culture here ? Glemmens1940 ( talk) 17:28, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
I would like to know why you have deleted the lambda basketball wiki page? Ngbaus ( talk) 23:59, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Is it cool with you if I borrow the nifty code for your "AUSC former member" userbox? I promise I will not use it for nefarious purposes.... -- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 21:19, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Hey Courcelles. A number of us are asking abrcom members a few questions regarding a prior case here [25]. The questions are basically 1) did you vote on this ban appeal 2) if so how 3) or are you against releasing this sort of details to the community. Many thanks Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 19:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
for your comment here. I have a busy day ahead IRL, but will follow up on this as soon as possible. (definitely within the next 24 hours if not sooner) — Ched : ? 10:36, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Courcelles for your advice, your time, and your indulgence. — Ched : ? 02:34, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
- JuneGloom Talk 23:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
|
![]() | 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. |
Archive 100 | ← | Archive 102 | Archive 103 | Archive 104 | Archive 105 | Archive 106 | → | Archive 110 |
I see you have fullprotected Penyulap's talkpage, Courcelles. Penyulap doesn't in any case have access to it per the terms (terms just instituted by you) of his block, and I can't see that you have supplied any explanation for why other users shouldn't get to post there. We've had the situation of "page non-protected, user without tpa" before, for a considerable time; we had it from September 28 to October 31; were there any problems with that? Problems on the page, I mean. (Cheatsheet: no, there weren't.) Admittedly, there was a silly request for arbitration about my unprotection of the page, but then that was promptly rejected by the arbitrators, with a generous helping of criticism of the original protection. Since you were part of that process (where you were the only arb who even evinced enough doubt about it to call for a reply from me), I'm surprised to see you now protecting Penyulap's talkpage yourself. All the arguments against Jc37's protection of the page made at that RFAR apply equally to your recent protection, as far as I can see. Would you please explain your rationale or unprotect? Or, as monotonous as this is getting, I will. Bishonen | talk 21:53, 4 November 2012 (UTC).
No idea if there have been more instances of socking or not, but I blocked User:180.181.67.106 a few weeks ago for clear (self-admitted) socking at Jimbo Wales talk page. The earlier block evasions with the same IP at ThatPeskyCommoner's talk page were IMO acceptable (under IAR, no need to become inhuman in such situations), but the later edits at Jimbo's talk page were standard block evasion. Fram ( talk) 08:32, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
I can't believe that this has happened. Elen had no need to go to Pen's talk page, I would say that if anyone is trolling here it is not Pen, at least as far as could see. Elen is quite able to tell me to"sod off" and tell Bish never to darken her talk page again, but constitutionally unable to leave Pen alone.
Or was the "trolling" the letter to the ombudsman? In which case this stinks of Arbcom closing ranks (especially with AGK and Brad chipping in). I know Arbcom has been very slow in seeing the conflict of interest failures that I have brought up in the past, but it would have been wise to have left this to an uninvolved admin. I had not intially noticed that the complaint was against you, but that makes matters much much worse.
Moreover I am deeply unhappy about the lack of thought, the lack of explanation, the general shoddiness with which blocks are handed out and other admin actions taken, quite apart form the total lack of human consideration for one's fellow editors. It is clear that in the first instance a block was made for a good faith redirect, and that subsequent blocks were based on empty headed reading of light hearted comments.
Rich
Farmbrough,
15:29, 5 November 2012 (UTC).
They "dispersed the crowds" at Tianamen Square and the surroundings, as well. Was that right? Pesky ( talk) 07:38, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Adding: of course I realise that Pen has "issues". I;m not denying that for a moment. But he also has talents. One is in the area of visual / graphics work. Another is in the area of sniffing out socks. And I cannot rid my mind of the lurking suspicion that, just maybe, his biggest "sin" was that he got far too close to the scent trail of a mole. A so-far-undiscovered sockmaster, possibly in a high-profile position. Pesky ( talk) 09:13, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
More adding (sorry!): I've been involved in the Real Life situation of investigating and dealing with abuses of power and process, and miscarriages of justice, for over a decade. With years and years of experience and investigation, one develops a "nose" for little things which ring quiet alarm bells, and one of those things is an apparent out-of-scale attempt to "make something go away". On the whole, it tends to occur when someone, somewhere, has something to hide; it frequently gets things brushed under the carpet and "disappeared" for years. The case of the West Midlands Serious Crime Squad, the London Police corruption investigation, and an unnerving array of others, illustrate this. Sometimes the reaction is just too much for the apparent offences. People are "shut up". Pesky ( talk) 09:37, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Pen's admitted joke sock was actually nothing compared to the admitted joke sock of Il Duce of the Featured Article space, Raul654. Which admin is going to volunteer to block Raul, revoke his talk page access, and full-protect his talk page to keep any wayward supporters from complaining there? Show of hands, please.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 23:29, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
There seem to be a rather duff assumption on the go on this talkpage. A blocked user cannot create a legitimate sock. They are blocked. They cannot edit Wikipedia. They cannot legitimately create a different account and edit Wikipedia from that while they remain blocked. Creating an account elsewhere and sneaking in via automatic account creation is common among sockmasters (I believe they think the checkuser tool won't pick it up). I never got a straight answer from Penyulap about the automatic account creation, and he has been editing anonymously on his IP, which definitely is socking. Elen of the Roads ( talk) 13:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Adding: it seems that we may have got ourselves into a kind of circular situation here; along the lines of "the beatings will continue until the whining has stopped". Like treating someone's allergy rash with an ointment made out of whatever it was that causes the rash ... there must be something better that we can attempt. Pesky ( talk) 05:13, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
−
Hi. I was wondering if you could please delete this sandbox User:Conquistador2k6/Lexi. It's just it's been around for a couple years and was not created by me to begin with and it's not really doing anything and I'm not really interested in editing it. Thanks in advance. User:Conquistador 2k6 Talk to me, dammit! 11 November 2012 23:44 (UTC)
Cheers. User:Conquistador 2k6 Talk to me, dammit! 12 November 2012 00:42 (UTC)
- JuneGloom Talk 22:41, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
I wanted to tell at least one member of ArbCom that I have struck and withdrawn my initial report, as the situation has taken an unexpected turn and is in the process of resolving itself. Of course, it is still up to ArbCom to decide if they want to accept the case or not, but the circumstances have changed so much that I felt it was necessary to explain. The admin has asked for his bit to be removed, understanding that this would be considered "under a cloud", and Nihonjoe has complied by removing it. There are still unanswered questions, but there is an ongoing RfC now, and those may be better to leave to the regular community, who now seems interested in seeking a solution. I sincerely appreciate the participation and insight, which ended up being a catalyst for what transpired, but feel that continuing the process may be unnecessary and/or unhelpful now that the circumstances have changed. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 14:23, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm presently considering standing in this year's ArbCom elections (rather seriously, actually...I already have a statement written and have drafted answers to some of the general questions), but I would like the opinion of someone who has been through it before. I've read User:AGK/ACE2012, but is there anything else you would point out about the elections or being an Arbitration Committee member? What do I have to lose by running in the event that I'm not elected? From your experience would the community consider me a good candidate as of now (before my statement and question answers), or do I not stand a snowball's chance in hell? Any advice you can give would be appreciated. Thanks, Ks0stm ( T• C• G• E) 20:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello Courcelles. Requesting page protection for Queen. Since the page became unprotected recently almost all edits by ip users have been reverted. In terms of views the article is very busy and has a history of vandalized edits. Thanks. Chie one ( talk) 23:34 16 October 2012 (UTC)
...are you ok if I change the RobertRosen SPI to checked status? Or are you still chipping away at it?-- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 23:39, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello Courcelles: months ago, we were in contact because of the article on "José Eduardo dos Santos". Luckily, problems with that article seem to have stopped - but now there are problems with the article on his daughter. User: Cavalo Lusitano has been editing this article in en:WP as well as in pt:WP, introducing apologetic POV, unsourced (and wrong) information etc. On the talk page of the article, User:Cruks has now requested semi-protection, and I should like to second that request. -- Aflis ( talk) 15:34, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
The problem are the edits by User: Cavalo Lusitano, all of which have to be reverted. Apparently User:Cruks, the main author of the article, did not do this before being sure the article was protected. I shall now try and do the reverts myself. -- Aflis ( talk) 14:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC) --- Done. Do you think you can semi-protect the page now, thus preventing User: Cavalo Lusitano from messing the text up once again? -- Aflis ( talk) 14:47, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
OK, right you are. So let us see what happens next. On pt:WP User:Cavalo Lusitano stopped editing the article "Isabel dos Santos" after somebody had reverted all his edits...-- Aflis ( talk) 00:14, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low
to High
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 15:36, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles!
Can you please take a look at this for me please? I'm totally confused.com as to what's happened there. When I moved those pages the other day they moved ok but I'm now being told information has been lost? Now it's like the page is on a double redirect? Every other page I redirected that day has gone through ok. That's if I'm understanding what the editor is saying! I'm just totally confused as to what's happened. I'm now off on holiday though for the next couple of weeks. Can you please have a look and advise on my talk page?-- 5 albert square ( talk) 00:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
The Rolex Ranking does not belong in a table showing LPGA Tour performance. The Rolex Ranking is NOT a measure of LPGA Tour performance. It includes LPGA Tour performance for players who play on that tour, but it is actually a measure of performance in ALL professional golf events. Furthermore, it is not at all linked to the LPGA season, so stating the Rolex Ranking in conjunction with LPGA Tour season results makes not sense. I am adding separate sections for year-end World Rankings to players' sites. See, for example, Stacy Lewis and Michelle Wie. I ask that you have patience while I continue this or, better yet, help out with the project yourself. -- Crunch ( talk) 18:56, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi, On Monday I requested that the 2011-12 Bangladesh League was moved to be simply the 2012 Bangladesh League. Something I couldn't rename myself as it was previously called that. This is for a soccer/football article. Later that evening it was moved and called 2012 Bangladesh Premier League ( I can't quite remember if this is the name I requested or not), but what already appeared to be their was this article for cricket. We now appear to have lost all the data for 2011-12 Bangladesh League and the 2012 article refers to a Bangladeshi cricket competition. Can this be restored in anyway back to say Sunday evening? Once restored I will then re-look at what the article can be called? Druryfire ( talk) 19:08, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
At the wiki diff of [1] on the right hand side, first paragraph the words "reports" is highlighted and a mouseover gives me an advertisement. Clicking the link goes to a different ad. I've not noticed this before so I may have picked up some spyware in my firefox browser. This has been happeneing with many diffs I've seen at wikipedia the last day or so. Highlighted words that are ads in the diffs. Can you check this out for me? Thanks. Fyunck(click) ( talk) 07:12, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm a bit tired of raising concerns about these sanctions at administrative noticeboards, so I'm hoping you can give me an opinion on a couple of questions as a member of ArbCom. I realize you would just be speaking for yourself, not for the committee as a whole, but it might still be helpful in avoiding a more full-blown discussion and shedding some light on issues that I'm probably less familiar with than you are.
First question. Can a non-admin notify a user of the sanctions? WP:ARBPIA doesn't explicitly say, although it's implied as the suggested template ({{ Palestine-Israel enforcement}} states: "This notice is only effective if given by an uninvolved administrator and logged here." User:Shrike has notified more than one user, the latest example here. Shrike doesn't use the suggested template but a variant that doesn't include any language about a non-involved admin. BTW, I'm not accusing Shrike of acting in bad faith. I'd just like to know if what they're doing is appropriate.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 18:00, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Second and related question. Can a non-admin slap a notice on an article talk page that the article is subject to sanctions? Again, ARBPIA refers to the notice but doesn't say who can add the notice. It's even less clear (to me) than the logging of notifications to editors.
If you think I should ask these questions elsewhere, please tell me where. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 18:00, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
The IP who was recently editing Assassination of Abraham Lincoln has been a plague on all sorts of articles relating to Lincoln, Kennedy, the Titanic and Alcatraz for more than a year. When engaged they're polite and reasonable, but then they go right back to pointless and sometimes ungrammatical rearrangement of sentences, insertion of OR and opinion, and general disruption. I've probably made more than 50 blocks this year. They edit from a UK Carphone Warehouse range that's highly dynamic but relatively unused. I've tried short rangeblocks, but multiple /16 ranges are needed and I don't like to do that, at least without checkuser input on activity elsewhere in the range. Any ideas? I and other editors have tried patience and reasoning and persuasion, but in the end nothing has changed, and I've gone back to summarily blocking them and reverting everything, despite a certain appreciation that they've been consistently nice when confronted. Nevertheless there was an incident in September when they made an edit implying suicide [2] (turned out to be a quote from The Final Confession of Jack the Ripper), and they've admitted that they understand why we have problems with their editing [3]. I've protected the article that have been hit the worst: Edward Smith (sea captain) and Charles Leale most recently; their histories are littered with 92.x edits and reversions. Acroterion (talk) 22:30, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello Courcelles! You accepted the WP:RFPP for Royal Rumble (2013) [4] however you didn't protect the page. Could you please protect the page? Thank you! Vacation nine 00:00, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Your skills are requested on ACC at request #83563. Thank you. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 00:27, 25 November 2012 (UTC) (Commented in-system, thanks for the heads up. Courcelles 02:05, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Missed at least this one. - jc37 09:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Could you take a look, or have another CU take a look, at User Talk:Danton's Jacobin? The user is requesting unblock, and since its a CU block, only y'all can handle the matter. As a side note, the user evaded the block to edit as an IP. Qwyrxian ( talk) 12:33, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
While I understand that they presumably are all grouped together due to the concern about confidentiality, I think that the removal of checkuser and oversight should be a separate motion for clarity. Since the behind-the-scenes removals (email lists and the arb wiki) are different than en.wp user-right removals. (Arbcom would be using two separate types of abilities.) There's a long tradition concerning arbcom and desysop, for example. and I think you may want to dot your I's and cross your T's on this. - jc37 21:13, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
I have no problem with trusting the committee to do what's right (the spirit of IAR, after all : )
I just think they should be separate.
And honestly, if half passes and half doesn't, then that's the ruling of the committee.
And now that you say that, I'm feeling uncomfortable with the idea of "controlling" the committee through an un-split motion. I'm not saying you are, or even intended that. Just how it's starting to feel. - jc37 21:40, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles, I was hoping to make an article for the 90s PC game Dinosaur Safari, and I noticed it was PRODed last year. Would you mind restoring a copy to my namespace so I can work on it? I may end up completely rewriting it, but I don't want to duplicate any effort that's already been done. If it makes you feel more comfortable, you may want to know that I've previously restored a deleted article into something decent, making Pro-Life (politician) into a DYK. Thanks, BDD ( talk) 22:45, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
![]() Dispute Resolution – Volunteer Survey Invite Hello Courcelles. To follow up on the first survey in April, I am conducting a second survey to learn more about dispute resolution volunteers - their motivations for resolving disputes, the experiences they've had, and their ideas for the future. I would appreciate your thoughts. I hope that with the results of this survey, we will learn how to increase the amount of active, engaged volunteers, and further improve dispute resolution processes. The survey takes around five to ten minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click
HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have either listed yourself as a volunteer at a dispute resolution forum, or are a member of a dispute resolution committee. For more information, please see the page that describes my fellowship work which can be found here. Szhang (WMF) ( talk) 02:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC) |
You're the "lucky" winner to be the first admin to top my watchlist at this particular moment. Would you please take a look at User talk:My76Strat#Question, and please offer your thoughts on the situation? - jc37 07:17, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
![]() Articles for creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are 2854 submissions waiting to be reviewed and many help requests at our help desk.
If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the
reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog. You might wish to add {{
AFC status}} or {{
AfC Defcon}} to your userpage, which will alert you to the number of open submissions.
Plus, reviewing is easy when you use our new semi-automated
reviewing script!
|
You are invited to Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC, an editathon, Wikipedia meet-up and workshops focused on film and the performing arts that will be held on Saturday, December 1, 2012, at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts (at Lincoln Center), as part of the Wikipedia Loves Libraries events being held across the USA.
All are welcome, sign up on the wiki and at meetup.com!-- Pharos ( talk) 07:00, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Is there a case somewhere I can look at? Just wondering about what to do about his edits and any articles he created. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 08:31, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I'm wondering if you would be able to delete User:List of Home and Away characters (1995)? Slight error as I'm working with a smaller screen at the minute. Thanks in advance.
Conquistador2k6 30 November 2012 20:00(UTC)
Any chance of you revisiting? A new IP sock has popped up very soon after the others were blocked. Thanks. -- Biker Biker ( talk) 22:18, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low
to High
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 13:34, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Courcelles, I'm not sure what to make of the new category that you are adding to swimmer bios. It's apparently for the FINA world championships (25m), but that's not obvious from the category name. Using "FINA" in the category name to distinguish it from the world championships (50m) doesn't help, either, because both events are sponsored by FINA.
Here's what FINA calls their two world championship swimming events:
In both cases, it would appear that our category names are confusing in that they do not use the official FINA names of the events, and their meanings cannot be easily distinguished one from the other.
Also, for reasons we have previously discussed, the category name should conclude, not begin, with the word "medalists."
Please let me know your thoughts on these points. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 21:36, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
-- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 18:13, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
It seems that indefinitely blocked user Danton's Jacobin evading block: [6] ( 79.99.144.141 ( talk · contribs)). GiW ( talk) 18:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for semi-protecting 27 Club. That was definitely needed, and I was thinking about requesting it anyway. I believe the indefinite time frame is also appropriate in this case. Anyway, like I said, thanks. — Mudwater ( Talk) 14:32, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
Did you happen to see my email amongst the myriad I'm sure flood your inbox on a daily basis? -- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 19:04, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Did you "oversight" some recent IP edits to " Lung cancer"? If so, may I ask why? Axl ¤ [Talk] 12:11, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Just saw you pop up on my watchlist.
I already dropped a note at AN.
But would you take a look at the situation developing? - jc37 07:17, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles, I saw your comment on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lurulu and have replied to it there. However, a notification on a user's talk page after a block is not mandatory. The main requirement per WP:EXPLAINBLOCK is that administrators must supply a clear and specific block reason that indicates why a user was blocked. If such reasoning is supplied in the block log, when the user attempts to edit, they will see a big splash screen explaining that they are blocked, the reason for the block, provided one was entered, and other useful information. (At least that's the way it looked the last time I blocked my doppelgänger.)
I agree that administrators should in most cases leave a notice on the talk page as well, but that is not mandatory. In practice, I almost always notify the blocked user via a talk page message or more frequently a template, but in vandalism-only accounts, I (and others that I know of) sometimes don't bother since the reasoning is obvious. Toddst1 ( talk) 13:41, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
{{
unblock}}
is usually helpful for long-term users, esp. if doing an indef.) (For the record, I agree with the underlying block, the litany of deletion notices on that talk page meant a stronger message was needed.)
Courcelles
08:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC)Re: this - my sig has just barfed also. A software blip, presumably. Honestly, we just can't get the staff nowadays <g> - Sitush ( talk) 01:47, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Well, Courcelles, if you insist on clogging up the entire "Recent changes" page with your fixes, then I'm just going to go make myself a drink and finish watching Law and Order. Come to think of it, you're probably a CSI person, which is why you're editing like crazy. Drmies ( talk) 04:46, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
When you take care of an issue raised on a talk page, please acknowledge it somehow (on that page) so that other editors aren't looking for the problem on the article page for nothing. Thank you. -- Musdan77 ( talk) 16:58, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi, you speedied 1958 Nottinghamshire Avro Vulcan crash today under G5, but I was wondering if I could have the text of the last revision? There was nothing wrong with the article per se, and I'd like to re-create it. Thanks! § FreeRangeFrog croak 23:49, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello and thanks for doing a check at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Party4321. However, I noticed there might be more users involved, and the master account ist actually User:Whatthedog, but the case has already been closed by an Admin. Im not sure if I should launch a new report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Whatthedog since the case is already closed months ago. Whats the best way to proceed from here? (just need someone to point me in the right direction) - A1candidate ( talk) 19:29, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Dear Courcelles,
There is a current discussion on Penyulap's talk page which involves other people asking the user for information. I don't see a reason for them to be blocked from contributing to the discussion directly; though right now due to being talk-page blocked Penyualp is corresponding through third parties by email. Since everyone involved would prefer for the discussion to be public, could you please unblock talk-page access to facilitate, at least for the duration of the thread?
Thank you, – SJ + 03:47, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
I've just reverted (as two separate edits) an edit by Lockheart1 ( talk · contribs) which felt oddly familiar; checking the page history I find that half of it was very similar to an edit made by Google9999 ( talk · contribs) who you blocked. I suspect that they may be the same person. What do you think? -- Redrose64 ( talk) 19:55, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
At 1958 Nottinghamshire Avro Vulcan crash. Reporting in as requested :) Thanks again for the help. § FreeRangeFrog croak 20:24, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
The WikiProject Articles for creation newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[8] Bishonen | talk 15:18, 19 December 2012 (UTC).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mobeus_Robotica
Only edit is to rag on Malleus.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 21:13, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
as a Mac user. Over at the latest Malleus fandango you have typed a '2' where I believe you intended an '@'. pablo 22:01, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles. I was wondering if you saw my comments at the RFAR page about the idea of a binding RFC, and would ask that you consider an alternative, such as how the dispute on Verifiability was handled. Use mediation to come up with clear proposals for the community, then take it to a binding RFC. At the very least, regular mediation should be attempted again. I'm unconvinced that a straight binding RFC would be productive - historically most have been train wrecks. Please think it over. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 08:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello Courcelles, I hope this messages finds you well and your holidays are doing well. I see that you were the administrator that deleted a page that I created for Justin B. Terry-Smith. I want to revive it BUT of course with your persmission. This time I would make sure that there are more sites and references. I believe one of the issues last time was that it did not have a lot of reliable references. This time I would really like to try to keep his page up and I have also found a picture of him on the Wiki Commons website. I believe I can use this pic instead of finding one of him and getting permission from an outside source. Here is the site where I found his picture http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Justin_B_Terry-Smith_-_DC_Gay_Pride_Parade_2012_(7171057087).jpg if this is granted I wanted to thank you so much and also thank you for even reading my post and request to you.
( Jsmithco98 ( talk) 16:31, 20 December 2012 (UTC)).
I noticed that you had applied a "checkuserblock" to this IP, possibly in connection with a sockpuppet investigation. The IP is connected to indefinitely blocked users Google6666/ Google9999 [9], as can be seen here [10], where the IP identifies himself/herself/itself as Google9999. So if the block on the IP is connected to a sock puppet investigation those socks ought to be added to Google6666's list of known aliases. Thomas.W ( talk) 17:42, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Is it really a good idea to semi-protect an AfD to protect against participation by sockpuppets? WP:AFDFORMAT says that "Unregistered or new users are welcome to contribute to the discussion". I think the closing admin would be able to figure out which commenters are sockpuppets because of their weak arguments or because other editors will point them out. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:07, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
Holiday Cheer | |
Michael Q. Schmidt my talk page is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings. |
TheGeneralUser
(talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! 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
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hello Courcelles! Wishing you a very Happy Merry Christmas :) TheGeneralUser (talk) 13:24, 25 December 2012 (UTC) &Thank you; I hope yoiu had a happy time with your family yesterday! Courcelles
Some Christmas traditions are very difficult to explain. Kind of like Wikipedia policies.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Round My Family Tree ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hey, Courcelles, you closed the abovd AfD as a merge on December 17. Within hours, User:Buck Winston, who nominated the article for deletion, redirected the article to the merge destination article, The Tigger Movie, without merging any content. I have no interest in any of the articles, but I noticed it because Buck was on my watchlist from an earlier block. I reverted Buck's redirect. He has again done the same thing today, with an edit summary in which he says, explain what can be merged before undoing.
I don't know what the proper course of action is in these circumstances. The AfD attracted very little attention, which seems to be the case with the merger. Because of the bot, the Talk page of the destination article states that the merger actually took place, which is not true (not sure why those templates work that way).
I'm not going to take any further action until I hear from you. Hope you're enjoying your holiday break.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 14:42, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Am working on this CCI and while checking files, ran into this one which has been transferred to Commons. When you read the en.WP copy of the file, this user's name appears as the person receiving the photo, but when you go to the file at Commons, the history shows that the photo was sent to this user, who is the subject of the CCI and suspected of socking. This user is not blocked and edited last on 7 October 2012. AFAIK, there was no OTRS done for the photo and I'll note it as such; the issue also seems to be whether the user who is not the subject of the CCI may be another identity of the person who is the subject of it. Can you help? Thanks, We hope ( talk) 01:46, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
OK-have linked this conversation to the CCI page. If it's a problem, these guys File:Beatles in Birmingham 1963.jpg said they'd help us out. :-) We hope ( talk) 18:51, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
User:Chromium Oxide has only made two edits, just to rag on Malleus. Is it the same sockmaster as the one who was doing that a little over a week ago?-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 01:19, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
-- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 00:05, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Hey, Courcelles, User:Deathlaser is on IRC, asking for an unblock. (Obviously not the right venue for requesting one, but whatevs.) I see that you originally blocked him as a sockpuppet, but is this a checkuser block, or just a normal block? I don't want to point him in the wrong direction. Thanks. Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 18:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Oh, by the way, Moe Epsilon also asked BsZ about this, since he was the last person to modify the block. Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 18:17, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
We've got another two (or more?). – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 02:46, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Hey, could you please move/merge User:JuneGloom07/Sense with Sense and Sensibility (2008 TV miniseries) for me? - JuneGloom Talk 00:54, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to celebrate Wikipedia Day and the 12th anniversary (!) of the founding of the site at Wikipedia Day NYC on Saturday February 23, 2013 at New York University; sign up for Wikipedia Day NYC here, or at bit.ly/wikidaynyu. Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues!
We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience!-- Pharos ( talk) 01:41, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
Keep up the great AfD work! Make sure that your not edit conflicting yourself though. ( [13] [14] [15]) -- Cheers, Ril ey 01:04, 3 January 2013 (UTC) |
Hello Courcelles, hope your having a good new year. Will you consolidate these ( SBS Transit Service 243, SMRT Service 307, SBS Transit Service 143, SBS Transit Service 151, SBS Transit Service 284, SBS Transit Service 163) AfDs into one AfD, similar to what you did with Nordic skiing. They're all similar & have had no input thus far, the first one listed above is the initial one. Regards ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 11:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
File:Happy New Year 2013.jpg | Have an enjoyable New Year! | |
Hello Courcelles: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable
New Year! Cheers,
Northamerica1000
(talk)
19:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
|
You relisted this AfD. It appears that a consensus had already been reached prior to you relisting it. Please would you elaborate on your rationale for relisting it? Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 12:29, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Courcelles. You participated at the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of National Wildlife Refuges at risk from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill discussion. The result of that discussion was to merge the List of National Wildlife Refuges at risk from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill into Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. The list was merged. However, there is a related discussion if the Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill was split correctly from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and if it should be merged back there. Relevant sections for this discussion are this and this. Your comments are appreciated. Thank you. Beagel ( talk) 21:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles, you semi protected Christopher Robin ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) just after it had been PC protected by User:Darkwind. I've made a request at WP:RFUP that one of them be lifted. Regards, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 03:49, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I don't know if it's too late, but could you userfy The Speakeasy (Smoke or Fire album) for me? I want to see if I can get it it up to snuff to stick around this time. Jasper420
Hi! Last year, in 17 March 2012 you removed Scotland move-protection, I guess by TW error. I'm contacting you in to let you know if you want either, you re-add it or you left it as it is and let's see how it goes. And welcome back. Tbhotch. ™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:57, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
I received an email from Ryoung122 ( talk · contribs), whom you blocked from editing his own talk page in September. He wants to plea for a modification in his block length from indefinite to something more definite. Would you object if I unlocked his talk page for that purpose? ~ Amatulić ( talk) 23:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Sir, can you please restore this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conqueror_Browser so that I can edit the article with further links and sources and updates about new versions. Thanks a lot akashtaker001 14:24, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Hiya. You relisted one AfD for a fourth time (which isn't supposed to happen) and failed to make a call on another with a more than adequate number of responses to forge a policy-based consensus, holding it over instead. I'd suggest that if you're not ready to pull the trigger on an AfD needing a close, you leave it for somebody who is. Thanks. —Tim //// Carrite ( talk) 00:02, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Someone (70.239.199.2) identifying himself as Matty Staudt recently posted at the Help Desk, asking "My page, Matty Staudt, was deleted and it seems it was a speedy delete by the foundation. I work in media and it is importan that I have my page up. Can this be remedied?" [16] You prod deleted the page. [17] There is US State News September 27, 2006 and Mobile Internet October 1, 2009. There may be other source material that could be found during AfD. I know its not much, but the person indicated that the deletion has had some effect on his life. Given that 70.239.199.2 is contesting the prod and this new source information, perhaps we can send the Matty Staudt article to AfD. -- Uzma Gamal ( talk) 14:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Thankyou for adding people to actresses categories. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 22:08, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Why did you relist Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phoenix (wargaming magazine)? Note that there is followup commentary at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ioannis Diakidis and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Endeavour Programme. As per WP:Articles for deletion#How to contribute, "...a pattern of groundless opinion, proof by assertion, and ignoring content guidelines may become disruptive." The comment attempting to rebut the speedy keep is another proof by assertion. Now that two editors have joined the conversation, I am not suggesting that you should change anything at this AfD, and I expect to change the speedy keep to a comment. The point is that there are 350 related AfDs in the pipeline, and that IMO relisters have a role to play in closing substandard discussions. To repeat a couple of sentences of the comments linked above "Speedy keeps are generally closed with no prejudice against speedy renomination, and one of the purposes of such a closure is to allow the nominator a chance to properly prepare or improve the deletion argument. Leaving such AfDs open for any longer than necessary poses a risk that subsequent editors will invest time in a substandard discussion that could already have been closed for improvement." Respectfully, Unscintillating ( talk) 14:01, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi, would you please consider a revision deletion on the following, due to grossly insulting material? [18] Thanks. Logical Cowboy ( talk) 05:45, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Corcelles. How are you doing? I have started a deletion review on Wildebeest after my request for it's undeletion was denied and I would like you to check it out. Rtkat3 ( talk) 11:33, January 21 2013 (UTC)
Hi Corcelles, in the Socrates page (which is semi-protected), I would like to suggest adding the following final paragraph to the Later Historical Effects section:
Over the past century numerous plays about Socrates have also focussed on Socrates’ life and influence. One of the most recent has been Socrates on Trial: A play based on Aristophanes' Clouds and Plato's Apology, Crito, and Phaedo, adapted for modern performance.
In the Further Reading section, I would also like to suggest adding:
Thanks.
--
Hi Corcelles - The protection of Jessica Ennis has expired and there have been two instances of vandalism already. Please can you re-apply the protection?
It seem that you use a bot ! It's true? -- Gac 06:32, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I was wondering if you could review a discussion re: the exclusion of the National Women's Soccer League on Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues and provide your feedback? Discussion is available here. I'm seeking some impartial feedback from an administrator. Thank you for your consideration. Hmlarson ( talk) 00:25, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Corcelles - The protection of Jessica Ennis has expired and there have been two instances of vandalism already. Please can you re-apply the protection?
It seem that you use a bot ! It's true? -- Gac 06:32, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Corcelles, in the Socrates page (which is semi-protected), I would like to suggest adding the following final paragraph to the Later Historical Effects section:
Over the past century numerous plays about Socrates have also focussed on Socrates’ life and influence. One of the most recent has been Socrates on Trial: A play based on Aristophanes' Clouds and Plato's Apology, Crito, and Phaedo, adapted for modern performance.
In the Further Reading section, I would also like to suggest adding:
Thanks.
(It would be best to propose this on
Talk:Socrates using {{
semiprotected}}
, as I really don't have the background on the subject to easily figure out if your edit would be good or not.
Courcelles
17:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
--
Hello, I was wondering if you could review a discussion re: the exclusion of the National Women's Soccer League on Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues and provide your feedback? Discussion is available here. I'm seeking some impartial feedback from an administrator. Thank you for your consideration. Hmlarson ( talk) 00:25, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey Courcelles - this is to notify you that there is a discussion starting on the Article Feedback RfC talkpage that has ramifications for the RfC itself. Your input is much appreciated :). Thanks! and apologies if I've missed anyone Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 16:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Dear Courcelles, I have talked with Wikipedia editors who think that they can collect the nesessary sources, references and citations to prove Schola Latina Universalis is significant and notable enough to have an article about it on Wikipedia. If I make only a Google search on the exact words (between quotation marks) 105.000 finds on the exact name show that it has a name and a presence. What would be the procedure to restart the page, or what is your opinion? Thanks! -- Gonda Attila ( talk) 11:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Back in July 2012 you blocked an IP address as a sock puppet of banned user User:Racepacket. The block expired a few days ago, and the same IP address is making the same edits to the same pages. So I've raised another sockpuppet investigation. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 18:21, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for going the extra step and updating the photo link here on enwp, when moving the file! - Pete ( talk) 00:15, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm out of my depth with a Commons issue. Could you check your email? Cheers, -- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 18:00, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
I have withdrawn my request but you guys are still voting.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 21:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles. Consensus has been reached at this AfD nomination. Can you please close it? Thanks.-- Jetstreamer Talk 22:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles. I appreciate your effort in changing all the file names in de:Bildtafel der Verkehrszeichen in Schweden etc. But wouldn't it be possible for you to make one big change innstead of making tons of small changes. That's cluttering up the watchlists and making it difficult to single out any problem edits in there. Thanks. -- TZorn ( talk) 07:40, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
A couple of years ago, I was granted the IP block exemption right to allow me to continue to edit, as another user on the network had been blocked and I had been caught in the autoblock. However, circumstances have now changed, so could you CheckUser me to see if I still require the flag and if not, remove it as per Wikipedia:IP block exemption. Thank you very much. -- Gilderien Chat| List of good deeds 19:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC) Worm That Turned suggested I take this to another CheckUser so I thought that you would be able to do this :)
FYI, I spammed you again (OTRS related this time).-- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 02:32, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey, hope you're well. I have a bit of a dilemma that I hope you can help me with. Yesterday, Neighbours announced they would be introducing a character called Brad Willis, however they previously had a character with the same name back in the early '90s. So, my problem is what do I call the article for the new Brad? - JuneGloom Talk 02:03, 8 February 2013 (UTC) (I'd use parantheticals like {1990's Neighbours character) and (2010's Neighbours character) with the current name being a dab page. Courcelles 02:06, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Courcelles. In the process of making an inquiry at WP:RSN, I stumbled across a 2004 ArbCom decision that appears to be relevant to the source in question. I was hoping to ask someone with ArbCom for clarification on what the previous decision means, but an official request for clarification seems to be part of the dispute process. May I run my question by you first, or is there another forum I should consult? Thanks! Location ( talk) 05:45, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
Hey, thanks for all the work at WP:AFD. You beat me in many of them! LlamaAl ( talk) 00:24, 14 February 2013 (UTC) |
Just a heads up since I see "some" indications of a block evasion. I could easily be wrong but since you had handled parts of the block I'm leaving it up to you. I see multiple edits since February 2012 (blocked since sep 2012) by anon editor 96.25.189.9 on tennis pages and longevity pages. There aren't a lot of editors interested in both topics. I'm not saying the edits are a problem but it's the exact same m.o. of indef blocked editor Ryoung122. Coincidence, maybe. He has asked multiple times to be unblocked, which I have no opinion on, but if the rules are no editing (even his talk page) while blocked, I thought I would at least bring this editing to your attention in case it's the same editor. Thanks. Fyunck(click) ( talk) 22:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
You forgot to put the block notice on Zakzoom1992's talk page. -- Starship9000 (roller coaster fan) 01:57, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
{{
checkuserblock-account}}
would have been displayed to him if e tried to edit from that account.
Courcelles
02:36, 24 February 2013 (UTC)![]() You are invited to join
WikiProject Cleanup, a WikiProject and resource for Wikipedia cleanup listings, information and discussion. |
---|
WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1st, 2013 – March 31st, 2013.
Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 2000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the
drive's page and help out!
Delivered by User:EdwardsBot on behalf of Wikiproject Articles for Creation at 14:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Would you mind taking a look at this merge discussion? It's gone on for more than a month and I think it's time that an uninvolved admin. closed it. Thanks. --- The Old Jacobite The '45 01:53, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
You deleted this article per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Atticus Mitchell and I have recreated it addressing, I believe, the concerns raised in the AfD. After 19 months I would not expect that a deletion review would be required as this is basically a new article, but I was advised at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion#Atticus Mitchell where I requested restoration of old revisions to contact you and see if you agree that I have met the AfD raised concerns or if I need to request a deletion review. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 22:14, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
You blocked this editor for disruptive editing and threatenibg behaviour about two years ago. He was, as i read the edits and userpage, twelve years old at the time. He is now, I think, fourteen, and from his unblock request seems to have grown up somewhat. I am minded to unblock, but would first value your opinion. -- Anthony Bradbury "talk" 21:50, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Maybe it's residual confusion from daylight savings time, but you're jumping the gun a little at AfD. Not that i have any problems with any of the closes, but its not a good example. DGG ( talk ) 01:40, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Courcelles. In a dispute over an article's content, I believe a consensus if forming to implement 1RR as a means to ending an edit war and letting show the consensus' preference for the content in question. Can you comment on whether or not you think 1RR can be implemented (i.e. put in place like 3RR with violations subject to blocks) without ArbCom's involvement? Thanks! Location ( talk) 15:53, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Courcelles. I have several articles deletion: Kravtsov family, Talk:Kravtsov family and Pyotr Kravtsov, this articles was wrong redirect by some colleagues and now after I moved back content I don't know how to nominate them to deletion. Can I ask You for help with this problem? Best regards, Kravtz ( talk) 03:10, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Courcelles
Please can you explain why you deleted the article entitled Future Cut in december?
thanks
( Thefrontroom ( talk) 18:04, 13 March 2013 (UTC))
Wikipedia should not be a Gestapo type state [22]. It should not operate on the word of secret informers and in-camera trials. Who was the informer on User:George Ponderevo or was s/he invented by the Arbcom) and please supply diffs for the supposed serious crimes. Then please tell the project how each Arb voted - or are the Arbs ashamed of their actions? Giano 13:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC) Yoiu asked this question to everyone, so I'll just point you back to Kirill's and Risker's answers; there was indeed an individual, who is not (and never has been) an arb who raised this matter, we really can't say who it was. And everyone's vote is recorded on what was posted. Courcelles 21:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Please unprotect Wikipedia:CheckUser; two years is an extremely long time, and it appears that good faith edit requests are being ignored on the talk page. (see Wikipedia_talk:CheckUser#Suggested_update)
Also, please either unprotect your talk page or provide "an unprotected user talk subpage linked conspicuously from their main talk page to allow good faith comments from non-autoconfirmed users." per Wikipedia:Protection_policy#User_talk_pages NE Ent 14:29, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi! How did you create your accounts on every wiki - did you use an automated tool, or just manually visit every site? I'm trying to figure out how people created them before Krinkle's tool came out in early 2012, for an investigation. (In case you haven't figured out, you're one of my go-to people who has a user page and account on almost every wiki
). --
Rs
chen
7754
02:40, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Courcelles! I have a question about your semiprotection of the article Rachel Maddow. This article has been under persistent attack for the past week or so by a sockmaster, using multiple socks a day. First it was the talk page [23], then when that was semiprotected he switched to the article page. [24] The SPI is here Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JoMontNW and is not yet resolved. I've been an interested spectator since some of the attacks have been directed toward pages on my watchlist. Today Bongwarrior, who has been wrestling with this sock for days, semiprotected the Rachel Maddow article page for a month. Shortly afterward you overrode that, semiprotecting the page on BLP grounds for only 9 hours. I'm wondering, did you mean to do that? Or was it accidental because the two actions came so close together? Thanks. -- MelanieN ( talk) 22:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Since you blocked Rollo's last sock, User:Oogie Pringle, I thought you'd want to be aware of this current SPI, possibly involving Rollo. I am notifying you as the SPI clerk is asking for admin assistance. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Rivertorch ( talk) 04:57, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Please take a look at this. Thank you very much. -- Lecen ( talk) 21:06, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello Courcelles,
A few months ago there was an arbitration request about Future Perfect at Sunrise where the arbitrator Sir Fozzie said that FPAS should make no more admin actions related to editors involved in the race and intelligence area, "or the next step WILL be to hand out sanctions." In the same request you said that a wider-ranging case is likely going to be necessary. Sir Fozzie seems inactive now, but I'd like you to please clarify something.
Future Perfect at Sunrise has not followed the instructions Sir Fozzie gave him. About a month ago he blocked my IP range with the explanation that it was to make me register, but the block itself was a hard block that disabled registration for my IP range. He refused to respond to other editors' questions about that inconsistency in my user talk, his own user talk, or in the AN thread another editor posted about it. This issue might seem "stale" now, but that's because his block made it so following his instructions to register took me a month. I finally was able to get an account just a few days ago.
Now that FPAS again did what he was told not to do, I think that "next step" mentioned by Sir Fozzie should happen now. But I don't know how to make that happen. Could you please explain what I need to do to get the arbitrators to address Future Perfect at Sunrise's irresponsibility with his admin powers? I also ask that you please explain what you meant by "a wider-ranging case", e.g. who it must include for you to accept it. Akuri ( talk) 07:03, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
It is I, Alison Weir. I am back. I demand the right to edit my article. By the way, I was born in 1954 not 1951.Yours,Alison Weir — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.237.28 ( talk) 16:07, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
I see that you blocked http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/210.94.41.89
Could you please revert his vandalisms at NYU Poly and elsewhere please? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kateapply ( talk • contribs) 02:04, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
Could I have 2 mins of your time? As I’ll be working on some other projects for Wikimedia Germany as well from now on the time I can spend on Wikidata will be reduced. This means I’ll have to figure out what is useful to spend time on. If you’re reading this could you let me know for example on this discussion page? Also if you have ideas how to improve the weekly summaries please post them. -- Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) ( talk)
Hi there,
In 2010, you closed Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Boris_Pelekh as "redirect". The redirect target doesn't really make it clear why Boris is directly related to Nat & Alex Wolff, and I think it might be better to delete the Boris Pelekh article instead. I'm not sure whether WP:RDFD is the right venue, or whether you can amend the discussion conclusion and just delete the redirect instead. L Faraone 18:05, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Based on feedback for last week’s call for comments we will continue this newsletter. However more community help will be needed. From now on they’ll be drafted at d:Wikidata:Status updates/Next and your help is very welcome.
Hi -- I notice you've been active in nominating at RfA over the past year, and would like to invite you to join the WikiProject for Nominators, which aims to support editors interested in nominating there. We'd be glad of your expertise in getting this new project off the ground. Apologies for the talk-page spamming if you've already seen this message a dozen times. Regards, Espresso Addict ( talk) 23:25, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles! You're invited to our next meeting for Wikipedia Meetup NYC on Sunday April 14 -this weekend- at Symposium Greek Restaurant @ 544 W 113th St (in the back room), on the Upper West Side in the Columbia University area.
Please sign up, and add your ideas to the agenda for Sunday. Thanks!
Delivered on behalf of User:Pharos, 17:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello Courcelles, this is notification of a
WP:AN discussion regarding an editor you have dealt with. The thread is:
WP:AN#Community ban for BLP-violating, sock-hopping conspiracy theorist from Hyogo, Japan. Appreciate your input, thanks!
Zad
68
18:04, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Based on feedback for last week’s call for comments we will continue this newsletter. However more community help will be needed. From now on they’ll be drafted at d:Wikidata:Status updates/Next and your help is very welcome.
Thanks for oversighting an edit--
I dream of horses @
03:32, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Another flower for not only protecting my userpage, but getting that I wanted it to be temprorary.--
I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{
Talkback}} message on
my talk page. @
19:24, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
the page Darkorbit has been deleted last by you. I was thinking that it should be redirected to the page DarkOrbit. can you fix that? -- Echoblast53 ( talk) 05:31, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Could you do a CU on User:Do Not Delete, checking him against User:98.204.145.138, User:Hollisz and User:Zimmermanh1997, please? SPI regarding this can by found here. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 18:32, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles. I'm giving some serious thought to unblocking this user - I'm inclined to believe his story, based on certain dissimilarites between him and his supposed sockpuppet (most glaringly, their completely different approach to edit summaries). Obviously checkuser will show a match, given the circumstances, so this a behavioural call. I'd appreciate your thoughts before I take any action. Cheers, Yunshui 雲 水 13:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Courcelles. I found a decent 2011 pic of Maria for the article: File:Maria Kirilenko 2011.jpg. If you have time, can you do a quick Flickr review of it on Commons? INeverCry 21:01, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Dear Courcelles,
I do not understand why you gave granted Robotje - the reviewer - status as if you look at his talk page - there seems to be a list of people he argues with ! He does not seem to read the - References, Links and Sources - of the pages he criticices at all before he starts with his negative comments - which he has been doing on my newest page Adrianus Johannes Lemmens. He brings this wrong attitude from the Dutch Wikipedia web site where there is a very bad Cyber Bullying culture and I would have thought that we do not want that culture here ? Glemmens1940 ( talk) 17:28, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
I would like to know why you have deleted the lambda basketball wiki page? Ngbaus ( talk) 23:59, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Is it cool with you if I borrow the nifty code for your "AUSC former member" userbox? I promise I will not use it for nefarious purposes.... -- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 21:19, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Hey Courcelles. A number of us are asking abrcom members a few questions regarding a prior case here [25]. The questions are basically 1) did you vote on this ban appeal 2) if so how 3) or are you against releasing this sort of details to the community. Many thanks Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 19:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
for your comment here. I have a busy day ahead IRL, but will follow up on this as soon as possible. (definitely within the next 24 hours if not sooner) — Ched : ? 10:36, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Courcelles for your advice, your time, and your indulgence. — Ched : ? 02:34, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
- JuneGloom Talk 23:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
|