This page 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. |
Kumioko, I have been extremely patient here, but the current situation is no longer tenable. I asked you nicely to stop trolling as an IP, but it appears you have no intention of doing that; indeed, you seem proud that you can summon multiple IPs to continue to cause pointless drama with new IPs even while blocked for causing drama with other IPs. You know perfectly well what block evasion is, so I see little choice but to block this account until you agree to knock this off. I have turned off the Wikibreak Enforcer so that you can log in and comment here if you like. 28bytes ( talk) 17:25, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
BTW I just wanted to point out that there is another sockpuppet going in the Doncram case. If you all think I was socking then you might want to investigate and block User talk:204.101.237.139. If I was considered socking its clear they are socking too. But since that user isn't me, I doubt it would be considered appropriate to enforce policy on them. Kumioko ( talk) 03:28, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
For those who might be bored:
There was a time (in fact just a year ago) when I would have requested an unblock and fought hard to be allowed back, but not anymore. I tried in the past to get folks to listen and no one cared. Its obvious I am to be treated as a common vandal so here is what I am asking. I want you to perform a global block on my account as it is here in the English Wikipedia. I tried to be an active positive contributor but I just got shit on and treated like a second class citizen so now I want no part of this. I want my account blocked on all Wiki's as it is here please. Kumioko ( talk) 21:39, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Well they denied my request for a global lock to my account. I think they are concerned I may change my mind. I got blocked for 6 hours but I'll try again tomorrow. Kumioko ( talk) 01:35, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Category:Burnt-out Wikipedians I begged and pleaded but I can't get the stewards to give me a Global site ban! I just got a 3 day block for disruption for not letting it go though. I really get the impression they don't think I'm serious about my intent! Kumioko ( talk) 02:24, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Wow. I haven't really been a fan of Arbcom but demanding Arbcom resign is extreme even by my standards. Kumioko ( talk) 02:49, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Poof! to the Gray Skies | |
You did a good thing. Audie Murphy made it to GA. My first GA, ever. Couldn't have done it without your help. Your advice was invaluable, so I'm sending this ray of sunshine to chase the gray skies you've having. — Maile ( talk) 19:33, 27 February 2013 (UTC) |
I should have known it would take more than 6 blocks and a countless number of bad calls, unnecessarily draconian blocks and bans to desysop an admin!. If this were just an editor they would have been banned from the project. But at least this does prove that I was right about out at least one thing in this place. There is an us and them mentality between admins and editors and the admins are always given the break. Kumioko ( talk) 19:02, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
There was a time when seeing these block messages on my account really would have pissed me off (about this time last year actually) but now I login to see the message that I am blocked for Block evasion and socking (both for editing from my Home/work IP) and it just makes me laugh. I shake my head too, but I mostly just laugh. Then I see today another longterm editor Cla68 was indeffed. Pretty soon the only ones editing will be the bots! Kumioko ( talk) 03:32, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Wow, never really had a strong desire to edit the Wikipediocracy site before until yesterday. I didn't realize how much I was universally hated. Here, there and everywhere. Over here I am a vandal, sock-puppeteer and block evader. Over there I am whiney incompetent user crying about how I will never be an admin and shouldn't because I am too inept to have the tools. Wow. You try and make things better and try and participate and see what happens. I can't wait until I am blocked from this place for good. Nothing good will come out of editing any further. To think I once believed so strongly in this project. All the time, years, wasted on these foolish pursuits. I realize that no one reads my talk page anymore but maybe some will see what the future holds for them after donating countless hours to the project. Nothing, absolutely nothing. Kumioko ( talk) 14:19, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
“ | Greetings to the peanut gallery, imagine my surprise when I did a search to see if my name ever came up and I find comments by you 2 calling me a whiny little child and such. At first I was a little annoyed until I looked at the context. A group of haters hating. Then I went and looked at your Wikipedia user pages and what do I find. User:EricBarbour that looks like the rantings of a lunatic. The talk page is filled with junk and seeing that you were banned indefinately for outing. So, after learning this it compels me to think that I must be doing something right if I have somehow caught the interest of 2 fine upstanding individuals such as yourselves. You can call me whiny, a child or whatever but like it or not there are still folks that want me to edit, I do not see one person anywhere on your page that thinks you should stay. | ” |
Kumioko ( talk) 15:05, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Sorry you're blocked. Work your way back if you feel you still have a commitment to this site and its... interesting social milieu. As for Wikipediocracy, your posts so far over there have been nothing but constructive.→ Stani Stani 21:35, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
I think it extremely ironic and silly that Fram accuses Carrite of being aggressive at opposing editors when that is his main modus operundi. I am confident that eventually the community will see through Fram's bullshit and cleverly worded rhetoric and see him for the bully he is. Kumioko ( talk) 16:22, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
A Request for Comment has been called at Talk:Watchmen. As a registered editor who has edited that page over the past year, you may wish to comment. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 18:50, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello, KumiokoCleanStart, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
Please remember to
sign your messages on
talk pages by typing four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}}
before the question. Again, welcome! Regards, —
Moe
Epsilon
21:04, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Welcome home, Kumioko. Glad to see you back. Hope you enjoyed your time off. I hope your stay will be an enjoyable one. It's really nice to have you back. Kind regards. 64.40.54.134 ( talk) 13:58, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
A cheeseburger to fuel your future editing on Wikipedia. It is great to see you back on, and you have contributed much to this community in the past; I only hope that you continue to contribute such quality work in the future! RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 15:51, 27 March 2013 (UTC) |
You know I have a great deal of respect for you, Kumioko, and I think you are a great benefit to the project. I am very happy you have returned, so please don't take this the wrong way. Sometimes you get wrapped up in something and lose sight of of the goal. It would be a great benefit to me if you try to slow down a little and focus more on the goal if you feel you are getting wrapped up in something. This place can be very trying at times. Very trying. And it's in our best interest to not let others get us wound up because they will use that to their advantage. I hope you don't mind me asking this favor of you. Thanks very much and welcome home. 64.40.54.134 ( talk) 16:14, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello, KumiokoCleanStart, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please remember to disclose these connections. J/K :D — cyberpower ChatOffline 22:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Yep, Looks like you caught me! :-)
KumiokoCleanStart (
talk)
01:35, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the constructive debate on Jimbo's talk page tonight. On a completely different note, have you thought about doing something with WP:MILHIST? Lots of topics to your taste, very active project with a lot of people to reach out to when you want to work on something, and they probably have enough tasks that they could use the advice of an experienced bot person. Having watched a number of people go at it over the years, trying to accomplish social change here tends to make people more burned-out and cranky, not less, but it's much harder to take the fun out of content work. If you can't kick the habit of being on here, you might as well have something to enjoy. :) Best, Choess ( talk) 04:53, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Most likely, I can help you create a typical markup-based template to display the data items, but with tricks to make it run very quickly. I am not sure where the articles are, as "Category:Medal_of_Honor_recipients" does not exist. What are some of the article names? Currently, for the ~2,900 towns in Austria, each population count is extracted from a set of population-metadata templates. - Wikid77 ( talk) 15:49, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi KumiokoCleanStart! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
Hi KumiokoCleanStart. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Seasons Bleedings, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers and review the criteria for speedy deletion. Particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion, proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. The db-band template is for bands, not albums. Michael Greiner 07:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello KumiokoCleanStart. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Alexander Lett Spence, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: DFC recipient. Thank you. Ϣere SpielChequers 11:17, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello KumiokoCleanStart. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Gadeguduru, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Its a village. Thank you. Ϣere SpielChequers 11:27, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
wow, that was quick I hadn't even finished creating it, it seems your not aloud to take a break from things like this (which is unfair), but there are plenty of articles like this why delete only mine.
thanks for your understanding
Why did you nominate Medicina legal for speedy deletion? It was not a test page and being non-english is not a valid CSD. Revolution1221 ( talk · email · contributions) 02:31, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
here's the video of jorm talking at wikimania 2012 [1]. long time coming. slowkingFarmbrough's revenge⇔ †@1₭ 03:23, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tibor Spitz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University Press ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 16:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Portal:United States/Collaborations, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:United States/Collaborations and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:United States/Collaborations during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Kumioko ( talk) 02:08, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
hey pinkampersand told me that i could continue with it..its legit man..i have talked to him he's allowed it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayush.datta ( talk • contribs) 13:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
how do i remove it? i have contested the deletion, dont be s quick to judge, i have quoted reliable sources, FT LOndon included! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayush.datta ( talk • contribs) 13:29, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Please do not attack other editors, as you did to User talk:Beyond My Ken. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Comments like this are unacceptable. Not only was that a rude personal attack, it ignores that fact that users have the discretion to remove messages from their talk page as they see fit (with the exception of some official actions such as block notices). -- LWG talk 01:56, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
A discussion regarding some of your recent edits is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive247#User:KumiokoCleanStart. Fram ( talk) 08:23, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I have declined your speedy deletion request at Engenho dos Erasmos, because neither of the reasons you gave were valid. Firstly, it might be short, but it does clearly state what it is about, so CSD:A1 is not applicable. Secondly, there is no indication it is a test page, so CSD:G2 is also inapplicable. I note you have been tagging a lot of pages with CSD:G2 recently, despite their clearly not being test pages. Please stop doing that - G2 has a specific meaning and is not just a "catch all" for anything you think should be deleted. -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 09:39, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello KumiokoCleanStart. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Seely Place Elementary School, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 clearly excludes schools. Thank you. Alexf (talk) 09:52, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Hey, I found a featured picture not included in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Washington Featured Picture list. Could you add it please? Thanks!
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.106.202.98 ( talk) 02:54, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
I declined the speedy deletion of this article because (1) the article was at least half in English, and (2) I did not know where it had been transwikied to. If you still believe the article deserves to be speedily deleted, please feel free to renominate it for speedy deletion, but please provide further explanation of the nomination on the page's talk page. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:27, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
You tagged Majakani for G2 deletion, but the page was not a test page, but a page in another language. You have been asked already to be more careful in applying G2.
You also tagged Porki for speedy deletion as "patent nonsense", which is lot worse than the above mistagging. The page was in English and had a clearly identifiable subject. It is badly written, but that is completely different from "patent nonsense". It is rather discouraging for a new user to get his or her first attempt at an article labeled thus. Fram ( talk) 12:47, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Since I seem to be the target of the month I want to let everyone know that I am no longer reviewing new articles. I am going to turn my focus on building up the Medal of Honor recipient articles until someone complains about that. I will be starting on add some WikiProject tags and assessing the ones that haven't been assessed yet. Sometimes the assessment of Stubs and Starts can be subjective. I think most are starts and I intend to tag them that way. If you disagree feel free to change them to stubs. No need to ask, comment or advise. I completely understand and its ok. Kumioko ( talk) 02:24, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Hey Kumioko, I found spotted some Washington related featured content. Its a beautiful picture and I think its a shame that it isnt included in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Washington Featured Pictures list. Could you add it? Thanks!
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.106.202.98 ( talk) 03:05, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot ( error?) 08:22, 14 April 2013 (UTC)Looks like the ANI Fram submitted against me for my work on patrolling new pages had some consequences. I've never seen it over 10, 000 unreviewed new pages before until recently. Seems the patrollers were sent a pretty clear message! Kumioko ( talk) 10:43, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
I created Portal:Film in the United States WhisperToMe ( talk) 18:16, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Just so you know, I was absolutely not suggesting that you're too stupid to understand a policy, I just objected to how you suggested the proposal (and thought it wasn't the best avenue to go about getting things changed).
There's nothing I can do if that's how you interpreted my comments, but I just making sure I was clear. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
EVula, I'm one of the folks that said that it reflects not understanding how the policy works. This is NOT a bad reflection on you. The system (for better or for worse) is immensely complex and fuzzy. Even when I was at 20,000 edits (and I'm no dummy) I still did not understand how the system worked. So my comment just makes you a normal, intelligent, conscientious Wikipedian. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 00:28, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Looks like you had been playing with the article. I'll leave you to clean up the mess as you know what to keep/delete. Bgwhite ( talk) 07:18, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kumioko. Maybe it's just me, but i notice that Archive 13 of your talk page is included in the category Burnt-out Wikipedians, which i suspect it shouldn't be. I'm not doing anything about it, 'cause that's your prerogative, but does it need removing? Cheers, Lindsay Hello 19:46, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Per this, I understand you were upset, and I won't block you or leave you a templated message. I will warn you that if you do something like this again you are likely to be blocked.-- John ( talk) 05:45, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) I am afraid I have to agree with Kumioko here. BMK's behaviour has been abysmal and admins just don't bother getting involved at his blatant uncooperative childish behaviour. He repeatedly ignores warnings and cries foul whenever someone criticise him and any attempt at mediation, especially if you don't share his viewpoint, is met with hostility. Hat off to Kumioko for being brave enough to stand up to him. -- MisterShiney ✉ 20:33, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Viriditas, Oh I am not saying Kumioko's behaviour was acceptable, but regardless, BMK's attitude needs to change if he wishes to continue editing. I also believe that the attitude of some admins is "Oh if we leave him alone he will go away" or "someone else can deal with it" because there is a distinct lack of warnings to him or attempts to reign him in. -- MisterShiney ✉ 14:14, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Go Phightins ! 19:11, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Will add more later. Kumioko ( talk) 13:28, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
User:Beyond My Ken's note to another user here. Almost certainly there is a more approrpriate way to say this. Kumioko ( talk) 19:34, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
This discussion begs for a comment. I hope its still open when my block expires....because I have a comment! Kumioko ( talk) 01:57, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Pierogi Award | |
Thanks for your support of my RfA. It didn't succeed this time, but that's no reason not to have some nice pierogi. Cheers, -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:26, 3 May 2013 (UTC) |
Test for the new Discussion logic. 138.162.8.57 ( talk) 19:17, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
+1 (from prior experience) Double sharp ( talk) 16:42, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
Thank you for standing up to bullies. ~ DanielTom ( talk) 23:03, 11 May 2013 (UTC) |
That Color Wheel link in your useful tools registers as an attack page to Firefox. I was wondering if you were aware of that. Also, thanks for your input from before. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 13:02, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Per your comments about Arbcom being extended to include MOS, there is no possibility of that happening – Arb deals solely with conduct, not content, just as DRN deals solely with content. There have been many erroneous statements made about Arb participating in the heated MOS discussions a year or two ago, but the participation was solely to handle the conduct there, and not the content. Arb is not our Supreme Court to decide content, that is what DRN is for. Apteva ( talk) 16:35, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
My apologies for this. It's written clearly at the top of the section that only Admins are meant to post there, and I was just being WP:BOLD. -- Ohconfucius ping / poke 16:37, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Komioko, after reading your responses here (and in other places), I would be appreciated if you can update me with links to the same or other problems you see. I usually don't follow those pages but would appreciate any link to new developments. Thanks in front, TMCk ( talk) 01:17, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I have been declining your A6 nominations for AFC redirects. Such redirects are supposed to exist. The case to delete these could apply if the article they point to was deleted, which was not in your case. Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 10:57, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I don't necessarily agree with your comment here. Wikis' open participation model is very susceptible to trolling, so it often makes sense to withdraw from a conversation once you have said your peace. Regards, -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 04:34, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
The Resilient Barnstar | |
Great attitude. Cheers! Basket Feudalist 11:37, 16 May 2013 (UTC) |
I'm not sure where you're getting that from. Tit for tat, flies and honey, and the golden rule, the same logic applies: Civility begets civility. I certainly did not intend to be hateful by saying that. ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 16:11, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kumioko. I've closed your RfA a little early per your comment here. Hopefully you'll enjoy your weekend a little more without having to check in on it. Cheers, 28bytes ( talk) 19:51, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Could you explain why you've tagged pages such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Recent changes/21 for deletion? If you've explained elsewhere, or if you're doing it on someone else's request, please just point me to where it is. Nyttend ( talk) 20:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
You tagged this page for speedy deletion because the bot which used to maintain it is no longer operational. However, I maintain it myself, and use it daily to check for vandalism of articles on New Zealand schools. There is an alternative method using the toolserver, but this has been unreliable recently. Accordingly, I have undeleted the page. If you object to this, I am happy to discuss the matter.- gadfium 02:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
I imagine you are aware that snarky comments like this one won't help you gain much respect. Anyway, for your answer, just look at the Arbitration Enforcement comment that Gatoclass linked to. -- Orlady ( talk) 21:35, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
I've updated the instructions to compile the SVN code. It is located at User:Bgwhite/Sandbox. Hopefully it is a little better. Also, tell me the problem you are having in compiling the #(%&# thing. I use SharpDevelop to compile. Bgwhite ( talk) 00:26, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm in the process of assessing the ACW in the WikiProject United States as "Low". If left unassessed, it is left unassessed in WikiProject Military History. If you feel that it deserves a higher assessment please re-assess otherwise do not remove. Adamdaley ( talk) 02:08, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi! In fact, when I deleted the page back in 2009, it was available on Commons. Apparently, it has been deleted there yesterday. Honestly, I'm a bit abashed it was deleted with no discussion nor care for the other projects, but considering the deletion reason, I'm a bit wary of unilaterally restoring it. Regards, -- Luk talk 08:11, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
If you want to have a conversation about your opinions on our changes, I am happy to set up a Hangout or skype call so we can talk through our differing views and exchange knowledge :). Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 20:48, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Library of Congress, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Library of Congress and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:WikiProject Library of Congress during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. JJ98 ( Talk) 18:11, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
The Resilient Barnstar | |
I hope you don't think I was personally attacking you at all in my comment on VPT. I have a lot of concerns about flow, and I too have dealt with a great deal of criticism and am probably not the most popular editor myself. I myself just got off an indefinite block less than two months ago, and I hear what you are saying. The problem isn't with the concerns you address, it's with the tone that you address them with. Calling the WMF team a bunch of blazing idiots isn't going to get us anywhere. Being one that has been tracking Flow on mw: and bugzilla for the last month, I'm afraid I'm not overly impressed with it either. I'll take whatever steps I feel are needed to keep Flow from being a major detriment to Wikipedia. The fact is that flow is probably going to happen, so instead of telling them to forget about it, it is more productive to say, "Hey, this isn't going to work like this because that and the other is how it could be fixed so it might work." As far as your username goes, if you truly want a clean start, the first step has to do with invoke your right to vanish on all of your current accounts. That way when you create a new account, they can't accuse you of socking because the other accounts will no longer exist... Food for thought. Technical 13 ( talk) 23:17, 2 June 2013 (UTC) |
I will respond back at AN. Giant Snowman 15:11, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for this, but WV is not equal to WA ;-) I fixed it. PumpkinSky talk 23:14, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:U.S. Southern wikipedians' notice board/USSCOTW/Archive, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:U.S. Southern wikipedians' notice board/USSCOTW/Archive and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:U.S. Southern wikipedians' notice board/USSCOTW/Archive during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Kumioko ( talk) 02:51, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:USCOTWnom. Since you had some involvement with the Template:USCOTWnom redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Kumioko ( talk) 02:57, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello can you help in this list. Solomon7968 ( talk) 16:57, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
I want to thank you for sacrificing the time, at wp:PUMPTECH, to escalate the concerns about the bizarre plans to use wp:FLOW. I suspect that your efforts to "shed light" on many dysfunctional aspects, of the limited Flow-talk interface, will alert countless editors to beware the planned shutdown of talk-pages to no longer be the current full word-processing documents which we use now to discuss text styles, wikitable formats, and wp:charts. It seems their WMF department was planning another "quiet" removal of talk-page access, in the manner of removing the orange new-messages bar (surprise, no user-talk notices!). Anyway, if you do go on more wikibreaks this year, then please consider returning on some occasions to voice opinions about other major topics. There are so many new people coming to re-suggest improvements, which had been forgotten years ago, and it is an exciting time here again, and so many people could benefit from your periodic insights. Thanks again. - Wikid77 ( talk) 23:36, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chemical Heritage Foundation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Fenn ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:19, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed between 12-14 Good article nominations and are not part of
WikiProject Good articles (the initial messages I sent out went to only WikiProject members and users that had over 15 reviews).
So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers:
NOTE: If you are interested in becoming a recruiter but do not meet the 15 review requirement, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters and put your status as "Not Available" until you have reviewed enough nominations.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along. A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.-- Dom497 ( talk) This message was sent out by -- EdwardsBot ( talk) 21:05, 10 June 2013 (UTC) |
Please don't leave any more messages at this user's talk page. You've been asked not to, and to continue to do so is disruptive. If there are any mandatory messages to go there ask someone else to post. I'll do it myself if it's warranted. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 21:25, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your positive input regarding Rich's block, care if we become friends? Skype or e-mail might do a trick. :)-- Mishae ( talk) 18:01, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
If there is what appears to be significant discussion on article subpage, I am not willing to delete it as speedy, and think it is better to use mfd to obtain consensus, because it is not obvious to me where the discussion has been preserved. I have consequently removed tags from a few of the subpages. I may of course not understand and other admins may see it differently, but mfd is the place to find out.. DGG ( talk ) 04:42, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Please avoid making personal attacks, like you did in this edit summary. Provide also diffs for accusations you level against other editors: unsupported accusations are also considered to be personal attacks. Fram ( talk) 14:41, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kumiko! When you added {{ WikiProject United States}} to Talk:Mariah Carey, it added the redlink Category:American music articles with to-do lists. Should the category be created, or should the template be changed? Thanks! GoingBatty ( talk) 16:59, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
I attempted to remove the tags from all of them, but another admin had already deleted several of them. It's not a big enough deal that I felt like asking for undeletion, but they definitely don't fit G6 — G6 is meant for things like histmerges and pagemoves, not something like this. Any method of deleting them, other than the MFDs you've filed, is a misuse of the criterion; I see no reason to delete them at MFD either, but I don't particularly care enough to go to the MFDs and oppose. Nyttend ( talk) 00:57, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
You may not believe it but I do understand the criteria very well and your right, it is a technical deletion but if you look at twinkle or at the page curation tool G6 is marked as applying to the following criteria
These fall under Housekeeping. If you don't agree I recommend having Twinkle and the Page curation tool changed. If you have a better suggestion for deleting these please let me know. Because MFD and G6 seem like the most accurate and reasonable route to getting rid of this trash. Unless you can see some reason we will start using these again in the future. Also, your example is completely wrong. These aren't articles about cities. In fact they are not articles at all and the community already voted to deprecate using them and eliminate them. Its just that no one ever bothered to follow through on it. If you think they need to be kept then open on RFC or something at AN or the Village pump. Kumioko ( talk) 01:07, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
You have recreated quite a few pages that were already deleted before, in your current effort to get rid of all the /comments subpages. Examples: Talk:Beagle/Comments, Talk:Bal-Sagoth/Comments, Talk:Bacteria/Comments, Talk:Backmasking/Comments, Talk:Autism/Comments, Talk:Augustus/Comments, Talk:Ant/Comments, Talk:Akhtar Hameed Khan/Comments, Talk:Algorithm/Comments, Talk:Alexander Wendt/Comments, ... Some of these, like Talk:Algorithm/Comments, you had already tagged for deletion before this and were already deleted.
There is an AWB setting "skip if page doesn't exist" which may be useful for this task. Fram ( talk) 06:55, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
AWB offers an option to skip non-existent pages. Moreover debug version of AWB can't save newly created and/or blank pages. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 13:47, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
While I do think all the deprecated comments pages should be deleted, could you not have just requested some kind of bulk deletion instead of having like twenty entries? It makes it much easier on commenters. T C N7JM 08:17, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
If there is a consensus to delete all these pages we could run a bot to do it. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 09:33, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Your reasons for deletion don't really vary between each other. If one is kept then all will be kept and vice versa so please wait for the result of the first 100 you nominated. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 15:39, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
I removed the {{ db-g8}} tags from Template:Quantity/sandbox & Template:Quantity/sandbox/doc and explained in detail on their talk pages. Thanks for your consideration, -- Kevjonesin ( talk) 01:26, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Integrity | ||
For your support during the recent unpleasantness. PumpkinSky talk 22:34, 16 June 2013 (UTC) |
Stop re-tagging pages such as Talk:Endowment (Mormonism)/Comments; when an admin declines the same speedy tag twice on the same page, you're supposed to take it as a hint that you're going the wrong way, and tagging it a third time is not right. Either stop trying to have these pages deleted, or take them to MFD. Nyttend ( talk) 03:49, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Please to do tag maintenance categories as empty unless you know for a fact that we are finished with this. Future categories clearly are likely to be used. Vegaswikian ( talk) 02:41, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
I probably should've explained that in an edit summary to prevent a misunderstanding, but I see you noticed that I added the coords to the article. My bad! Spencer T♦ C 20:54, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
|class=
doesn't need "Cat", "category", "template", "portal", "file", "image" etc anymore. Now namespace is automatically detected by the banner itself. --
Magioladitis (
talk)
09:55, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Moreover, according to my notes, I finished removed nested from all talk pages today. I'll wait for the next database dump to confirm it. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 10:04, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
As I wrote above we don't need to add class category anymore. It's redundant and auto-set by the banner itself. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 16:44, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
WOSlinker may help with it. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 16:59, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
The same holds for template class. It it auto-detected. By the way, I noticed you remove spaces from comments in talk pages. There is no need to. The only result is to make larger diffs. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 11:59, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Autodetection has the benefit that if the project decided to go from NA-class to Category-class or the opposite, we only need to change a line in the code instead of running a bot to change all pages. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 12:43, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't agree that "broadly construed" is useless or abusive. It's meant to invite attention to the spirit of a ban, because it's difficult to foresee all the ways a ban can be skirted or lawyered. Compare my comments here and here. Do you consider them abusive? Do you have any examples of the "broadly construed" language being used to justify abuse? I agree that it could happen, but I think an admin that did so would be taken up sharply and be reverted or forced to recant. Admins, too, are supposed to attend to the spirit, not the letter; "broadly construed" doesn't allow them to wikilawyer, either. Bishonen | talk 16:51, 23 June 2013 (UTC).
Hi. There are, at present, no particular clear guidelines for religious material here, or, for that matter, guidelines for how to deal with ideas in general, particularly those ideas which might be accepted as true by individuals of a given religious, political, or scientific stance. There have been attempts in the past to draft such guidelines, but they have quickly been derailed. I am dropping this note on the talk pages of a number of editors who I believe have some interest in these topics, or have shown some ability and interest in helping to develop broad topic areas, such as yourself, and asking them to review the material at User:John Carter/Guidelines discussion and perhaps take part in an effort to decide what should be covered in such guidelines, should they be determined useful, and what phrasing should be used. I also raise a few questions about broader possible changes in some things here, which you might have some more clear interest in. I would be honored to have your input. John Carter ( talk) 19:28, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi, sorry to ask what might be perceived as an affront but are you a bot or using some sort of WP:BOTASSIST? Your recent edit history suggests as much. Not that there's anything wrong with this but I'm surprised that your edits don't have the bot tag and there's nothing about it on your user page. It's hard to imagine that you're making all of these rote changes by hand. You don't include links in your edit comments to "WPUS/USPP" which makes your efforts rather unclear (although I think I understand what you're doing). Even if you are it might be helpful to describe your efforts prominently on your user page, at least while they're ongoing and shortly thereafter? -- Nstrauss ( talk) 19:18, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for moving the comments from the composer project to the talk page for this composer. I had never seen them before in their hidden place and they're interesting to read. Best -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 22:00, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I left a question at Portal talk:Biography. I hope you don't want to add the portal logo in 1 million pages manually. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 19:16, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
What's the logic of tagging articles for both the US Public Policy Wikiproject and a "public policy" subproject of WikiProject United States? (I'm puzzled by the tag you added at Talk:Tennessee Plan.) -- Orlady ( talk) 15:36, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
<score>...</score>
Please note that
this edit did not observe the special syntax used within the <score>...</score>
tags. --
Michael Bednarek (
talk)
06:07, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
<score>
and could answer questions and phrase the problems better. This is a problem with AWB's logic and with score being so new, I'm sure there are other problems with AWB's handling of it.
Bgwhite (
talk)
06:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello KumiokoCleanStart, Eduemoni has given you a shining smiling star! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the Shining Smiling Star whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy! Eduemoni ↑talk↓ 01:18, 1 July 2013 (UTC) |
Hey, I reported once about AWB is not working in [2]. But after I leaving three error messages, not responding at there. Could you do me a favor about that? 乌拉跨氪 ( talk) 14:53, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
If the WP community came to a good consensus that the preference should be "on" by default to hide VE as default, thus pretty much making it opt in for everyone, technically the developers would follow that (hopefully) since it's a preference change.
Whether they'd actually accept such a consensus (when even new editors hate this) is another question. ~ Charmlet -talk- 17:57, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
No fancy messages, no drama but this Visual editor stunt by WMF has me frustrated so I am going to walk away for a while. Just wanted to let folks know in case I don't respond for a while. Let's face it, I'll be back. Kumioko ( talk) 19:38, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I just recently went through the online World Book Encyclopedia, which includes a page of "outline", for the list of articles it includes in its outline of mythology/philosophy/religion. The list can be found at User:John Carter/World Book articles. The first section places the articles in order of number of paragraphs found in the last, 2010, print edition, and the second section includes the articles by sections of the outline in which they are included, which named subarticles included after the name of the main article, and an indicator of the paragraphs for all. Those which are lists of subarticles are included in sections marked "(title) (article)". Like I've said elsewhere, I've never been entirely sure if Simple English wikipedia were intended as a "linguistic" wikipedia, or as a "scholastic" (basically high school and younger) English wikipedia, but I do think that if the latter this page might be of some use there, if you are yourself still at all active there. Yes, I have myself noticed that some of the outline matters are open to question. Jesus Christ, for instance, is not included in the Christianity section, but in the Bible section. But the overall list is possibly at least a good starting point for a scholastic type encyclopedia, if that is what Simple English wikipedia is intended to be. John Carter ( talk) 19:43, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Kumioko, sorry, re WP:BN, you got two RFAR cases conflated. It was User:PumpkinSky's proposal to desysop Doc James that had just been shot down. [3] The Hex proposal (a while ago now) was initiated by User:Anthonyhcole. [4] Can't say I blame you, with all these well-founded and yet declined RFARs flying around. Bishonen | talk 02:32, 8 July 2013 (UTC).
I'm relatively new to Wiki and delighted to have found an article on my house (Wesley Chapel - Hopetown Oh). We bought this historic church building in 1993 and have been working to make a residence out of it for two decades now. I have attempted on two occasions to add some of the research we have done on the property to Wikipedia, only to return later and find the information deleted, with no explaination as to why or by whom. May I ask what must be done (substantiation, documentation etc.) for my posts to remain?
Thanks
Roger McDanie (Greek2Me)
Hey - I've seen you question this concept several times. Have you considered writing an essay that explains your objections to the term? WP:Broadly Construed for example? If I were in your shoes, I'd start by explaining how it's used on Wikipedia and it's definition in Wikipedia terms and then move on to why it's, in your opinion, disruptive and unhelpful. Might be a way to help others see your point of view on the topic.--v/r - T P 19:00, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Military history reviewers' award | ||
By order of the
Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's
Peer,
A-Class and
Featured Article reviews for the period Apr-Jun 2013, I hereby award you this
Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award.
AustralianRupert (
talk)
10:57, 1 August 2013 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
This. Thank you! Tinton5 ( talk) 20:21, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically List of Medal of Honor recipients for the Vietnam War, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth ( talk) 14:59, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Kumioko accusing other users of trolling and harassment for asking him to provide evidence for his claims. T C N7JM 00:52, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello, just a simple request. When you add assessments for new USA articles, would you mind (1) checking to see if their subjects are on the National Register of Historic Places, and (2) if they are, adding a {{ WikiProject NRHP}} tag as well as your normal WP:USA tag? The NRHP wikiproject has been trying to put together a scheme for understanding our article ratings better, relying primarily on the article ratings, but for some reason the scheme ignores all other projects' ratings completely. If you were to tag articles for the NRHP project as well as for the USA project, it would probably make it a lot simpler. Thanks! Nyttend ( talk) 22:12, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi. It's very clear that the article is from a new editor who thought he was working on a draft and not a new article. In the spirit of welcoming new editors to Wikipedia, and ignoring all rules, would you, as nominator, be amenable to userfying and an early closing out Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FirstHealth of the Carolinas? -- Regards. -- Whpq ( talk) 03:48, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Is it possible for you to add two templates at once like here, and just switch the state?-- Mishae ( talk) 02:12, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Mmmmm, updated beeeeer, ahhhh. That had to be the most disappointing edit summary ever. Get someone's hopes up only to dash them like that is pure evil. Bgwhite ( talk) 20:12, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Well, you withdrew before I had an opportunity to poke my nose in. I think you're going the wrong way about this and I'd be more than happy to discuss it with you over email. Up to you - the only thing I bite is my food, as you know already. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 03:23, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
I put myself in as the first support. Admin should be no big deal but it is, and for the reasons I noted there it needs folks like you. North8000 ( talk) 01:28, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Don't forget my previous observation/offer/idea. For better or for worse 5 savvy people can get 99% of anything done in Wikipedia, including fixing lots of things. North8000 ( talk) 01:49, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
You have nominated templates for deletion in wp:categories for deletion. X Ottawahitech ( talk) 05:27, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Kumioko. Although "Qing" is the name of a dynasty, the phrase "Qing conquest theory" is a neologism: you won't find it anywhere but on Wikipedia. Kanguole 17:36, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
This is a quick notice to inform you that there is a WP:RfC being conducted at WT:Templates for discussion#RfC: Should Userbox templates in Template: space be nominated at TfD or MfD that I think you may be interested in. Happy editing! Technical 13 ( talk) 21:00, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Has the authority - whether he chooses to be Pilate or Solomon is the issue now. Two different types of judges, and he has free will. If he simply says the case was procedurally deficient, he could save face and not claim he diminished the authority of ArbCom. Or he could simply call for the bowl of water. But, in the end, it is up to him. I have been cautious and moderate in my posts and statements, and trust those who have been immoderate will not affect this course. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 19:40, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
/Comments pages I've been deleting still either are linked or transcluded into the parent page, but with no visible link or transclusion. I closed Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:List of expressions related to death/Comments as delete and deleted the page. [6] The What links here button shows "Talk:List of expressions related to death" links to the deleted page. Do you know how "Talk:List of expressions related to death" links to the deleted page? Another what links here of a page I just deleted shows the deleted /Comments page being transcluded into the parent page, but I could not find the transclusion. I think it is being done through the Banner Template:WikiProject India, which some how uses Template:WPBannerMeta/comments. It appears it is through the Comments=Yes parameter at Template:WPBannerMeta. Your MfD posts note that the use of comments subpages was deprecated years ago. (Do you have a link for that?) Would you please confirm how deleted /Comments pages are being linked/transcluded into the parent talk page. I would like to try to fix it so that deleted /Comments pages no longer are linked/transcluded into the parent talk page. Thanks. -- Jreferee ( talk) 12:45, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
COMMENTS
that indicates use of /Comments subpages is depreciated. That probably should be revised so that Template:WPBannerMeta no longer promotes use of /Comments subpages. --
Jreferee (
talk)
15:22, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
...I always wondered what my userpage looked like to the rest of Wikipedia and those who came to view it. I guess I now have my answer :)
On a more serious note, I thought I'd swing by and to see how you're doing and to suggest adding your name to the milhist coordinator election. I think you'd be a good candidate for milhist coordinatorship, and who knows, it may help tip you next rfa toward a pass. Of course its entirely your decision to run, but I would encourage you to think about it all the same. If have any question or comments, you can drop me a line or swing by Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators. TomStar81 ( Talk) 06:33, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Can you identify what actions you hope to take place as a result of your [ https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard&diff=572345958&oldid=572345108 comment}? If I read it literally (which is often a failing of mine) you are encouraging people to give up trying to make changes. Let's imagine you are successful. Will this be a better place if more people give up?-- SPhilbrick (Talk) 14:14, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Template:WikiProject United States has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Fram ( talk) 09:25, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
You've mentioned several times that broadly construed is too broad and too ambiguous that it sets a trap for whomever is under such a sanction. So I've had an idea. I'm not sure if it exists as a tool yet, but there is a game on Wikipedia called the 6 degrees of Wikipedia. I think it would be possible to create a tool that could take any article and calculate the number of links it takes to get to any other article. Then when we describe "broadly construed", we could define it in terms of the number of clicks it takes to get to a topic. So for the recent Tea Party Arbcom case, broadly construed could mean any article that has 2 degrees of separation from Tea Party. What do you think?--v/r - T P 16:08, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kumioko, twice now I've seen you claim that WP:FLOW will eliminate talk page templates, such as WikiProject tags. But the FLOW documentation says "Current plans indicate that there will be... A place for an 'introduction' to the page, which can contain free-form text, user boxes, templates, etc." So where are you getting this idea that anything is going to happen to talk page templates? -- BDD ( talk) 17:07, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi.
I was skimming Special:Permalink/573229751#The WMF response to the Visual Editor RFC is disappointing and insulting and Special:Permalink/573233282#Wikimedia response. Both were pretty much what I expected: a lot of outrage over a "+1" to m:Limits to configuration changes, really.
However, I'm not sure all options have been carefully considered here. There are many methods of disabling VisualEditor, most of which can be implemented by local administrators. I'm not sure how "Wikimedia's response" is relevant and I don't see why anyone would feel it necessary to wait for it in order to act. I'm namely thinking of:
Regarding the former proposal, if you can find someone willing to the write the necessary code, surely a local administrator would be within his or her rights to implement such a change, given the community discussion. (Or so the argument goes, in any case.)
Regarding the latter proposal, it focuses more on the effects of VisualEditor rather than the tool itself. That is, it can be helpful to be agnostic as to how someone is editing (mobile, VisualEditor, lynx) and instead simply focus on the result of their edits. If your edits add twenty pawn characters to an article, let's just stop allowing those edits. They're simple enough to identify, surely.
In any case, pretending as though the Wikimedia Foundation is the big bad guy doesn't seem very reasonable to me at this point. You have local power to hide—and effectively disable—VisualEditor by using local (elected) wiki administrators. The ball is not in the Wikimedia Foundation's court, it's in yours. (Now, if the Wikimedia Foundation is foolish enough to edit war over such changes, then a "big bad guy" label may be appropriate, among other measures.)
If you cannot find any local administrator willing to implement your local changes (either to site-wide CSS/JS pages or to AbuseFilter filters) in order to fulfill the RFC, you will have effectively allowed (or implicitly endorsed the continued use of) VisualEditor. :-)
Hope that helps. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 00:48, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
(cc: Jdforrester, Kww, Black Kite, The Rambling Man)
Looks to me like the code in common.js would look like
if (autoconfirmed() === 0) { mw.user.options.set('visualeditor-enable',0); } else { mw.loader.load( 'ext.visualEditor.viewPageTarget.init' ); } function autoconfirmed() { var userGroups = mw.config.get( 'wgUserGroups' ); if ( userGroups ) { for ( var i = 0; i < userGroups.length; i++ ) { if ( userGroups[i] === 'autoconfirmed' ) { return(1); } } } return(0); }
— Kww( talk) 01:54, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
function inGroup( group ) {
return mw.config.get('wgUserGroups').indexOf(group) > -1;
}
mw.loader.using('mediawiki.user', function() { stuff; });
Legoktm (
talk)
04:29, 17 September 2013 (UTC)Why not something like this?
/* Hide VisualEditor for anons and new users */
if ( mw.config.get( 'wgUserName' ) == null || mw.config.get( 'wgUserEditCount' ) < 10 ) {
appendCSS('li#ca-ve-edit, \
.mw-editsection .mw-editsection-divider, \
.mw-editsection .mw-editsection-visualeditor \
{ display: none; }');
}
Perfect is the enemy of the good. I tested this code at test.wikipedia.org and it seems to work just fine. It will cleanly hide VisualEditor for anonymous users and users who have fewer than ten edits, while leaving user preferences untouched. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 14:22, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
VisualEditor has been made opt-in for all users (cf. Special:Permalink/574255799#VisualEditor now opt-in only for all users on English Wikipedia). -- MZMcBride ( talk) 00:14, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
The Progressive Barnstar | ||
I couldn't find a
barnstar that would adequately thank those involved in making
the template editor user right RFC a reality, so I created this new one. The Progressive Barnstar recognizes those courageous enough to work towards a vision for change at Wikipedia. Kumioko, thanks for your pessimism :) which actually served to remind us all of how delicately and precisely to handle the proposal. I consider the proposal a success at this point, no matter what the eventual outcome. equazcion (talk) 06:28, 18 Sep 2013 (UTC) |
I have an idea of reducing the requirements for the WP:US which can be found here: User:Adamdaley/Draft of Article 3 on that talkpage of mine. It reduces the Universities to just placing "|Universities=y", Capital Cities as "|Capital-Cities=y", and Regional Cities as "|Regional-Cities=y" and since I'm doing the ACW having Confederates as "|ACW-CSA=y" US Federal troops as "|ACW-US=y". The last two can be tweaked. Have every state and territory listed. I'm open for suggestions. Adamdaley ( talk) 04:22, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
I hope you read this Kumioko. Long ago I made a massive push to get the assessment of USA done, a few bumps threw me off when it never should have. I just read about the attempt at its deletion and was considerably shocked by it. As a result, I am going to finish my assessment work, if you are able to mentor me in tagging and other administrative operations related to the project, I would be very happy. It may be a bit late, if you truly have left, I only discovered the matter today. The desire to maintain and improve Wikipedia in its core functions, independent of content, is something that few editors truly desire. It is part of my reason for taking charge in A&M subjects. I simply do not believe editors who contribute nothing to a Wikiproject or are a detriment to the operation should be allowed to determine the fate of anything. By the sweat of your brow untold millions of people have furthered their education because your edits have provided a path for improvements to be made, directly or indirectly. Those who work behind the scenes to operate the play are just as important as those who are on stage. I'll fight like hell to complete the task and make WP:USA's assessment template useful for the international studies by treating it like a textbook. Top, High and Mid should reflect subjects of varying degrees useful to those in general international interest, citizenship and study and a deeper study, respectively. This cannot be done at the state levels, this cannot be done in any other capacity and the operation and maintenance must be done periodically to ensure stability and relevance of the assessment. I believe there is a way to maintain it easily, but I lack some training. Even if you do not get my message, I will continue to do what I can to improve Wikipedia. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 17:42, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:31, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Medal of Honor
Thank you for quality articles on recipients of the
Medal of Honor, for quoting the wisdom "We have known the bitterness of defeat and the exultation of triumph, and from both we have learned there can be no turning back.", applied to an
honorable oppose, - repeating: you are an
awesome Wikipedian (5 February 2010 and 22 January 2011)!
A year ago, you were the 276th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style. I include you in those remembered on top of my talk, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:33, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
I have started a discussion about some of your edits at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive255#Kumioko socking. Fram ( talk) 08:20, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013
by The Interior ( talk · contribs), Ocaasi ( talk · contribs)
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. -- The Interior 20:31, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Hey. Saw your note on that front, and figured I probably didn't explain what I had meant. There are copyright investigations that do require admin help, whether it's due to needing revisions or articles deleted or history merges that were unattributed. A good number of them, however, are good faith editors that had close paraphrasing issues where the references are provided. For these, all you would have to do is use the Duplication Detector to see if the issues remain in the article with the added sources, and reword if that's the case. Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20100307 would be a good one to practice on for that reason, as most of the early edits are long gone from the article and any recent ones still have references that work.
As for one last point, the most active user at CCI that isn't me is User:MER-C, a non-admin, take that for what it's worth. Wizardman 02:48, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but I do think you're way down in a rut and not helping your own case for reform at this point. Kudpung has stated a couple of times that you are a nice guy face to face and that you did a lot of good for the project and helped a lot of people. But retirement combined with gadflying rubs a lot of people the wrong way, no matter the circumstances, and you're now well into saying repeatedly that you don't care a fig about the project ... but you're going to tell us at length your opinion on aspects of it, anyway. Please, walk away for real, for a good long time. Feel free to e-mail me if you want to discuss specifics. (I would feel more comfortable discussing your admin candidacies one-on-one anyway; but I'm also quite ready to be used as an example of a mediocre admin and taken to task for it.) You have prided yourself on speaking truth to power; now's the time to recognize that you are just repeating yourself, and that Leaky caldron was himself speaking some straight truths. At least leave that page alone for several months, please. If only to let events marinate so that who's right on what can be more clearly demonstrated. Yngvadottir ( talk) 17:22, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis
Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kumioko, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.
Chris Troutman ( talk) 21:14, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kumioko. Sorry that the community has been biting you lately. I do want to say that there are many people that do appreciate that you're still here. I just stopped by to mention there's some research going on regarding RfA and editor retention over at meta:Research:Ideas/Requests for adminship and the retention of long term editors and I thought you might be interested. In reading the talk page there, it seems like they are looking to get some more data on the issue. Maybe check it out if you have the time. Things are a lot more friendly over there. Best. 64.40.54.79 ( talk) 03:58, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:07, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kumioko. I've been catching up on various discussions and I noticed several where you (or someone I think was you) left comments as an IP. I recognised you as the writing style and what you have to say is familiar (you have said some of the same things many times before), but it can be difficult to follow such discussions without knowing who is who. Ideally you would log in, but I know you don't always feel like doing that. Would you at least be able to add your name if you are leaving comments as an IP? That would help keep track of the discussions and who is saying what. It would also help make your track record in such discussions clearer as well. Carcharoth ( talk) 00:37, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Best wishes | |
for the holidays and 2014 from a warmer place than where you probably are ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 11:39, 21 December 2013 (UTC) |
There must be a severe problem with Wikipedia user participation, considering about 50% of the Wikipedia contributors come from the US. WhisperToMe ( talk) 02:35, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
I liked your movement, - one link goes to "awesomely weird", -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:09, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
138.162.8.58 ( talk) 17:34, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Morning KumiokoCleanStart. "I think your a jerk" and "Your a jerk and always have been" are not really appropriate comments to make about your fellow editors. I would like to ask you to please not refer to other editors in this way. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 03:51, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
This page 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. |
Kumioko, I have been extremely patient here, but the current situation is no longer tenable. I asked you nicely to stop trolling as an IP, but it appears you have no intention of doing that; indeed, you seem proud that you can summon multiple IPs to continue to cause pointless drama with new IPs even while blocked for causing drama with other IPs. You know perfectly well what block evasion is, so I see little choice but to block this account until you agree to knock this off. I have turned off the Wikibreak Enforcer so that you can log in and comment here if you like. 28bytes ( talk) 17:25, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
BTW I just wanted to point out that there is another sockpuppet going in the Doncram case. If you all think I was socking then you might want to investigate and block User talk:204.101.237.139. If I was considered socking its clear they are socking too. But since that user isn't me, I doubt it would be considered appropriate to enforce policy on them. Kumioko ( talk) 03:28, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
For those who might be bored:
There was a time (in fact just a year ago) when I would have requested an unblock and fought hard to be allowed back, but not anymore. I tried in the past to get folks to listen and no one cared. Its obvious I am to be treated as a common vandal so here is what I am asking. I want you to perform a global block on my account as it is here in the English Wikipedia. I tried to be an active positive contributor but I just got shit on and treated like a second class citizen so now I want no part of this. I want my account blocked on all Wiki's as it is here please. Kumioko ( talk) 21:39, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Well they denied my request for a global lock to my account. I think they are concerned I may change my mind. I got blocked for 6 hours but I'll try again tomorrow. Kumioko ( talk) 01:35, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Category:Burnt-out Wikipedians I begged and pleaded but I can't get the stewards to give me a Global site ban! I just got a 3 day block for disruption for not letting it go though. I really get the impression they don't think I'm serious about my intent! Kumioko ( talk) 02:24, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Wow. I haven't really been a fan of Arbcom but demanding Arbcom resign is extreme even by my standards. Kumioko ( talk) 02:49, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Poof! to the Gray Skies | |
You did a good thing. Audie Murphy made it to GA. My first GA, ever. Couldn't have done it without your help. Your advice was invaluable, so I'm sending this ray of sunshine to chase the gray skies you've having. — Maile ( talk) 19:33, 27 February 2013 (UTC) |
I should have known it would take more than 6 blocks and a countless number of bad calls, unnecessarily draconian blocks and bans to desysop an admin!. If this were just an editor they would have been banned from the project. But at least this does prove that I was right about out at least one thing in this place. There is an us and them mentality between admins and editors and the admins are always given the break. Kumioko ( talk) 19:02, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
There was a time when seeing these block messages on my account really would have pissed me off (about this time last year actually) but now I login to see the message that I am blocked for Block evasion and socking (both for editing from my Home/work IP) and it just makes me laugh. I shake my head too, but I mostly just laugh. Then I see today another longterm editor Cla68 was indeffed. Pretty soon the only ones editing will be the bots! Kumioko ( talk) 03:32, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Wow, never really had a strong desire to edit the Wikipediocracy site before until yesterday. I didn't realize how much I was universally hated. Here, there and everywhere. Over here I am a vandal, sock-puppeteer and block evader. Over there I am whiney incompetent user crying about how I will never be an admin and shouldn't because I am too inept to have the tools. Wow. You try and make things better and try and participate and see what happens. I can't wait until I am blocked from this place for good. Nothing good will come out of editing any further. To think I once believed so strongly in this project. All the time, years, wasted on these foolish pursuits. I realize that no one reads my talk page anymore but maybe some will see what the future holds for them after donating countless hours to the project. Nothing, absolutely nothing. Kumioko ( talk) 14:19, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
“ | Greetings to the peanut gallery, imagine my surprise when I did a search to see if my name ever came up and I find comments by you 2 calling me a whiny little child and such. At first I was a little annoyed until I looked at the context. A group of haters hating. Then I went and looked at your Wikipedia user pages and what do I find. User:EricBarbour that looks like the rantings of a lunatic. The talk page is filled with junk and seeing that you were banned indefinately for outing. So, after learning this it compels me to think that I must be doing something right if I have somehow caught the interest of 2 fine upstanding individuals such as yourselves. You can call me whiny, a child or whatever but like it or not there are still folks that want me to edit, I do not see one person anywhere on your page that thinks you should stay. | ” |
Kumioko ( talk) 15:05, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Sorry you're blocked. Work your way back if you feel you still have a commitment to this site and its... interesting social milieu. As for Wikipediocracy, your posts so far over there have been nothing but constructive.→ Stani Stani 21:35, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
I think it extremely ironic and silly that Fram accuses Carrite of being aggressive at opposing editors when that is his main modus operundi. I am confident that eventually the community will see through Fram's bullshit and cleverly worded rhetoric and see him for the bully he is. Kumioko ( talk) 16:22, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
A Request for Comment has been called at Talk:Watchmen. As a registered editor who has edited that page over the past year, you may wish to comment. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 18:50, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello, KumiokoCleanStart, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
Please remember to
sign your messages on
talk pages by typing four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}}
before the question. Again, welcome! Regards, —
Moe
Epsilon
21:04, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Welcome home, Kumioko. Glad to see you back. Hope you enjoyed your time off. I hope your stay will be an enjoyable one. It's really nice to have you back. Kind regards. 64.40.54.134 ( talk) 13:58, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
A cheeseburger to fuel your future editing on Wikipedia. It is great to see you back on, and you have contributed much to this community in the past; I only hope that you continue to contribute such quality work in the future! RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 15:51, 27 March 2013 (UTC) |
You know I have a great deal of respect for you, Kumioko, and I think you are a great benefit to the project. I am very happy you have returned, so please don't take this the wrong way. Sometimes you get wrapped up in something and lose sight of of the goal. It would be a great benefit to me if you try to slow down a little and focus more on the goal if you feel you are getting wrapped up in something. This place can be very trying at times. Very trying. And it's in our best interest to not let others get us wound up because they will use that to their advantage. I hope you don't mind me asking this favor of you. Thanks very much and welcome home. 64.40.54.134 ( talk) 16:14, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello, KumiokoCleanStart, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please remember to disclose these connections. J/K :D — cyberpower ChatOffline 22:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Yep, Looks like you caught me! :-)
KumiokoCleanStart (
talk)
01:35, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the constructive debate on Jimbo's talk page tonight. On a completely different note, have you thought about doing something with WP:MILHIST? Lots of topics to your taste, very active project with a lot of people to reach out to when you want to work on something, and they probably have enough tasks that they could use the advice of an experienced bot person. Having watched a number of people go at it over the years, trying to accomplish social change here tends to make people more burned-out and cranky, not less, but it's much harder to take the fun out of content work. If you can't kick the habit of being on here, you might as well have something to enjoy. :) Best, Choess ( talk) 04:53, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Most likely, I can help you create a typical markup-based template to display the data items, but with tricks to make it run very quickly. I am not sure where the articles are, as "Category:Medal_of_Honor_recipients" does not exist. What are some of the article names? Currently, for the ~2,900 towns in Austria, each population count is extracted from a set of population-metadata templates. - Wikid77 ( talk) 15:49, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi KumiokoCleanStart! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
Hi KumiokoCleanStart. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Seasons Bleedings, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers and review the criteria for speedy deletion. Particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion, proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. The db-band template is for bands, not albums. Michael Greiner 07:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello KumiokoCleanStart. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Alexander Lett Spence, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: DFC recipient. Thank you. Ϣere SpielChequers 11:17, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello KumiokoCleanStart. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Gadeguduru, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Its a village. Thank you. Ϣere SpielChequers 11:27, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
wow, that was quick I hadn't even finished creating it, it seems your not aloud to take a break from things like this (which is unfair), but there are plenty of articles like this why delete only mine.
thanks for your understanding
Why did you nominate Medicina legal for speedy deletion? It was not a test page and being non-english is not a valid CSD. Revolution1221 ( talk · email · contributions) 02:31, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
here's the video of jorm talking at wikimania 2012 [1]. long time coming. slowkingFarmbrough's revenge⇔ †@1₭ 03:23, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tibor Spitz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University Press ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 16:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Portal:United States/Collaborations, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:United States/Collaborations and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:United States/Collaborations during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Kumioko ( talk) 02:08, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
hey pinkampersand told me that i could continue with it..its legit man..i have talked to him he's allowed it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayush.datta ( talk • contribs) 13:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
how do i remove it? i have contested the deletion, dont be s quick to judge, i have quoted reliable sources, FT LOndon included! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayush.datta ( talk • contribs) 13:29, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Please do not attack other editors, as you did to User talk:Beyond My Ken. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Comments like this are unacceptable. Not only was that a rude personal attack, it ignores that fact that users have the discretion to remove messages from their talk page as they see fit (with the exception of some official actions such as block notices). -- LWG talk 01:56, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
A discussion regarding some of your recent edits is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive247#User:KumiokoCleanStart. Fram ( talk) 08:23, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I have declined your speedy deletion request at Engenho dos Erasmos, because neither of the reasons you gave were valid. Firstly, it might be short, but it does clearly state what it is about, so CSD:A1 is not applicable. Secondly, there is no indication it is a test page, so CSD:G2 is also inapplicable. I note you have been tagging a lot of pages with CSD:G2 recently, despite their clearly not being test pages. Please stop doing that - G2 has a specific meaning and is not just a "catch all" for anything you think should be deleted. -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 09:39, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello KumiokoCleanStart. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Seely Place Elementary School, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 clearly excludes schools. Thank you. Alexf (talk) 09:52, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Hey, I found a featured picture not included in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Washington Featured Picture list. Could you add it please? Thanks!
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.106.202.98 ( talk) 02:54, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
I declined the speedy deletion of this article because (1) the article was at least half in English, and (2) I did not know where it had been transwikied to. If you still believe the article deserves to be speedily deleted, please feel free to renominate it for speedy deletion, but please provide further explanation of the nomination on the page's talk page. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:27, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
You tagged Majakani for G2 deletion, but the page was not a test page, but a page in another language. You have been asked already to be more careful in applying G2.
You also tagged Porki for speedy deletion as "patent nonsense", which is lot worse than the above mistagging. The page was in English and had a clearly identifiable subject. It is badly written, but that is completely different from "patent nonsense". It is rather discouraging for a new user to get his or her first attempt at an article labeled thus. Fram ( talk) 12:47, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Since I seem to be the target of the month I want to let everyone know that I am no longer reviewing new articles. I am going to turn my focus on building up the Medal of Honor recipient articles until someone complains about that. I will be starting on add some WikiProject tags and assessing the ones that haven't been assessed yet. Sometimes the assessment of Stubs and Starts can be subjective. I think most are starts and I intend to tag them that way. If you disagree feel free to change them to stubs. No need to ask, comment or advise. I completely understand and its ok. Kumioko ( talk) 02:24, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Hey Kumioko, I found spotted some Washington related featured content. Its a beautiful picture and I think its a shame that it isnt included in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Washington Featured Pictures list. Could you add it? Thanks!
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.106.202.98 ( talk) 03:05, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot ( error?) 08:22, 14 April 2013 (UTC)Looks like the ANI Fram submitted against me for my work on patrolling new pages had some consequences. I've never seen it over 10, 000 unreviewed new pages before until recently. Seems the patrollers were sent a pretty clear message! Kumioko ( talk) 10:43, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
I created Portal:Film in the United States WhisperToMe ( talk) 18:16, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Just so you know, I was absolutely not suggesting that you're too stupid to understand a policy, I just objected to how you suggested the proposal (and thought it wasn't the best avenue to go about getting things changed).
There's nothing I can do if that's how you interpreted my comments, but I just making sure I was clear. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
EVula, I'm one of the folks that said that it reflects not understanding how the policy works. This is NOT a bad reflection on you. The system (for better or for worse) is immensely complex and fuzzy. Even when I was at 20,000 edits (and I'm no dummy) I still did not understand how the system worked. So my comment just makes you a normal, intelligent, conscientious Wikipedian. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 00:28, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Looks like you had been playing with the article. I'll leave you to clean up the mess as you know what to keep/delete. Bgwhite ( talk) 07:18, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kumioko. Maybe it's just me, but i notice that Archive 13 of your talk page is included in the category Burnt-out Wikipedians, which i suspect it shouldn't be. I'm not doing anything about it, 'cause that's your prerogative, but does it need removing? Cheers, Lindsay Hello 19:46, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Per this, I understand you were upset, and I won't block you or leave you a templated message. I will warn you that if you do something like this again you are likely to be blocked.-- John ( talk) 05:45, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) I am afraid I have to agree with Kumioko here. BMK's behaviour has been abysmal and admins just don't bother getting involved at his blatant uncooperative childish behaviour. He repeatedly ignores warnings and cries foul whenever someone criticise him and any attempt at mediation, especially if you don't share his viewpoint, is met with hostility. Hat off to Kumioko for being brave enough to stand up to him. -- MisterShiney ✉ 20:33, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Viriditas, Oh I am not saying Kumioko's behaviour was acceptable, but regardless, BMK's attitude needs to change if he wishes to continue editing. I also believe that the attitude of some admins is "Oh if we leave him alone he will go away" or "someone else can deal with it" because there is a distinct lack of warnings to him or attempts to reign him in. -- MisterShiney ✉ 14:14, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Go Phightins ! 19:11, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Will add more later. Kumioko ( talk) 13:28, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
User:Beyond My Ken's note to another user here. Almost certainly there is a more approrpriate way to say this. Kumioko ( talk) 19:34, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
This discussion begs for a comment. I hope its still open when my block expires....because I have a comment! Kumioko ( talk) 01:57, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Pierogi Award | |
Thanks for your support of my RfA. It didn't succeed this time, but that's no reason not to have some nice pierogi. Cheers, -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:26, 3 May 2013 (UTC) |
Test for the new Discussion logic. 138.162.8.57 ( talk) 19:17, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
+1 (from prior experience) Double sharp ( talk) 16:42, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
Thank you for standing up to bullies. ~ DanielTom ( talk) 23:03, 11 May 2013 (UTC) |
That Color Wheel link in your useful tools registers as an attack page to Firefox. I was wondering if you were aware of that. Also, thanks for your input from before. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 13:02, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Per your comments about Arbcom being extended to include MOS, there is no possibility of that happening – Arb deals solely with conduct, not content, just as DRN deals solely with content. There have been many erroneous statements made about Arb participating in the heated MOS discussions a year or two ago, but the participation was solely to handle the conduct there, and not the content. Arb is not our Supreme Court to decide content, that is what DRN is for. Apteva ( talk) 16:35, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
My apologies for this. It's written clearly at the top of the section that only Admins are meant to post there, and I was just being WP:BOLD. -- Ohconfucius ping / poke 16:37, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Komioko, after reading your responses here (and in other places), I would be appreciated if you can update me with links to the same or other problems you see. I usually don't follow those pages but would appreciate any link to new developments. Thanks in front, TMCk ( talk) 01:17, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I have been declining your A6 nominations for AFC redirects. Such redirects are supposed to exist. The case to delete these could apply if the article they point to was deleted, which was not in your case. Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 10:57, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I don't necessarily agree with your comment here. Wikis' open participation model is very susceptible to trolling, so it often makes sense to withdraw from a conversation once you have said your peace. Regards, -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 04:34, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
The Resilient Barnstar | |
Great attitude. Cheers! Basket Feudalist 11:37, 16 May 2013 (UTC) |
I'm not sure where you're getting that from. Tit for tat, flies and honey, and the golden rule, the same logic applies: Civility begets civility. I certainly did not intend to be hateful by saying that. ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 16:11, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kumioko. I've closed your RfA a little early per your comment here. Hopefully you'll enjoy your weekend a little more without having to check in on it. Cheers, 28bytes ( talk) 19:51, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Could you explain why you've tagged pages such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Recent changes/21 for deletion? If you've explained elsewhere, or if you're doing it on someone else's request, please just point me to where it is. Nyttend ( talk) 20:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
You tagged this page for speedy deletion because the bot which used to maintain it is no longer operational. However, I maintain it myself, and use it daily to check for vandalism of articles on New Zealand schools. There is an alternative method using the toolserver, but this has been unreliable recently. Accordingly, I have undeleted the page. If you object to this, I am happy to discuss the matter.- gadfium 02:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
I imagine you are aware that snarky comments like this one won't help you gain much respect. Anyway, for your answer, just look at the Arbitration Enforcement comment that Gatoclass linked to. -- Orlady ( talk) 21:35, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
I've updated the instructions to compile the SVN code. It is located at User:Bgwhite/Sandbox. Hopefully it is a little better. Also, tell me the problem you are having in compiling the #(%&# thing. I use SharpDevelop to compile. Bgwhite ( talk) 00:26, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm in the process of assessing the ACW in the WikiProject United States as "Low". If left unassessed, it is left unassessed in WikiProject Military History. If you feel that it deserves a higher assessment please re-assess otherwise do not remove. Adamdaley ( talk) 02:08, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi! In fact, when I deleted the page back in 2009, it was available on Commons. Apparently, it has been deleted there yesterday. Honestly, I'm a bit abashed it was deleted with no discussion nor care for the other projects, but considering the deletion reason, I'm a bit wary of unilaterally restoring it. Regards, -- Luk talk 08:11, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
If you want to have a conversation about your opinions on our changes, I am happy to set up a Hangout or skype call so we can talk through our differing views and exchange knowledge :). Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 20:48, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Library of Congress, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Library of Congress and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:WikiProject Library of Congress during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. JJ98 ( Talk) 18:11, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
The Resilient Barnstar | |
I hope you don't think I was personally attacking you at all in my comment on VPT. I have a lot of concerns about flow, and I too have dealt with a great deal of criticism and am probably not the most popular editor myself. I myself just got off an indefinite block less than two months ago, and I hear what you are saying. The problem isn't with the concerns you address, it's with the tone that you address them with. Calling the WMF team a bunch of blazing idiots isn't going to get us anywhere. Being one that has been tracking Flow on mw: and bugzilla for the last month, I'm afraid I'm not overly impressed with it either. I'll take whatever steps I feel are needed to keep Flow from being a major detriment to Wikipedia. The fact is that flow is probably going to happen, so instead of telling them to forget about it, it is more productive to say, "Hey, this isn't going to work like this because that and the other is how it could be fixed so it might work." As far as your username goes, if you truly want a clean start, the first step has to do with invoke your right to vanish on all of your current accounts. That way when you create a new account, they can't accuse you of socking because the other accounts will no longer exist... Food for thought. Technical 13 ( talk) 23:17, 2 June 2013 (UTC) |
I will respond back at AN. Giant Snowman 15:11, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for this, but WV is not equal to WA ;-) I fixed it. PumpkinSky talk 23:14, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:U.S. Southern wikipedians' notice board/USSCOTW/Archive, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:U.S. Southern wikipedians' notice board/USSCOTW/Archive and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:U.S. Southern wikipedians' notice board/USSCOTW/Archive during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Kumioko ( talk) 02:51, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:USCOTWnom. Since you had some involvement with the Template:USCOTWnom redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Kumioko ( talk) 02:57, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello can you help in this list. Solomon7968 ( talk) 16:57, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
I want to thank you for sacrificing the time, at wp:PUMPTECH, to escalate the concerns about the bizarre plans to use wp:FLOW. I suspect that your efforts to "shed light" on many dysfunctional aspects, of the limited Flow-talk interface, will alert countless editors to beware the planned shutdown of talk-pages to no longer be the current full word-processing documents which we use now to discuss text styles, wikitable formats, and wp:charts. It seems their WMF department was planning another "quiet" removal of talk-page access, in the manner of removing the orange new-messages bar (surprise, no user-talk notices!). Anyway, if you do go on more wikibreaks this year, then please consider returning on some occasions to voice opinions about other major topics. There are so many new people coming to re-suggest improvements, which had been forgotten years ago, and it is an exciting time here again, and so many people could benefit from your periodic insights. Thanks again. - Wikid77 ( talk) 23:36, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chemical Heritage Foundation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Fenn ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:19, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed between 12-14 Good article nominations and are not part of
WikiProject Good articles (the initial messages I sent out went to only WikiProject members and users that had over 15 reviews).
So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers:
NOTE: If you are interested in becoming a recruiter but do not meet the 15 review requirement, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters and put your status as "Not Available" until you have reviewed enough nominations.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along. A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.-- Dom497 ( talk) This message was sent out by -- EdwardsBot ( talk) 21:05, 10 June 2013 (UTC) |
Please don't leave any more messages at this user's talk page. You've been asked not to, and to continue to do so is disruptive. If there are any mandatory messages to go there ask someone else to post. I'll do it myself if it's warranted. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 21:25, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your positive input regarding Rich's block, care if we become friends? Skype or e-mail might do a trick. :)-- Mishae ( talk) 18:01, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
If there is what appears to be significant discussion on article subpage, I am not willing to delete it as speedy, and think it is better to use mfd to obtain consensus, because it is not obvious to me where the discussion has been preserved. I have consequently removed tags from a few of the subpages. I may of course not understand and other admins may see it differently, but mfd is the place to find out.. DGG ( talk ) 04:42, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Please avoid making personal attacks, like you did in this edit summary. Provide also diffs for accusations you level against other editors: unsupported accusations are also considered to be personal attacks. Fram ( talk) 14:41, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kumiko! When you added {{ WikiProject United States}} to Talk:Mariah Carey, it added the redlink Category:American music articles with to-do lists. Should the category be created, or should the template be changed? Thanks! GoingBatty ( talk) 16:59, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
I attempted to remove the tags from all of them, but another admin had already deleted several of them. It's not a big enough deal that I felt like asking for undeletion, but they definitely don't fit G6 — G6 is meant for things like histmerges and pagemoves, not something like this. Any method of deleting them, other than the MFDs you've filed, is a misuse of the criterion; I see no reason to delete them at MFD either, but I don't particularly care enough to go to the MFDs and oppose. Nyttend ( talk) 00:57, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
You may not believe it but I do understand the criteria very well and your right, it is a technical deletion but if you look at twinkle or at the page curation tool G6 is marked as applying to the following criteria
These fall under Housekeeping. If you don't agree I recommend having Twinkle and the Page curation tool changed. If you have a better suggestion for deleting these please let me know. Because MFD and G6 seem like the most accurate and reasonable route to getting rid of this trash. Unless you can see some reason we will start using these again in the future. Also, your example is completely wrong. These aren't articles about cities. In fact they are not articles at all and the community already voted to deprecate using them and eliminate them. Its just that no one ever bothered to follow through on it. If you think they need to be kept then open on RFC or something at AN or the Village pump. Kumioko ( talk) 01:07, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
You have recreated quite a few pages that were already deleted before, in your current effort to get rid of all the /comments subpages. Examples: Talk:Beagle/Comments, Talk:Bal-Sagoth/Comments, Talk:Bacteria/Comments, Talk:Backmasking/Comments, Talk:Autism/Comments, Talk:Augustus/Comments, Talk:Ant/Comments, Talk:Akhtar Hameed Khan/Comments, Talk:Algorithm/Comments, Talk:Alexander Wendt/Comments, ... Some of these, like Talk:Algorithm/Comments, you had already tagged for deletion before this and were already deleted.
There is an AWB setting "skip if page doesn't exist" which may be useful for this task. Fram ( talk) 06:55, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
AWB offers an option to skip non-existent pages. Moreover debug version of AWB can't save newly created and/or blank pages. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 13:47, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
While I do think all the deprecated comments pages should be deleted, could you not have just requested some kind of bulk deletion instead of having like twenty entries? It makes it much easier on commenters. T C N7JM 08:17, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
If there is a consensus to delete all these pages we could run a bot to do it. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 09:33, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Your reasons for deletion don't really vary between each other. If one is kept then all will be kept and vice versa so please wait for the result of the first 100 you nominated. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 15:39, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
I removed the {{ db-g8}} tags from Template:Quantity/sandbox & Template:Quantity/sandbox/doc and explained in detail on their talk pages. Thanks for your consideration, -- Kevjonesin ( talk) 01:26, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Integrity | ||
For your support during the recent unpleasantness. PumpkinSky talk 22:34, 16 June 2013 (UTC) |
Stop re-tagging pages such as Talk:Endowment (Mormonism)/Comments; when an admin declines the same speedy tag twice on the same page, you're supposed to take it as a hint that you're going the wrong way, and tagging it a third time is not right. Either stop trying to have these pages deleted, or take them to MFD. Nyttend ( talk) 03:49, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Please to do tag maintenance categories as empty unless you know for a fact that we are finished with this. Future categories clearly are likely to be used. Vegaswikian ( talk) 02:41, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
I probably should've explained that in an edit summary to prevent a misunderstanding, but I see you noticed that I added the coords to the article. My bad! Spencer T♦ C 20:54, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
|class=
doesn't need "Cat", "category", "template", "portal", "file", "image" etc anymore. Now namespace is automatically detected by the banner itself. --
Magioladitis (
talk)
09:55, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Moreover, according to my notes, I finished removed nested from all talk pages today. I'll wait for the next database dump to confirm it. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 10:04, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
As I wrote above we don't need to add class category anymore. It's redundant and auto-set by the banner itself. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 16:44, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
WOSlinker may help with it. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 16:59, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
The same holds for template class. It it auto-detected. By the way, I noticed you remove spaces from comments in talk pages. There is no need to. The only result is to make larger diffs. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 11:59, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Autodetection has the benefit that if the project decided to go from NA-class to Category-class or the opposite, we only need to change a line in the code instead of running a bot to change all pages. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 12:43, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't agree that "broadly construed" is useless or abusive. It's meant to invite attention to the spirit of a ban, because it's difficult to foresee all the ways a ban can be skirted or lawyered. Compare my comments here and here. Do you consider them abusive? Do you have any examples of the "broadly construed" language being used to justify abuse? I agree that it could happen, but I think an admin that did so would be taken up sharply and be reverted or forced to recant. Admins, too, are supposed to attend to the spirit, not the letter; "broadly construed" doesn't allow them to wikilawyer, either. Bishonen | talk 16:51, 23 June 2013 (UTC).
Hi. There are, at present, no particular clear guidelines for religious material here, or, for that matter, guidelines for how to deal with ideas in general, particularly those ideas which might be accepted as true by individuals of a given religious, political, or scientific stance. There have been attempts in the past to draft such guidelines, but they have quickly been derailed. I am dropping this note on the talk pages of a number of editors who I believe have some interest in these topics, or have shown some ability and interest in helping to develop broad topic areas, such as yourself, and asking them to review the material at User:John Carter/Guidelines discussion and perhaps take part in an effort to decide what should be covered in such guidelines, should they be determined useful, and what phrasing should be used. I also raise a few questions about broader possible changes in some things here, which you might have some more clear interest in. I would be honored to have your input. John Carter ( talk) 19:28, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi, sorry to ask what might be perceived as an affront but are you a bot or using some sort of WP:BOTASSIST? Your recent edit history suggests as much. Not that there's anything wrong with this but I'm surprised that your edits don't have the bot tag and there's nothing about it on your user page. It's hard to imagine that you're making all of these rote changes by hand. You don't include links in your edit comments to "WPUS/USPP" which makes your efforts rather unclear (although I think I understand what you're doing). Even if you are it might be helpful to describe your efforts prominently on your user page, at least while they're ongoing and shortly thereafter? -- Nstrauss ( talk) 19:18, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for moving the comments from the composer project to the talk page for this composer. I had never seen them before in their hidden place and they're interesting to read. Best -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 22:00, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I left a question at Portal talk:Biography. I hope you don't want to add the portal logo in 1 million pages manually. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 19:16, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
What's the logic of tagging articles for both the US Public Policy Wikiproject and a "public policy" subproject of WikiProject United States? (I'm puzzled by the tag you added at Talk:Tennessee Plan.) -- Orlady ( talk) 15:36, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
<score>...</score>
Please note that
this edit did not observe the special syntax used within the <score>...</score>
tags. --
Michael Bednarek (
talk)
06:07, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
<score>
and could answer questions and phrase the problems better. This is a problem with AWB's logic and with score being so new, I'm sure there are other problems with AWB's handling of it.
Bgwhite (
talk)
06:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello KumiokoCleanStart, Eduemoni has given you a shining smiling star! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the Shining Smiling Star whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy! Eduemoni ↑talk↓ 01:18, 1 July 2013 (UTC) |
Hey, I reported once about AWB is not working in [2]. But after I leaving three error messages, not responding at there. Could you do me a favor about that? 乌拉跨氪 ( talk) 14:53, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
If the WP community came to a good consensus that the preference should be "on" by default to hide VE as default, thus pretty much making it opt in for everyone, technically the developers would follow that (hopefully) since it's a preference change.
Whether they'd actually accept such a consensus (when even new editors hate this) is another question. ~ Charmlet -talk- 17:57, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
No fancy messages, no drama but this Visual editor stunt by WMF has me frustrated so I am going to walk away for a while. Just wanted to let folks know in case I don't respond for a while. Let's face it, I'll be back. Kumioko ( talk) 19:38, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I just recently went through the online World Book Encyclopedia, which includes a page of "outline", for the list of articles it includes in its outline of mythology/philosophy/religion. The list can be found at User:John Carter/World Book articles. The first section places the articles in order of number of paragraphs found in the last, 2010, print edition, and the second section includes the articles by sections of the outline in which they are included, which named subarticles included after the name of the main article, and an indicator of the paragraphs for all. Those which are lists of subarticles are included in sections marked "(title) (article)". Like I've said elsewhere, I've never been entirely sure if Simple English wikipedia were intended as a "linguistic" wikipedia, or as a "scholastic" (basically high school and younger) English wikipedia, but I do think that if the latter this page might be of some use there, if you are yourself still at all active there. Yes, I have myself noticed that some of the outline matters are open to question. Jesus Christ, for instance, is not included in the Christianity section, but in the Bible section. But the overall list is possibly at least a good starting point for a scholastic type encyclopedia, if that is what Simple English wikipedia is intended to be. John Carter ( talk) 19:43, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Kumioko, sorry, re WP:BN, you got two RFAR cases conflated. It was User:PumpkinSky's proposal to desysop Doc James that had just been shot down. [3] The Hex proposal (a while ago now) was initiated by User:Anthonyhcole. [4] Can't say I blame you, with all these well-founded and yet declined RFARs flying around. Bishonen | talk 02:32, 8 July 2013 (UTC).
I'm relatively new to Wiki and delighted to have found an article on my house (Wesley Chapel - Hopetown Oh). We bought this historic church building in 1993 and have been working to make a residence out of it for two decades now. I have attempted on two occasions to add some of the research we have done on the property to Wikipedia, only to return later and find the information deleted, with no explaination as to why or by whom. May I ask what must be done (substantiation, documentation etc.) for my posts to remain?
Thanks
Roger McDanie (Greek2Me)
Hey - I've seen you question this concept several times. Have you considered writing an essay that explains your objections to the term? WP:Broadly Construed for example? If I were in your shoes, I'd start by explaining how it's used on Wikipedia and it's definition in Wikipedia terms and then move on to why it's, in your opinion, disruptive and unhelpful. Might be a way to help others see your point of view on the topic.--v/r - T P 19:00, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Military history reviewers' award | ||
By order of the
Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's
Peer,
A-Class and
Featured Article reviews for the period Apr-Jun 2013, I hereby award you this
Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award.
AustralianRupert (
talk)
10:57, 1 August 2013 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
This. Thank you! Tinton5 ( talk) 20:21, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically List of Medal of Honor recipients for the Vietnam War, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth ( talk) 14:59, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Kumioko accusing other users of trolling and harassment for asking him to provide evidence for his claims. T C N7JM 00:52, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello, just a simple request. When you add assessments for new USA articles, would you mind (1) checking to see if their subjects are on the National Register of Historic Places, and (2) if they are, adding a {{ WikiProject NRHP}} tag as well as your normal WP:USA tag? The NRHP wikiproject has been trying to put together a scheme for understanding our article ratings better, relying primarily on the article ratings, but for some reason the scheme ignores all other projects' ratings completely. If you were to tag articles for the NRHP project as well as for the USA project, it would probably make it a lot simpler. Thanks! Nyttend ( talk) 22:12, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi. It's very clear that the article is from a new editor who thought he was working on a draft and not a new article. In the spirit of welcoming new editors to Wikipedia, and ignoring all rules, would you, as nominator, be amenable to userfying and an early closing out Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FirstHealth of the Carolinas? -- Regards. -- Whpq ( talk) 03:48, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Is it possible for you to add two templates at once like here, and just switch the state?-- Mishae ( talk) 02:12, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Mmmmm, updated beeeeer, ahhhh. That had to be the most disappointing edit summary ever. Get someone's hopes up only to dash them like that is pure evil. Bgwhite ( talk) 20:12, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Well, you withdrew before I had an opportunity to poke my nose in. I think you're going the wrong way about this and I'd be more than happy to discuss it with you over email. Up to you - the only thing I bite is my food, as you know already. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 03:23, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
I put myself in as the first support. Admin should be no big deal but it is, and for the reasons I noted there it needs folks like you. North8000 ( talk) 01:28, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Don't forget my previous observation/offer/idea. For better or for worse 5 savvy people can get 99% of anything done in Wikipedia, including fixing lots of things. North8000 ( talk) 01:49, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
You have nominated templates for deletion in wp:categories for deletion. X Ottawahitech ( talk) 05:27, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Kumioko. Although "Qing" is the name of a dynasty, the phrase "Qing conquest theory" is a neologism: you won't find it anywhere but on Wikipedia. Kanguole 17:36, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
This is a quick notice to inform you that there is a WP:RfC being conducted at WT:Templates for discussion#RfC: Should Userbox templates in Template: space be nominated at TfD or MfD that I think you may be interested in. Happy editing! Technical 13 ( talk) 21:00, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Has the authority - whether he chooses to be Pilate or Solomon is the issue now. Two different types of judges, and he has free will. If he simply says the case was procedurally deficient, he could save face and not claim he diminished the authority of ArbCom. Or he could simply call for the bowl of water. But, in the end, it is up to him. I have been cautious and moderate in my posts and statements, and trust those who have been immoderate will not affect this course. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 19:40, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
/Comments pages I've been deleting still either are linked or transcluded into the parent page, but with no visible link or transclusion. I closed Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:List of expressions related to death/Comments as delete and deleted the page. [6] The What links here button shows "Talk:List of expressions related to death" links to the deleted page. Do you know how "Talk:List of expressions related to death" links to the deleted page? Another what links here of a page I just deleted shows the deleted /Comments page being transcluded into the parent page, but I could not find the transclusion. I think it is being done through the Banner Template:WikiProject India, which some how uses Template:WPBannerMeta/comments. It appears it is through the Comments=Yes parameter at Template:WPBannerMeta. Your MfD posts note that the use of comments subpages was deprecated years ago. (Do you have a link for that?) Would you please confirm how deleted /Comments pages are being linked/transcluded into the parent talk page. I would like to try to fix it so that deleted /Comments pages no longer are linked/transcluded into the parent talk page. Thanks. -- Jreferee ( talk) 12:45, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
COMMENTS
that indicates use of /Comments subpages is depreciated. That probably should be revised so that Template:WPBannerMeta no longer promotes use of /Comments subpages. --
Jreferee (
talk)
15:22, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
...I always wondered what my userpage looked like to the rest of Wikipedia and those who came to view it. I guess I now have my answer :)
On a more serious note, I thought I'd swing by and to see how you're doing and to suggest adding your name to the milhist coordinator election. I think you'd be a good candidate for milhist coordinatorship, and who knows, it may help tip you next rfa toward a pass. Of course its entirely your decision to run, but I would encourage you to think about it all the same. If have any question or comments, you can drop me a line or swing by Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators. TomStar81 ( Talk) 06:33, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Can you identify what actions you hope to take place as a result of your [ https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard&diff=572345958&oldid=572345108 comment}? If I read it literally (which is often a failing of mine) you are encouraging people to give up trying to make changes. Let's imagine you are successful. Will this be a better place if more people give up?-- SPhilbrick (Talk) 14:14, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Template:WikiProject United States has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Fram ( talk) 09:25, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
You've mentioned several times that broadly construed is too broad and too ambiguous that it sets a trap for whomever is under such a sanction. So I've had an idea. I'm not sure if it exists as a tool yet, but there is a game on Wikipedia called the 6 degrees of Wikipedia. I think it would be possible to create a tool that could take any article and calculate the number of links it takes to get to any other article. Then when we describe "broadly construed", we could define it in terms of the number of clicks it takes to get to a topic. So for the recent Tea Party Arbcom case, broadly construed could mean any article that has 2 degrees of separation from Tea Party. What do you think?--v/r - T P 16:08, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kumioko, twice now I've seen you claim that WP:FLOW will eliminate talk page templates, such as WikiProject tags. But the FLOW documentation says "Current plans indicate that there will be... A place for an 'introduction' to the page, which can contain free-form text, user boxes, templates, etc." So where are you getting this idea that anything is going to happen to talk page templates? -- BDD ( talk) 17:07, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi.
I was skimming Special:Permalink/573229751#The WMF response to the Visual Editor RFC is disappointing and insulting and Special:Permalink/573233282#Wikimedia response. Both were pretty much what I expected: a lot of outrage over a "+1" to m:Limits to configuration changes, really.
However, I'm not sure all options have been carefully considered here. There are many methods of disabling VisualEditor, most of which can be implemented by local administrators. I'm not sure how "Wikimedia's response" is relevant and I don't see why anyone would feel it necessary to wait for it in order to act. I'm namely thinking of:
Regarding the former proposal, if you can find someone willing to the write the necessary code, surely a local administrator would be within his or her rights to implement such a change, given the community discussion. (Or so the argument goes, in any case.)
Regarding the latter proposal, it focuses more on the effects of VisualEditor rather than the tool itself. That is, it can be helpful to be agnostic as to how someone is editing (mobile, VisualEditor, lynx) and instead simply focus on the result of their edits. If your edits add twenty pawn characters to an article, let's just stop allowing those edits. They're simple enough to identify, surely.
In any case, pretending as though the Wikimedia Foundation is the big bad guy doesn't seem very reasonable to me at this point. You have local power to hide—and effectively disable—VisualEditor by using local (elected) wiki administrators. The ball is not in the Wikimedia Foundation's court, it's in yours. (Now, if the Wikimedia Foundation is foolish enough to edit war over such changes, then a "big bad guy" label may be appropriate, among other measures.)
If you cannot find any local administrator willing to implement your local changes (either to site-wide CSS/JS pages or to AbuseFilter filters) in order to fulfill the RFC, you will have effectively allowed (or implicitly endorsed the continued use of) VisualEditor. :-)
Hope that helps. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 00:48, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
(cc: Jdforrester, Kww, Black Kite, The Rambling Man)
Looks to me like the code in common.js would look like
if (autoconfirmed() === 0) { mw.user.options.set('visualeditor-enable',0); } else { mw.loader.load( 'ext.visualEditor.viewPageTarget.init' ); } function autoconfirmed() { var userGroups = mw.config.get( 'wgUserGroups' ); if ( userGroups ) { for ( var i = 0; i < userGroups.length; i++ ) { if ( userGroups[i] === 'autoconfirmed' ) { return(1); } } } return(0); }
— Kww( talk) 01:54, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
function inGroup( group ) {
return mw.config.get('wgUserGroups').indexOf(group) > -1;
}
mw.loader.using('mediawiki.user', function() { stuff; });
Legoktm (
talk)
04:29, 17 September 2013 (UTC)Why not something like this?
/* Hide VisualEditor for anons and new users */
if ( mw.config.get( 'wgUserName' ) == null || mw.config.get( 'wgUserEditCount' ) < 10 ) {
appendCSS('li#ca-ve-edit, \
.mw-editsection .mw-editsection-divider, \
.mw-editsection .mw-editsection-visualeditor \
{ display: none; }');
}
Perfect is the enemy of the good. I tested this code at test.wikipedia.org and it seems to work just fine. It will cleanly hide VisualEditor for anonymous users and users who have fewer than ten edits, while leaving user preferences untouched. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 14:22, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
VisualEditor has been made opt-in for all users (cf. Special:Permalink/574255799#VisualEditor now opt-in only for all users on English Wikipedia). -- MZMcBride ( talk) 00:14, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
The Progressive Barnstar | ||
I couldn't find a
barnstar that would adequately thank those involved in making
the template editor user right RFC a reality, so I created this new one. The Progressive Barnstar recognizes those courageous enough to work towards a vision for change at Wikipedia. Kumioko, thanks for your pessimism :) which actually served to remind us all of how delicately and precisely to handle the proposal. I consider the proposal a success at this point, no matter what the eventual outcome. equazcion (talk) 06:28, 18 Sep 2013 (UTC) |
I have an idea of reducing the requirements for the WP:US which can be found here: User:Adamdaley/Draft of Article 3 on that talkpage of mine. It reduces the Universities to just placing "|Universities=y", Capital Cities as "|Capital-Cities=y", and Regional Cities as "|Regional-Cities=y" and since I'm doing the ACW having Confederates as "|ACW-CSA=y" US Federal troops as "|ACW-US=y". The last two can be tweaked. Have every state and territory listed. I'm open for suggestions. Adamdaley ( talk) 04:22, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
I hope you read this Kumioko. Long ago I made a massive push to get the assessment of USA done, a few bumps threw me off when it never should have. I just read about the attempt at its deletion and was considerably shocked by it. As a result, I am going to finish my assessment work, if you are able to mentor me in tagging and other administrative operations related to the project, I would be very happy. It may be a bit late, if you truly have left, I only discovered the matter today. The desire to maintain and improve Wikipedia in its core functions, independent of content, is something that few editors truly desire. It is part of my reason for taking charge in A&M subjects. I simply do not believe editors who contribute nothing to a Wikiproject or are a detriment to the operation should be allowed to determine the fate of anything. By the sweat of your brow untold millions of people have furthered their education because your edits have provided a path for improvements to be made, directly or indirectly. Those who work behind the scenes to operate the play are just as important as those who are on stage. I'll fight like hell to complete the task and make WP:USA's assessment template useful for the international studies by treating it like a textbook. Top, High and Mid should reflect subjects of varying degrees useful to those in general international interest, citizenship and study and a deeper study, respectively. This cannot be done at the state levels, this cannot be done in any other capacity and the operation and maintenance must be done periodically to ensure stability and relevance of the assessment. I believe there is a way to maintain it easily, but I lack some training. Even if you do not get my message, I will continue to do what I can to improve Wikipedia. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 17:42, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:31, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Medal of Honor
Thank you for quality articles on recipients of the
Medal of Honor, for quoting the wisdom "We have known the bitterness of defeat and the exultation of triumph, and from both we have learned there can be no turning back.", applied to an
honorable oppose, - repeating: you are an
awesome Wikipedian (5 February 2010 and 22 January 2011)!
A year ago, you were the 276th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style. I include you in those remembered on top of my talk, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:33, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
I have started a discussion about some of your edits at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive255#Kumioko socking. Fram ( talk) 08:20, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013
by The Interior ( talk · contribs), Ocaasi ( talk · contribs)
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. -- The Interior 20:31, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Hey. Saw your note on that front, and figured I probably didn't explain what I had meant. There are copyright investigations that do require admin help, whether it's due to needing revisions or articles deleted or history merges that were unattributed. A good number of them, however, are good faith editors that had close paraphrasing issues where the references are provided. For these, all you would have to do is use the Duplication Detector to see if the issues remain in the article with the added sources, and reword if that's the case. Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20100307 would be a good one to practice on for that reason, as most of the early edits are long gone from the article and any recent ones still have references that work.
As for one last point, the most active user at CCI that isn't me is User:MER-C, a non-admin, take that for what it's worth. Wizardman 02:48, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but I do think you're way down in a rut and not helping your own case for reform at this point. Kudpung has stated a couple of times that you are a nice guy face to face and that you did a lot of good for the project and helped a lot of people. But retirement combined with gadflying rubs a lot of people the wrong way, no matter the circumstances, and you're now well into saying repeatedly that you don't care a fig about the project ... but you're going to tell us at length your opinion on aspects of it, anyway. Please, walk away for real, for a good long time. Feel free to e-mail me if you want to discuss specifics. (I would feel more comfortable discussing your admin candidacies one-on-one anyway; but I'm also quite ready to be used as an example of a mediocre admin and taken to task for it.) You have prided yourself on speaking truth to power; now's the time to recognize that you are just repeating yourself, and that Leaky caldron was himself speaking some straight truths. At least leave that page alone for several months, please. If only to let events marinate so that who's right on what can be more clearly demonstrated. Yngvadottir ( talk) 17:22, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis
Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kumioko, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.
Chris Troutman ( talk) 21:14, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kumioko. Sorry that the community has been biting you lately. I do want to say that there are many people that do appreciate that you're still here. I just stopped by to mention there's some research going on regarding RfA and editor retention over at meta:Research:Ideas/Requests for adminship and the retention of long term editors and I thought you might be interested. In reading the talk page there, it seems like they are looking to get some more data on the issue. Maybe check it out if you have the time. Things are a lot more friendly over there. Best. 64.40.54.79 ( talk) 03:58, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:07, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kumioko. I've been catching up on various discussions and I noticed several where you (or someone I think was you) left comments as an IP. I recognised you as the writing style and what you have to say is familiar (you have said some of the same things many times before), but it can be difficult to follow such discussions without knowing who is who. Ideally you would log in, but I know you don't always feel like doing that. Would you at least be able to add your name if you are leaving comments as an IP? That would help keep track of the discussions and who is saying what. It would also help make your track record in such discussions clearer as well. Carcharoth ( talk) 00:37, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Best wishes | |
for the holidays and 2014 from a warmer place than where you probably are ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 11:39, 21 December 2013 (UTC) |
There must be a severe problem with Wikipedia user participation, considering about 50% of the Wikipedia contributors come from the US. WhisperToMe ( talk) 02:35, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
I liked your movement, - one link goes to "awesomely weird", -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:09, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
138.162.8.58 ( talk) 17:34, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Morning KumiokoCleanStart. "I think your a jerk" and "Your a jerk and always have been" are not really appropriate comments to make about your fellow editors. I would like to ask you to please not refer to other editors in this way. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 03:51, 26 January 2014 (UTC)