You deleted this: greenfinger. It got transwiki'd before, because it was a definition not a proper article. I've added specific instances and shown the term s being used more generally. I think you should have AfD'd it, not done an instant. I could build it up further if needed, there's more stuff out there. Pls TP me Andrewjlockley ( talk) 02:30, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety talk 02:47, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:
Delievered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 08:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Why did you delete and block the article? I gave ample proof of his notability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AmericanPatriot2009 ( talk • contribs) 00:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Ajay Bruno- Tell me what sources you and others would find acceptable. Please unprotect it and I agree I won't attempt to reinstate it until I have such sources available. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AmericanPatriot2009 ( talk • contribs) 00:18, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
You deleted Ryan Lopretto and rightly so. Could you close the afd also? Thanks— Sandahl ( talk) 02:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC).
Hi there RS, Let me know what you think of the proposal at the end of section Talk:Provinces_of_India#What_to_do_now. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
...are welcome at WT:RFA#Badgers and bullies and pricks, oh my!. (Watchlisting) - Dan Dank55 ( push to talk) 19:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Issue 29 - March 2009
| |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 17:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
There isn't going to be a lot of the original article left by the time you get through. :-) Thank you and keep up the great work! – 74 04:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi mate, just a quick note to say thanks for your support in my RfA, which passed successfully with 83 support votes, 0 oppose votes and 2 neutrals. Unfortunately, that million Euros hasn't materialised yet, so in the meantime I'll press on and be a good administrator... Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 15:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm looking for advice on how to proceed with the Callback verification article. Contrary to your suggestion that if Marcperkel could not agree to a "limitations" section in some form, that he should proceed with an RfC, he just deleted it. I waited a few days for him to put up a RfC and then added one myself. However, no one ever made a comment. Marc refuses to allow anything negative about this subject that his email filtering company uses, and I think that removing information about the limitations violates WP:NPOV, WP:NOTCENSORED, WP:UNDUEWEIGHT, etc. Any ideas what I should do next? Wrs1864 ( talk) 18:19, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. belated congratulations for your admin nomination. -- Docku: What's up? 21:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:
Delivered by §hepBot ( Disable) at 00:33, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Would it be possible for you to remove full protection of this article for sometime. I wish to add the image Image:Orissa small.png for Wikiproject Orissa. Thanks- The Enforcer Office of the secret service 06:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I had question related to expression religious opinions and you seem to be the best editor to consult regarding this . Religious accounts always describe about visions, supernatural events etc., what is the best way to include them in the article in a encyclopedic way? For ex, Is this the right way : "According to the traditional accounts, there was so-and-so vision"? Pls share your inputs, Thanks. -- Nvineeth ( talk) 10:27, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey admin, hope you're enjoying the high life! So--I was a bit bold, and redid the section in the Arundhati Roy article on US military activity. I thought it focused way too much on one minor point, her enumeration of countries the US had been at war with, and I opted to replace practically the entire section with a summary of her (lenghty) argument that, I hope, will give better weight to the different issues she is trying to tackle in that editorial. See what you think. Take care, and keep the faith, Drmies ( talk) 04:37, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for troubling you again! I had created an article Database Console Commands (Transact-SQL) a long time back but it was deleted and the reason given as copyright infringement. I wish to recreate the article by modifying its contents. Could you retrieve and post a copy of the article in my sandbox here? Thanks- The Enforcer Office of the secret service 14:10, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for protecting my talk page. Can you also protect my user page as well? The IP also vandalized it. Thanks! ---- Ðysepsion † Speak your mind 01:49, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by §hepBot ( Disable) at 23:40, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi RegentsPark, there is a thread on the Sai Baba article at WP:AE. Could you weigh in, given that you commented in the recent RfC? Cheers, Jayen 466 17:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
what was wrong with my addition its been all over the news ? 86.156.208.231 ( talk) 18:08, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi RP. Could pls comment on these following threads, [1] and [2]. Bake1987 ( talk · contribs · count) seems having trouble understanding policies here. -- Docku: What's up? 18:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I've removed your oppose vote on the motion regarding Aitias... Voting on committee motions is restricted to members of the arbitration committee. Avruch T 02:32, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
to India. should be pretty hot out there now...well, depends on where you go... -- Docku: What's up? 21:21, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
New York City Meetup |
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, sign official incorporation papers for the chapter, review recent projects like Wikipedia Loves Art and upcoming projects like Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the January meeting's minutes).
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our
mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 20:14, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
I see you've "semi-protected" the Arundhati Roy biography page for two weeks. I'm not sure exactly what this means, but a group of three students from my class are beginning to work at their contributions to the page as a part of this educational project: English 4994. Will they be able to add to and edit the page? And/Or do you have any advice as they enter the article/ongoing discussion of the article?
AEG English4994 ( talk) 23:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)AEG 4994
Thanks for the comments -- and the reminders. I'm thinking about all you suggested (and I'm already turning my students' attention to all you've suggested), so we'll see how it goes. The controversies on the page are actually terrific for my students to see as we read Roy's work. Thanks again. And please let me know, as my students work at the article (and talk on the discussion page) if there's anything I miss that I should be paying attention to. (I'll be watching carefully and helping them so I shouldn't miss anything, but . . . )
AEG English4994 ( talk) 03:48, 24 March 2009 (UTC)AEG English4994
Delievered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 04:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey RPark, we have a full-blown edit war going on, over that one addition--please think about what the best next step is. The addition cannot stand, as I explained to Mbhiii on their talkpage: it's really OR, and no decent argument is given. Or tell me I'm wrong! Thanks. Drmies ( talk) 14:19, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
A simple fact, presented w/o controversy here, here, here, here, and here, with which, no doubt, Ms. Roy herself would agree. You say it's a stretch. If inspection or simple math suffices to see it, it isn't. The world seems to accept it. - MBHiii ( talk) 15:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey RPark, sorry to bother you, but you're an admin, and I can't figure out what happened to Heart of War--the original author moved it to Blank Page? I tried to undo, but was unable to. It's at AfD and that should probably run its course, though it doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell. Thanks! Drmies ( talk) 02:25, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering why you protected Hindutash while previously reverting multiple with statements like "Can't really leave wrong information out there", which suggest an involved POV and edit warring (as NPOV cannot be construed as vandalism and thus, the reverts are content based POV dispute). Ottava Rima ( talk) 03:42, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
To -- User:Ottava Rima Just see for yourself how -- Regent's Park ( Rose Garden) has been making contradictory statements and blowing hot and cold. First he says, “….and I suggest that you make a case, properly backed up with definitive references, for your view. If the pass was considered to be a part of Kashmir, or if its location is or was disputed, I don't see why less obscure colonial era or even modern documents substantiating that claim cannot be found”… “--I'm here at the request of Fowler&fowler. But, rest assured that, if reliable, credible and accessible sources are provided, I will heed them.”
Then he made a misrepresentation. He said “Hindutashravi, I did read your responses to Fowler&fowler and Saravask and found your reasoning wanting in several ways.” He completely pretended to not notice the references that I had provided to Saravask , that you can find in my last edit of Hindutash [3] dated 6, March 2009
Never the less, I reproduced the references that were already provided to User:Saravask in the Discussion page of Hindutash for his perusal, and his response was “. If these conclusions are generally accepted, then surely you can provide references to scholars who draw the same conclusions (#2 claims to do so and I'll take a look at it)…. your second reference seems the most promising”. His vested interests and ulterior motives can be inferred by his deliberately ignoring Reference Number 1 that I provided viz. The Gazetteer of Kashmir which includes the description of Hindutash [4] at Pages 520 and 364. I informed him that “the very fact that the entry on Hindutash is included in the said Gazetteer of Kashmir is only because Hindutash is part of Kashmir. Go to the wikilink on Gazetteer” and further explained that “For example, a Gazetteer of Texas would contain only places in Texas and will not include an item on Albuquerque in the neighbouring State of New Mexico simply because Albuquerque is not in Texas but is in New Mexico. Right? It is as simple as that.” Since he was deliberately ignoring and evading the said crucial reference viz the The Gazetteer of Kashmir, I tried all torturous methods of exact an answer out of him. I asked him leading questions.
“I will now ask you straight questions!
1. Did you check the Gazetteer of Kashmir?
2. Did you see an entry on Hindutash (spelt Hindutak therein) or not at page 364?
3. Did you find the statement “The eastern (Kuenlun) range forms the southern boundary of Khotan”, and is crossed by two passes, the Yangi or Elchi Diwan, crossed in 1865 by Johnson, and the Hindutak ( Hindutash ) Diwan, crossed by Robert Schlagentweit in 1857” in the Gazetteer of Kashmir at page 520?.”
The reply to the first question should have been like “Yes, I went through the Gazetteer of Kashmir” and the reply to the second question should have been Yes I read the description of Hindutash in the Gazetteer of Kashmir” or even if he is not averse to lying “there is no such description at all in the Gazetteer of Kashmir”. But She/He never gave me a reply and always evaded the questions. If her/his intentions were bona fide, he ought to have given a proper answer and not try to evade giving a proper reply to the questions. Then she/he went on to say, “Note that I cannot prevent you from reverting the article without further discussion and note also that, though I can do so, I will not protect the article myself because, I suppose, I now have an involvement in it (though the actual location of the pass does not matter to me!.”
I did try to arrive at a consensus . I informed her/him that, “In a scenario where I reiterate that the Hindutash pass is part of Kashmir and the only thing that Fowler&fowler does is to state that the pass is allegedly in so called Xinjiang, a newly coined name which is detested by the East Turkistanis, the only consensus that can be arrived is to altogether abstain from any reference to the political location of Hindutash and just state that the historic Pass is located in the Kuen Lun range on the edge of the Highlands of Kashmir. And that the northern border of Kashmir has not been demarcated or delineated. And leave it to the readers to make their own conclusions. That is the only consensus that can be arrived at, if you intention is to arrive at a consensus. I know that truth is a casualty in case of a consensus, but I cannot do any thing about that. But she/he rejected that only solution point blank. Because she/he was only all along been acting at the behest of Fowler&fowler. Then she/he again went on to say, “Finally, I've only protected the article against IP editors, not registered users such as yourself, and, since you can edit the article, I'm not sure why you're yelling 'administrator abuse'”. And again later on, “However, I did engage with you in the dispute (my mistake!) and so won't take any admin action on this.”
Now just look at the conduct of Fowler&fowler. From my revision dated 6, March 2009 to 20, March 2009, she/he did not revert my edit. The moment I added links to my references that were already there in the article , she/he could not irk it and lost no time in reverting it to her own POV edit. Since she/he was weary of the said references that she/he could not refute and since the references exploded her/his lie that my edit was allegedly POV and Original research. The action shows his mens rea. Then he goes on to request for the protection of her/his POV edit of the article in the article’s discussion page to his old colleague Saravask at 10:51, 20 March 2009 (UTC) and no sooner than he/she makes the request, -- Regent's Park ( Rose Garden) protects the article at 12:06, 20 March 2009 (UTC) which shows that they have been hand in glove all along.
Then again though -- Regent's Park ( Rose Garden) is selectively blind and does not seem to notice crucial references and does not give a proper response to them, he never the less goes to the discussion page of another Article and makes misrepresentations. Again when Fowler&fowler gives a reason which cannot be countenanced for why she/he had removed the Hindi script from the lead in the Aksai Chin article, -- Regent's Park ( Rose Garden) does nothing about it and leaves it there. Hindutashravi ( talk) 18:57, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello RegentsPark, can you pls delete the following Userspace pages of mine :
Just my routine cleanup, removing unnecessary stuff. -- Nvineeth ( talk) 18:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
As one particular user complained that I was manipulating things in the RFC, I am withdrawing it. You may continue the RFC on your own interest but I have nothing to do with it any more.- The Enforcer Office of the secret service 03:49, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
The Enforcer Office of the secret service 02:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I've completed the article. It was featured as a DYK a few days back. You could very well delete the copy you placed in my sandbox. Thank you for your help.- The Enforcer Office of the secret service 15:14, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello RegentsPark, I'm not around too much these days so I'm wondering if I could seek your assistance with the Taare Zameen Par article. There has been some recent vandalism. I've reverted it for now but perhaps an admin needs to watch the page. Thanks, - Classicfilms ( talk) 02:07, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 20:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
I responded on my talk page. I thought that such a point would be obvious, but apparently (from history) not others seem to have realized it. :) Ottava Rima ( talk) 03:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Vell zank zyou! :D — neuro (talk) (review) 05:43, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
The Gulf of Martaban is a part of the Andaman Sea, correct?
Shouldn't Gulf of Martaban be removed from the "boundaries" paragraph of the Burma lead, as the Andaman Sea and the Bay of Bengal jointly account for the entire coastline of Burma? - 58.8.14.213 ( talk) 15:28, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 19:35, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. Just to let you know there is an unprotect request at WP:RPP concerning Hindutash. There are also allegations of you abusing your admin tools. As you protected it, I thought I'd let you know. The other issues are probably something for ANI, though i see no case to answer, personally. -- Ged UK 11:52, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Haruhi Suzumiya (franchise) also needs to be moved to Talk:Haruhi Suzumiya. It got left behind. :) -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 16:16, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for weighing in on the page. I was getting tired of being the sole "gatekeeper" for NPOV on the page. Coincidentally, while you were reverting the edit on the Romila Thapar article, I was whining how we need more admins like you. :) Abecedare ( talk) 19:29, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Note sure why you made the revert to a older version of the article, especially since besides deleting the expanded text on the NCERT controversy, it also deleted other improvements. See the note I left yesterday Talk:Romila_Thapar#NCERT_controversy explaining my edit and inviting suggestion for further improvements. And the comment by Nihar S, and my concurrence, pointing out the inadequacies of the previous version; that motivated my changes. Abecedare ( talk) 20:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
I have left messages at User:Nishkid64's and User:Akhilleus's talkpages since, looking at the article talk page, they seem familiar with this article's editing history. Abecedare ( talk) 23:52, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Socks, as suspected. Abecedare ( talk) 02:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Why am I not surprised? Sometimes, these socks are just too obvious! -- RegentsPark ( My narrowboat) 03:10, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Whilst looking over RFPP I saw that you declined this request. Whilst I agree with your assessment that DR is needed, I know from my own experience in mediation with medcom and medcab, that DR is rarely successful if the parties are too busy edit warring. I just wanted to check with you before I full protect the page. Seddσn talk 20:01, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Even the sources I've read that reported his death have stated they weren't sure if he was dead or not. Basically a 'I heard from someone he's dead' sort of thing. Half Shadow 20:40, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aitias/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aitias/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 22:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
On behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Easter! Sincerely, -- A Nobody My talk 16:11, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 16:46, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
I am filing an official complaint with Wikimedia Foundation Inc. against RegentsPark for abusing his/her administrative privileges to promote his/her biased agenda. WiksterPolice ( talk) 15:38, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
I've removed the section in question, but I expect that won't stand for long. I've asked for help from Wikiproject Finance. If that doesn't work, I guess there may be a need to escalate—don't ask me how.
JohnnyB256 (
talk) 20:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Why don't you want people to see the chart and to make their own conclusions? The chart is real and unbiased in documenting the facts – what has actually accrued in the market.
Simply because you do not like the facts, please do not remove them. If you feel that subprime is responsible for high volatility, please provide the data linking subprime to volatility. The actual factual chart is not a research. It is the factual evidence. Everyone can draw their own conclusion after looking at the chart.
In addition, a number of papers has been published before and after the uptick rule elimination with statistically significant results conclusively proving that uptick rule dampens volatility. The subprime problem was well before July 2007, but the volatility has increased dramatically exactly after July 2007. Either you like it or not, but these are the indisputable facts.
For example, a study by Diether, Lee, and Werner (2005) found that the uptick rule is found to (1) narrow the spread, (2) thicken the ask depth, (3) cause a higher execution price, and (4) dampen volatility.
Kind Regards, WiksterPolice
If you continue vandalism, I will be forced to take protective measures against you.
This is my last warning to you. Your ignorance will not be tolerated.
Kind Regards, WiksterPolice
(outdent) WiksterPolice: The Diether, Lee and Werner results are cited in the text. About the graph, it may be correct, that volatility may have increased since July 2007 may be an 'undisputed fact', but, what is neither an undisputed fact nor a hypothesis supported by reliable sources, is the conclusion that it represents: that the abolition of the uptick rule caused an increase in volatility (or the down trend in the Russell 3000). Not only is that unsupported by reliable sources, it boggles the mind that anyone could blame the recent economic crisis on the abolition of the uptick rule. My apologies for upsetting your view of the world but, unfortunately, wikipedia is not the place for advocating views that are unusual and unsupported. --
RegentsPark (
My narrowboat) 14:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) All this sounds reasonable to me. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the Historical volatility section (titled perhaps 'The uptick rule and volatility') with the material you've listed above. As long as it is clear that reliable sources indicate that elimination of the uptick rule may have resulted in increased volatility, I have no objection. The problem is with the graph (because it indicates a direct causal relationship) and with the association of the lifting of the uptick rule with the recent economic crisis.-- RegentsPark ( My narrowboat) 18:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Poor Johnny gets so picked on by the vandals sometimes! Wildhartlivie ( talk) 18:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the congratulations on my RfA. I'm still a bit nervous around the links that say "block" and "delete," but I'll get there. -- Orlady ( talk) 03:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Is this speedy-able (wasn't sure which category), or should I take it to AFD ? Note that the included source is being misrepresented (as expected). It was created by ===================
Talk here, who is also the creator of Hollywood of the east. Abecedare ( talk) 17:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 19:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi there! Would you like to offer a broad critique of History of Mysore and Coorg (1565–1760), which I've been ignoring lately. You can do so on the article talk page. A paragraph or two. Not the details, but the big picture. I'm hoping it will inspire me to get my ass in gear and attend to the article, add the footnotes etc. I mean I haven't even copyedited it in a long time. Shameful. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 23:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Part of that was my fault: I issued erroneous vandalism warnings because I thought the user was simply improperly removing chunks of text, when in fact he was merely a new user revising his own additions without including edit summaries. Nevertheless, the linkspamming and COI problems remain. -- Rrburke( talk) 19:31, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for updating me on the "how-to". I'm such a neophyte at times. I've updated it to what it standard now. Andrzejbanas ( talk) 22:25, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
hi. I am unsure if I you are correct .. I am alone as far as I know in this request. jayen may agree with me and there could be other people too but I am asking only on a comment about this . it is pointless waiting for a comment from cirt as he has already reverted all my edits on this topic. ( Off2riorob ( talk) 18:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC))
Your comments might be useful at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Mbhiii. Dicklyon ( talk) 03:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
The article has really made great strides since I last looked in on it. Kudos to all responsible. -- JohnnyB256 ( talk) 23:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
— LinguistAtLarge • Talk 03:42, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey Regents. Thanks very much for contributing to the discussion on my candidacy for adminship and for your encouragement. I appreciate it. Take care. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 20:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey RegentsPark, I was wondering if you could me an administrative favor: drop by Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Fixxers, and close the AfD? I'm withdrawing the nomination. If by chance another admin beats you to it, thanks anyway. Thanks! Drmies ( talk) 15:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I intend to work on it some more tonight. :) — neuro (talk) 17:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 04:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi RegentsPark, I just posted Chocolate Bloom this morning. It was deleted by you. Could you please help me improve it so that it can remain as an entry. This is my first entry and I could really use some guidance. Thank you so much, Kezia7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kezia7 ( talk • contribs) 17:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate the help, I wrote {{underconstruction]] at the top of the page. I will continue to work on "Chocolate Bloom" tonight. It's actually a paper I had to write for a class. Since I couldn't find much online about chocolate bloom, I thought it would be brilliant the summerize my learnings to post and help the next group of students who will be taking Water Relations in Chemistry. Thanks again for your help and advice! Kezia7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kezia7 ( talk • contribs) 19:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Could you please semi-protect my userpage again? Sorry for disturbing you but I asked User:YellowMonkey to remove a few diffs and the semi-protection got automatically removed. I'm leaving for Bengaluru this night. So, I wont be logging in for quite sometime.- The Enforcer Office of the secret service 13:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Wasn't me. :) – Juliancolton | Talk 20:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
New York City Meetup
|
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, establish a membership process for the chapter, review the upcoming Wiki-Conference New York 2009 (planned for ~100 people at NYU this summer) and future projects like Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the March meeting's minutes).
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our
mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 22:18, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
RegentsPark, Gaia Octavia Agrippa has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Gaia Octavia Agrippa
Talk |
Sign 20:16, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hey RegentsPark, how you doin'? If you're feeling like it, and why wouldn't you, after all you're an administrator now and don't have to write content anymore, could you have a look at User talk:71.130.177.243? It appears to be a vandalism-only IP, and while their talk page is full of warnings you could compile another complete set from their history. Worse, they vandalized an article I just got a DYK badge for! Is there no shame??? Thanks for your time, and enjoy your weekend, Drmies ( talk) 20:05, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Koolabhieb ( talk · contribs).-- GDibyendu ( talk) 17:41, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 22:16, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Could you please try to move the page A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010 Film) to A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010 film), Could you swap the titles?
Thanks!, I Seek To Help & Repair! ( talk) 22:33, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, just wanted to say a quick thanks for the semi-protect on the Fawcett article. Abrazame ( talk) 15:19, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I thought the guy made a really thoughtful point. I figured he wouldn't mind my sharing it. Pretty clear from my user contributions what article I'm referring to, but I don't think I'm violating his privacy or anything. -- JohnnyB256 ( talk) 23:57, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, my RFA was closed recently with a final tally of 75 ½/38/10. Though it didn't succeed, I wanted to thank you for your support and I hope I can count on it in the future. Even though it didn't pass, it had a nearly 2 to 1 ratio of support and I am quite encouraged by those results. I intend to review the support, oppose, and neutral !votes and see what I can do to address those concerns that were brought up and resubmit in a few months. If you would like to assist in my betterment and/or co-nominate me in the future, please let me know on my talk page. Special thanks go to Schmidt, MICHAEL Q., TomStar81, and henrik for their co-nominations and support. — BQZip01 — talk |
Did you try to email him? Did you get a reply? YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 06:30, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
FlyingToaster Barnstar
Hello RegentsPark! Thank you so much for your support in my
recent RfA, which passed with a tally of 126/32/5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust.
Flying
Toaster
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 13:24, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
...For semi-protecting Blue's Clues. Man, that article got bombarded with the vandalism today! It tends to get constant and regular vandalism, but this has been unusual. I'd like to see it protected as a rule, but it's been hard to convince any administrator of that. So thanks. -- Christine ( talk) 20:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Amicaveritas ( talk) 06:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi there! I've just received an unprotection request for Hindutash (at least I think that's what it is). Could you have a look at it again, as it's been a month or so at least. If you want me to review it, I'm happy to, but I thought I'd ask you first. -- Ged UK 17:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
My RfA
Thank you for participating in my
"RecFA", which passed with a final tally of 153/39/22. There were issues raised regarding my adminship that I intend to cogitate upon, but I am grateful for the very many supportive comments I received and for the efforts of certain editors (
Ceoil,
Noroton and
Lar especially) in responding to some issues. I wish to note how humbled I was when I read
Buster7's support comment, although a fair majority gave me great pleasure. I would also note those whose opposes or neutral were based in process concerns and who otherwise commented kindly in regard to my record.I recognise that the process itself was unusual, and the format was generally considered questionable - and I accept that I was mistaken in my perception of how it would be received - but I am particularly grateful for those whose opposes and neutrals were based in perceptions of how I was not performing to the standards expected of an administrator. As much as the support I received, those comments are hopefully going to allow me to be a better contributor to the project. Thank you. Very much. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 13:01, 24 May 2009 (UTC) ~~~~~ |
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 04:02, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to point out that I had clarified my position (mainly to address the difference between static and dynamic IP addresses) on Question 4 of my RfA about one minute before you left your !vote, which directly addressed that question in particular. I wanted to ensure that either you were commenting on the the updated version, or your position hadn't changed with the updated version. I don't feel the tone or the message changed with the update, however I felt that I should notify you none the less. Cheers. -- kelapstick ( talk) 16:05, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
No need to start a new section (wast of non-paper) but I would like to thank you for coming out and participating in my Request for Adminship, which closed unsuccessfully at (48/8/6) based on my withdrawal. I withdrew because in my opinion I need to focus on problems with my content contributions before I can proceed with expanding my responsibilities. Overall I feel that the RfA has improved me as an editor and in turn some articles which in my eyes is successful. Thank you again for your support. Cheers and happy editing.-- kelapstick ( talk) 18:07, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi RP, please don't unblock against the consensus of the editors at ANI. A new consensus to unblock needs to be formed to unban when the indef is implemented due to a community discussion. I strongly object to an unblock at this time due to the attacks specifically directed at another user. At the very least, an unblock right now says that it's OK -it's not. Thanks, R. Baley ( talk) 22:29, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
... my post on Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Proposed_decision#Users_willing_to_act_as_advisers. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi RegentsPark, I am trying to clean up the Sathya Sai Baba article - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sathya_Sai_Baba. I succeeded in removing some of the unreliable sources by appealing in the Wikipedia Reliable Source Notice Board.
Right in the introduction there is a mention about the Consular Sheet warning about travelling to Andhra Pradesh and Sathya Sai Baba. I did a little research to see if its true. This is what I found. Yes - In 2006 there was warning in the official Consular Sheet under the Crime section. Here's the link to the 2006 Consular Sheet - You will see the warning about a local religious leader in the Crime Section just before "INFORMATION FOR VICTIMS OF CRIME". -
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Consular_Information_Sheet_-_India.
But since July 2007 all indirect reference to Sathya Sai Baba and the warning advisory for travelling to Andhra Pradesh has been removed from the Consular Sheet .
I Checked 2009 Official Consular Sheet published by U.S Department of State in February 2009 there is no warning about travelling to Andhra Pradesh nor any warning about a local religious leader - indirectly referencing to Sathya Sai Baba.
http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1139.html#crime. But the article still mentions about this warning right in the introduction. This wrong statement has to be corrected in the article.
I created a discussion in
WP:RS -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Question:Can_an_articles_be_updated_as_per_the_new_2009_Consular_Travel_Warning_For_India.3F. But there was only one response from User:Peregrine Fisher.
I am hoping that if more wikipedians from outside the article contribute to this discussion it will be really helpful in making a decision to correct the article. You were one of the outside editors who contributed in the earlier discussions in the Sathya Sai Baba talk page. You very well know the
WP:BLP issues in the article. I think the first step to improving this article is getting rid of unreliable sources and wrong information. I would greatly appreciate if you would contribute your thoughts to the above discussion in the Wikipedia Reliable Source Noticeboard.
Radiantenergy (
talk) 23:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the reminder. I won't revert unless consensus is achieved. However, this edit is not a revert. -- Nosedown ( talk) 20:42, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 22:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Preliminary discussion at AN/I leaned towards blank & protect; Gwen Gale did so. Why on earth are we giving a community-banned user a soapbox? Much less one filled with lies? // roux 23:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi, only to let you know, had I known you'd declined the protection request on User:DougsTech's user talk, I wouldn't have protected it, I'd only seen the ANI thread. Afterwards, I didn't bring this up there because I didn't want to stir things up even more, glad to see it all seems to have settled down and has been archived on the sub-page. Cheers, Gwen Gale ( talk) 13:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Farrah Fawcett seems to have calmed down. How do you feel about trying to remove the protection on it and see how it goes? (I'm happy to do it but soliciting your opinion.) Frank | talk 17:49, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
In case it was not obvious: my reason for revert was to remove the POV pushing and changes to quotes by User:HFret and the edit summary referred to his edits. I have no opinion or knowledge as to whether Taj Mahal was influenced by Ottoman architecture ... although "influenced" is such a vague word that someone somewhere is sure to have claimed that! :) Abecedare ( talk) 18:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up, but the page in question' direct action day' includes a lot of edits that were done at the same time as the 'british india' edit, all of which I have discussed in detail so I have nothing against any one reverting British india to 'India', however it's not fair to revert everything ( there's lots of edits), so I have reverted it back,, to save further issues I am going remove 'british India' from that article. Khokhar ( talk) 21:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
... you doing my friend...? -- Tinu Cherian - 13:08, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey RP, I came to ask for your time and your big stick. Have a look at
User talk:92.48.54.122, and their contributions. Then, if you don't mind, look at the article histories of, for instance,
Humayun Ahmed,
Muhammed Zafar Iqbal, and
Taslima Nasrin. What we have is a series of IPs constantly reinserting links to (blocked link deleted) this spammy site, and doing so, often, for every single title in the article subject's bibliography. Oh, the link goes to a site that mirrors (old) Wikipedia content, it seems to me. This one did it twice three times now, and that, in my opinion, is enough ground for something more serious than a warning. For a week or two now I've been chasing these IPs around on those three pages (and I think there's one or two more), and it's getting irritating. I have no doubt that they have plenty of other IPs to do the same thing with, but I think it's time to do more than warn. (I've never asked for page protection and am not really inclined to do so now, but maybe you think otherwise.) Please see what you think. Thanks,
Drmies (
talk) 14:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Adding deshiboi here may do the trick. -- RegentsPark ( My narrowboat) 16:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Do not shamelessly act at the behest of user:Fowler&fowler and be his accomplice. And do not make misrepresentations like I am allegedly using “misleading edit summaries” . There is nothing misleading in the edit summary. The edit summary is pertaining to my previous NPOV edit at 12.53 where in I removed the item with in the brackets, and not to the pernicious POV version of user:Fowler&fowler at 13.15 . That edit itself is where I added more details to the earlier NPOV edit of user:John Hill including providing references and corroborations. By the way, In fact there is hardly anything else! I did not even either explicitly or implicitly state that the Sanju Pass is in Kashmir,though I could have in no time stated that Sanju Pass is in northern Kashmir, respecting the spirit of the article created by user:John Hill who had abstained from stating that the pass is in a particular country.Both of you are obviously jealous and envious of my contributions to both the Hindutash and Sanju Pass articles! It was user:Fowler&fowler who rushed to state that the pass was allegedly in so-called Xinjiang, the moment I made changes to the article and he had no use of the article till then. I had suggested to user:Fowler&fowler that the Sanju Pass article example could be followed in the article on Hindutash as a way to arrive at a consensus. I had also suggested the same to you . But both of you have evaded the suggestion. Obviously, user:John Hill seems to agree with my idea. I am sorry that I have to even reply to such stupid allegations, when I do not even get a precise reply from either of you in my entire correspondence with both of you! Hindutashravi ( talk) 11:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
well er I am a productive user I am sorry I just would like a clarification of the rules here as I have NO history of vandalism. I am just curious as to why one incident would mean a permanent block, Sincerely, -- Something12356789 ( talk) 23:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
I'd like your explanation as to why the Normandy Landing edits are considered "vandalism", given that you didn't bother to discuss the changes on the talk page. 139.48.25.60 ( talk) 18:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Beth Stern's semiprotection that you added has expired, and nothing has changed - it is a playground for vandals. Can we reinstate the semi? Thanks Tvoz/ talk 06:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. This newsletter is automatically delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 11:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
in about 24 hrs I'm on a holiday to Thailand. Any FA criteria concerns you have? Please reply to me. Hometech ( talk) 21:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 12:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi RegentsPark,
Since you offered at my arbitration to advise me, albeit reluctantly, on my plan to offer to ArbCom, I am wonder if you would be willing to look it over and offer suggestions. You are listed as an adviser/mentor as I remember your extraordinary diplomacy and conflict resolution abilities in several situations. The current draft of my plan is User:Mattisse/Plan and the discussion is User talk:Mattisse/Plan.
I am very willing to recognize that some of my past behavior was wrong, and I have worked to reduce the chance of that behavior will reoccur in the future. I feel that it will not, but of course I am a human being. However, I have learned during this arbitration and modified by behavior accordingly.
I would be grateful for any feedback or suggestions you might offer. Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 12:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Are you getting feedback from arbitrators on the plan as you prepare it? (I notice that a lot more than 15 days have gone by and, hopefully, you know that you're on the right track viz whatever arbcom wants from you.) -- RegentsPark ( sticks and stones) 19:54, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
I keep meaning to mention that it hasn't escaped notice that you've created several articles from the Mulliner Samhita, surely among the great divinely inspired oral traditions :-) . Priyanath talk 01:16, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
The WikiProject Novels Newsletter
Issue 30 - June 2009 | ||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 03:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Why did you take special ed. off the list? They are having a dispute. Never mind. I misinterpreted it. You are providing the third opinion. Harionlad ( talk) 21:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Aye, in addition to Sanju Pass, I'd like to propose protecting Aksai Chin as well. User:Keithonearth undid an anonymous edit that's identical to User:Hindutashravis. Cheers, -- Rayshade ( talk) 22:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi RegentsPark,
As we discussed previously, my plan is User:Mattisse/Plan formed with the input of others User talk:Mattisse/Plan, Arbitration Workshop and Proposed decision talk page. Previously, you said you were willing to be one of my mentors/advisers.
The ArbCom is in the process of rendering decision and have requested that my mentors/advisers confirm that they are aware of the plan and agree with their role in it. See Moving towards closure of the case. If you are still willing to serve as one of my mentors/advisers, and I fervently hope you are, I ask you to indicate your willingness by posting on the Proposed decision talk page.
I think this plan will work. I have learned a great deal from this arbitration and feel comfortable with my panel of mentors/advisers and trust their judgment.
Thank you so much. Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 16:49, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I ran into some problems at John Russell (Florida politician), with an editor who flooded the article with trivial information and got themselves blocked for a 3RR violation. To cut a long story short, I ended up rollbacking a deprodding, since I suspect a sock puppet of a blocked user removed the prod (which was placed there by another editor). Now I wonder if I should have done that or not, if I have the right to re-prod in case of suspected sock puppetry. I don't mind removing the template if you think I should, and apologize if I did so wrongly. Also, I hope I filed the sock puppetry charge accurately, at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Russellfl5--do you mind checking? Thanks so much for your help! Drmies ( talk) 00:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello. The Coordiantor Election has begun. All members are encouraged to vote by the deadline, July 28. To vote simply add support to the comments and questions for.. section of the member of your choice.
3 users are standing:
Regards, Alan16 ( talk) 19:45, 29 June 2009 (UTC).
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 02:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time to explain in detail why you decided the way you did. -- Born2cycle ( talk) 06:00, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Born2cycle has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
You should have tipped me off about his block evasion earlier. I don't do a full sweep of the watchlist very often so hadnt notcied until late YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 01:47, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 03:23, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to say good call on archiving the move discussion at
Talk:Death of Neda Agha-Soltan. I was thinking of doing exactly the same thing, but I was hesitant because I have been so involved int the discussion to date...
—
Ω (
talk) 21:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
The semi protection can be lifted. The discussion has come to an end. -- 91.130.188.40 ( talk) 20:19, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
RegentsPark, thank you for posting on my page in the middle of my dust up. I am gratified that you did and it gives me confidence. Although I may not have done as well as I could have, I did learn from the incident. I understand a little more now, and will do better in the future. Please continue, any time you feel I need a little reigning in. You are a great member of panel. Thank you! Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 19:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your support! Groomtech ( talk) 06:11, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
You deleted this: greenfinger. It got transwiki'd before, because it was a definition not a proper article. I've added specific instances and shown the term s being used more generally. I think you should have AfD'd it, not done an instant. I could build it up further if needed, there's more stuff out there. Pls TP me Andrewjlockley ( talk) 02:30, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety talk 02:47, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:
Delievered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 08:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Why did you delete and block the article? I gave ample proof of his notability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AmericanPatriot2009 ( talk • contribs) 00:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Ajay Bruno- Tell me what sources you and others would find acceptable. Please unprotect it and I agree I won't attempt to reinstate it until I have such sources available. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AmericanPatriot2009 ( talk • contribs) 00:18, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
You deleted Ryan Lopretto and rightly so. Could you close the afd also? Thanks— Sandahl ( talk) 02:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC).
Hi there RS, Let me know what you think of the proposal at the end of section Talk:Provinces_of_India#What_to_do_now. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
...are welcome at WT:RFA#Badgers and bullies and pricks, oh my!. (Watchlisting) - Dan Dank55 ( push to talk) 19:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Issue 29 - March 2009
| |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 17:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
There isn't going to be a lot of the original article left by the time you get through. :-) Thank you and keep up the great work! – 74 04:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi mate, just a quick note to say thanks for your support in my RfA, which passed successfully with 83 support votes, 0 oppose votes and 2 neutrals. Unfortunately, that million Euros hasn't materialised yet, so in the meantime I'll press on and be a good administrator... Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 15:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm looking for advice on how to proceed with the Callback verification article. Contrary to your suggestion that if Marcperkel could not agree to a "limitations" section in some form, that he should proceed with an RfC, he just deleted it. I waited a few days for him to put up a RfC and then added one myself. However, no one ever made a comment. Marc refuses to allow anything negative about this subject that his email filtering company uses, and I think that removing information about the limitations violates WP:NPOV, WP:NOTCENSORED, WP:UNDUEWEIGHT, etc. Any ideas what I should do next? Wrs1864 ( talk) 18:19, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. belated congratulations for your admin nomination. -- Docku: What's up? 21:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:
Delivered by §hepBot ( Disable) at 00:33, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Would it be possible for you to remove full protection of this article for sometime. I wish to add the image Image:Orissa small.png for Wikiproject Orissa. Thanks- The Enforcer Office of the secret service 06:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I had question related to expression religious opinions and you seem to be the best editor to consult regarding this . Religious accounts always describe about visions, supernatural events etc., what is the best way to include them in the article in a encyclopedic way? For ex, Is this the right way : "According to the traditional accounts, there was so-and-so vision"? Pls share your inputs, Thanks. -- Nvineeth ( talk) 10:27, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey admin, hope you're enjoying the high life! So--I was a bit bold, and redid the section in the Arundhati Roy article on US military activity. I thought it focused way too much on one minor point, her enumeration of countries the US had been at war with, and I opted to replace practically the entire section with a summary of her (lenghty) argument that, I hope, will give better weight to the different issues she is trying to tackle in that editorial. See what you think. Take care, and keep the faith, Drmies ( talk) 04:37, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for troubling you again! I had created an article Database Console Commands (Transact-SQL) a long time back but it was deleted and the reason given as copyright infringement. I wish to recreate the article by modifying its contents. Could you retrieve and post a copy of the article in my sandbox here? Thanks- The Enforcer Office of the secret service 14:10, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for protecting my talk page. Can you also protect my user page as well? The IP also vandalized it. Thanks! ---- Ðysepsion † Speak your mind 01:49, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by §hepBot ( Disable) at 23:40, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi RegentsPark, there is a thread on the Sai Baba article at WP:AE. Could you weigh in, given that you commented in the recent RfC? Cheers, Jayen 466 17:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
what was wrong with my addition its been all over the news ? 86.156.208.231 ( talk) 18:08, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi RP. Could pls comment on these following threads, [1] and [2]. Bake1987 ( talk · contribs · count) seems having trouble understanding policies here. -- Docku: What's up? 18:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I've removed your oppose vote on the motion regarding Aitias... Voting on committee motions is restricted to members of the arbitration committee. Avruch T 02:32, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
to India. should be pretty hot out there now...well, depends on where you go... -- Docku: What's up? 21:21, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
New York City Meetup |
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, sign official incorporation papers for the chapter, review recent projects like Wikipedia Loves Art and upcoming projects like Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the January meeting's minutes).
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our
mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 20:14, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
I see you've "semi-protected" the Arundhati Roy biography page for two weeks. I'm not sure exactly what this means, but a group of three students from my class are beginning to work at their contributions to the page as a part of this educational project: English 4994. Will they be able to add to and edit the page? And/Or do you have any advice as they enter the article/ongoing discussion of the article?
AEG English4994 ( talk) 23:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)AEG 4994
Thanks for the comments -- and the reminders. I'm thinking about all you suggested (and I'm already turning my students' attention to all you've suggested), so we'll see how it goes. The controversies on the page are actually terrific for my students to see as we read Roy's work. Thanks again. And please let me know, as my students work at the article (and talk on the discussion page) if there's anything I miss that I should be paying attention to. (I'll be watching carefully and helping them so I shouldn't miss anything, but . . . )
AEG English4994 ( talk) 03:48, 24 March 2009 (UTC)AEG English4994
Delievered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 04:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey RPark, we have a full-blown edit war going on, over that one addition--please think about what the best next step is. The addition cannot stand, as I explained to Mbhiii on their talkpage: it's really OR, and no decent argument is given. Or tell me I'm wrong! Thanks. Drmies ( talk) 14:19, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
A simple fact, presented w/o controversy here, here, here, here, and here, with which, no doubt, Ms. Roy herself would agree. You say it's a stretch. If inspection or simple math suffices to see it, it isn't. The world seems to accept it. - MBHiii ( talk) 15:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey RPark, sorry to bother you, but you're an admin, and I can't figure out what happened to Heart of War--the original author moved it to Blank Page? I tried to undo, but was unable to. It's at AfD and that should probably run its course, though it doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell. Thanks! Drmies ( talk) 02:25, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering why you protected Hindutash while previously reverting multiple with statements like "Can't really leave wrong information out there", which suggest an involved POV and edit warring (as NPOV cannot be construed as vandalism and thus, the reverts are content based POV dispute). Ottava Rima ( talk) 03:42, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
To -- User:Ottava Rima Just see for yourself how -- Regent's Park ( Rose Garden) has been making contradictory statements and blowing hot and cold. First he says, “….and I suggest that you make a case, properly backed up with definitive references, for your view. If the pass was considered to be a part of Kashmir, or if its location is or was disputed, I don't see why less obscure colonial era or even modern documents substantiating that claim cannot be found”… “--I'm here at the request of Fowler&fowler. But, rest assured that, if reliable, credible and accessible sources are provided, I will heed them.”
Then he made a misrepresentation. He said “Hindutashravi, I did read your responses to Fowler&fowler and Saravask and found your reasoning wanting in several ways.” He completely pretended to not notice the references that I had provided to Saravask , that you can find in my last edit of Hindutash [3] dated 6, March 2009
Never the less, I reproduced the references that were already provided to User:Saravask in the Discussion page of Hindutash for his perusal, and his response was “. If these conclusions are generally accepted, then surely you can provide references to scholars who draw the same conclusions (#2 claims to do so and I'll take a look at it)…. your second reference seems the most promising”. His vested interests and ulterior motives can be inferred by his deliberately ignoring Reference Number 1 that I provided viz. The Gazetteer of Kashmir which includes the description of Hindutash [4] at Pages 520 and 364. I informed him that “the very fact that the entry on Hindutash is included in the said Gazetteer of Kashmir is only because Hindutash is part of Kashmir. Go to the wikilink on Gazetteer” and further explained that “For example, a Gazetteer of Texas would contain only places in Texas and will not include an item on Albuquerque in the neighbouring State of New Mexico simply because Albuquerque is not in Texas but is in New Mexico. Right? It is as simple as that.” Since he was deliberately ignoring and evading the said crucial reference viz the The Gazetteer of Kashmir, I tried all torturous methods of exact an answer out of him. I asked him leading questions.
“I will now ask you straight questions!
1. Did you check the Gazetteer of Kashmir?
2. Did you see an entry on Hindutash (spelt Hindutak therein) or not at page 364?
3. Did you find the statement “The eastern (Kuenlun) range forms the southern boundary of Khotan”, and is crossed by two passes, the Yangi or Elchi Diwan, crossed in 1865 by Johnson, and the Hindutak ( Hindutash ) Diwan, crossed by Robert Schlagentweit in 1857” in the Gazetteer of Kashmir at page 520?.”
The reply to the first question should have been like “Yes, I went through the Gazetteer of Kashmir” and the reply to the second question should have been Yes I read the description of Hindutash in the Gazetteer of Kashmir” or even if he is not averse to lying “there is no such description at all in the Gazetteer of Kashmir”. But She/He never gave me a reply and always evaded the questions. If her/his intentions were bona fide, he ought to have given a proper answer and not try to evade giving a proper reply to the questions. Then she/he went on to say, “Note that I cannot prevent you from reverting the article without further discussion and note also that, though I can do so, I will not protect the article myself because, I suppose, I now have an involvement in it (though the actual location of the pass does not matter to me!.”
I did try to arrive at a consensus . I informed her/him that, “In a scenario where I reiterate that the Hindutash pass is part of Kashmir and the only thing that Fowler&fowler does is to state that the pass is allegedly in so called Xinjiang, a newly coined name which is detested by the East Turkistanis, the only consensus that can be arrived is to altogether abstain from any reference to the political location of Hindutash and just state that the historic Pass is located in the Kuen Lun range on the edge of the Highlands of Kashmir. And that the northern border of Kashmir has not been demarcated or delineated. And leave it to the readers to make their own conclusions. That is the only consensus that can be arrived at, if you intention is to arrive at a consensus. I know that truth is a casualty in case of a consensus, but I cannot do any thing about that. But she/he rejected that only solution point blank. Because she/he was only all along been acting at the behest of Fowler&fowler. Then she/he again went on to say, “Finally, I've only protected the article against IP editors, not registered users such as yourself, and, since you can edit the article, I'm not sure why you're yelling 'administrator abuse'”. And again later on, “However, I did engage with you in the dispute (my mistake!) and so won't take any admin action on this.”
Now just look at the conduct of Fowler&fowler. From my revision dated 6, March 2009 to 20, March 2009, she/he did not revert my edit. The moment I added links to my references that were already there in the article , she/he could not irk it and lost no time in reverting it to her own POV edit. Since she/he was weary of the said references that she/he could not refute and since the references exploded her/his lie that my edit was allegedly POV and Original research. The action shows his mens rea. Then he goes on to request for the protection of her/his POV edit of the article in the article’s discussion page to his old colleague Saravask at 10:51, 20 March 2009 (UTC) and no sooner than he/she makes the request, -- Regent's Park ( Rose Garden) protects the article at 12:06, 20 March 2009 (UTC) which shows that they have been hand in glove all along.
Then again though -- Regent's Park ( Rose Garden) is selectively blind and does not seem to notice crucial references and does not give a proper response to them, he never the less goes to the discussion page of another Article and makes misrepresentations. Again when Fowler&fowler gives a reason which cannot be countenanced for why she/he had removed the Hindi script from the lead in the Aksai Chin article, -- Regent's Park ( Rose Garden) does nothing about it and leaves it there. Hindutashravi ( talk) 18:57, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello RegentsPark, can you pls delete the following Userspace pages of mine :
Just my routine cleanup, removing unnecessary stuff. -- Nvineeth ( talk) 18:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
As one particular user complained that I was manipulating things in the RFC, I am withdrawing it. You may continue the RFC on your own interest but I have nothing to do with it any more.- The Enforcer Office of the secret service 03:49, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
The Enforcer Office of the secret service 02:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I've completed the article. It was featured as a DYK a few days back. You could very well delete the copy you placed in my sandbox. Thank you for your help.- The Enforcer Office of the secret service 15:14, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello RegentsPark, I'm not around too much these days so I'm wondering if I could seek your assistance with the Taare Zameen Par article. There has been some recent vandalism. I've reverted it for now but perhaps an admin needs to watch the page. Thanks, - Classicfilms ( talk) 02:07, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 20:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
I responded on my talk page. I thought that such a point would be obvious, but apparently (from history) not others seem to have realized it. :) Ottava Rima ( talk) 03:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Vell zank zyou! :D — neuro (talk) (review) 05:43, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
The Gulf of Martaban is a part of the Andaman Sea, correct?
Shouldn't Gulf of Martaban be removed from the "boundaries" paragraph of the Burma lead, as the Andaman Sea and the Bay of Bengal jointly account for the entire coastline of Burma? - 58.8.14.213 ( talk) 15:28, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 19:35, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. Just to let you know there is an unprotect request at WP:RPP concerning Hindutash. There are also allegations of you abusing your admin tools. As you protected it, I thought I'd let you know. The other issues are probably something for ANI, though i see no case to answer, personally. -- Ged UK 11:52, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Haruhi Suzumiya (franchise) also needs to be moved to Talk:Haruhi Suzumiya. It got left behind. :) -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 16:16, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for weighing in on the page. I was getting tired of being the sole "gatekeeper" for NPOV on the page. Coincidentally, while you were reverting the edit on the Romila Thapar article, I was whining how we need more admins like you. :) Abecedare ( talk) 19:29, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Note sure why you made the revert to a older version of the article, especially since besides deleting the expanded text on the NCERT controversy, it also deleted other improvements. See the note I left yesterday Talk:Romila_Thapar#NCERT_controversy explaining my edit and inviting suggestion for further improvements. And the comment by Nihar S, and my concurrence, pointing out the inadequacies of the previous version; that motivated my changes. Abecedare ( talk) 20:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
I have left messages at User:Nishkid64's and User:Akhilleus's talkpages since, looking at the article talk page, they seem familiar with this article's editing history. Abecedare ( talk) 23:52, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Socks, as suspected. Abecedare ( talk) 02:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Why am I not surprised? Sometimes, these socks are just too obvious! -- RegentsPark ( My narrowboat) 03:10, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Whilst looking over RFPP I saw that you declined this request. Whilst I agree with your assessment that DR is needed, I know from my own experience in mediation with medcom and medcab, that DR is rarely successful if the parties are too busy edit warring. I just wanted to check with you before I full protect the page. Seddσn talk 20:01, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Even the sources I've read that reported his death have stated they weren't sure if he was dead or not. Basically a 'I heard from someone he's dead' sort of thing. Half Shadow 20:40, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aitias/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aitias/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 22:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
On behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Easter! Sincerely, -- A Nobody My talk 16:11, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 16:46, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
I am filing an official complaint with Wikimedia Foundation Inc. against RegentsPark for abusing his/her administrative privileges to promote his/her biased agenda. WiksterPolice ( talk) 15:38, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
I've removed the section in question, but I expect that won't stand for long. I've asked for help from Wikiproject Finance. If that doesn't work, I guess there may be a need to escalate—don't ask me how.
JohnnyB256 (
talk) 20:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Why don't you want people to see the chart and to make their own conclusions? The chart is real and unbiased in documenting the facts – what has actually accrued in the market.
Simply because you do not like the facts, please do not remove them. If you feel that subprime is responsible for high volatility, please provide the data linking subprime to volatility. The actual factual chart is not a research. It is the factual evidence. Everyone can draw their own conclusion after looking at the chart.
In addition, a number of papers has been published before and after the uptick rule elimination with statistically significant results conclusively proving that uptick rule dampens volatility. The subprime problem was well before July 2007, but the volatility has increased dramatically exactly after July 2007. Either you like it or not, but these are the indisputable facts.
For example, a study by Diether, Lee, and Werner (2005) found that the uptick rule is found to (1) narrow the spread, (2) thicken the ask depth, (3) cause a higher execution price, and (4) dampen volatility.
Kind Regards, WiksterPolice
If you continue vandalism, I will be forced to take protective measures against you.
This is my last warning to you. Your ignorance will not be tolerated.
Kind Regards, WiksterPolice
(outdent) WiksterPolice: The Diether, Lee and Werner results are cited in the text. About the graph, it may be correct, that volatility may have increased since July 2007 may be an 'undisputed fact', but, what is neither an undisputed fact nor a hypothesis supported by reliable sources, is the conclusion that it represents: that the abolition of the uptick rule caused an increase in volatility (or the down trend in the Russell 3000). Not only is that unsupported by reliable sources, it boggles the mind that anyone could blame the recent economic crisis on the abolition of the uptick rule. My apologies for upsetting your view of the world but, unfortunately, wikipedia is not the place for advocating views that are unusual and unsupported. --
RegentsPark (
My narrowboat) 14:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) All this sounds reasonable to me. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the Historical volatility section (titled perhaps 'The uptick rule and volatility') with the material you've listed above. As long as it is clear that reliable sources indicate that elimination of the uptick rule may have resulted in increased volatility, I have no objection. The problem is with the graph (because it indicates a direct causal relationship) and with the association of the lifting of the uptick rule with the recent economic crisis.-- RegentsPark ( My narrowboat) 18:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Poor Johnny gets so picked on by the vandals sometimes! Wildhartlivie ( talk) 18:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the congratulations on my RfA. I'm still a bit nervous around the links that say "block" and "delete," but I'll get there. -- Orlady ( talk) 03:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Is this speedy-able (wasn't sure which category), or should I take it to AFD ? Note that the included source is being misrepresented (as expected). It was created by ===================
Talk here, who is also the creator of Hollywood of the east. Abecedare ( talk) 17:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 19:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi there! Would you like to offer a broad critique of History of Mysore and Coorg (1565–1760), which I've been ignoring lately. You can do so on the article talk page. A paragraph or two. Not the details, but the big picture. I'm hoping it will inspire me to get my ass in gear and attend to the article, add the footnotes etc. I mean I haven't even copyedited it in a long time. Shameful. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 23:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Part of that was my fault: I issued erroneous vandalism warnings because I thought the user was simply improperly removing chunks of text, when in fact he was merely a new user revising his own additions without including edit summaries. Nevertheless, the linkspamming and COI problems remain. -- Rrburke( talk) 19:31, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for updating me on the "how-to". I'm such a neophyte at times. I've updated it to what it standard now. Andrzejbanas ( talk) 22:25, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
hi. I am unsure if I you are correct .. I am alone as far as I know in this request. jayen may agree with me and there could be other people too but I am asking only on a comment about this . it is pointless waiting for a comment from cirt as he has already reverted all my edits on this topic. ( Off2riorob ( talk) 18:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC))
Your comments might be useful at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Mbhiii. Dicklyon ( talk) 03:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
The article has really made great strides since I last looked in on it. Kudos to all responsible. -- JohnnyB256 ( talk) 23:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
— LinguistAtLarge • Talk 03:42, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey Regents. Thanks very much for contributing to the discussion on my candidacy for adminship and for your encouragement. I appreciate it. Take care. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 20:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey RegentsPark, I was wondering if you could me an administrative favor: drop by Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Fixxers, and close the AfD? I'm withdrawing the nomination. If by chance another admin beats you to it, thanks anyway. Thanks! Drmies ( talk) 15:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I intend to work on it some more tonight. :) — neuro (talk) 17:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 04:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi RegentsPark, I just posted Chocolate Bloom this morning. It was deleted by you. Could you please help me improve it so that it can remain as an entry. This is my first entry and I could really use some guidance. Thank you so much, Kezia7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kezia7 ( talk • contribs) 17:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate the help, I wrote {{underconstruction]] at the top of the page. I will continue to work on "Chocolate Bloom" tonight. It's actually a paper I had to write for a class. Since I couldn't find much online about chocolate bloom, I thought it would be brilliant the summerize my learnings to post and help the next group of students who will be taking Water Relations in Chemistry. Thanks again for your help and advice! Kezia7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kezia7 ( talk • contribs) 19:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Could you please semi-protect my userpage again? Sorry for disturbing you but I asked User:YellowMonkey to remove a few diffs and the semi-protection got automatically removed. I'm leaving for Bengaluru this night. So, I wont be logging in for quite sometime.- The Enforcer Office of the secret service 13:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Wasn't me. :) – Juliancolton | Talk 20:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
New York City Meetup
|
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, establish a membership process for the chapter, review the upcoming Wiki-Conference New York 2009 (planned for ~100 people at NYU this summer) and future projects like Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the March meeting's minutes).
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our
mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 22:18, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
RegentsPark, Gaia Octavia Agrippa has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Gaia Octavia Agrippa
Talk |
Sign 20:16, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hey RegentsPark, how you doin'? If you're feeling like it, and why wouldn't you, after all you're an administrator now and don't have to write content anymore, could you have a look at User talk:71.130.177.243? It appears to be a vandalism-only IP, and while their talk page is full of warnings you could compile another complete set from their history. Worse, they vandalized an article I just got a DYK badge for! Is there no shame??? Thanks for your time, and enjoy your weekend, Drmies ( talk) 20:05, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Koolabhieb ( talk · contribs).-- GDibyendu ( talk) 17:41, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 22:16, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Could you please try to move the page A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010 Film) to A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010 film), Could you swap the titles?
Thanks!, I Seek To Help & Repair! ( talk) 22:33, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, just wanted to say a quick thanks for the semi-protect on the Fawcett article. Abrazame ( talk) 15:19, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I thought the guy made a really thoughtful point. I figured he wouldn't mind my sharing it. Pretty clear from my user contributions what article I'm referring to, but I don't think I'm violating his privacy or anything. -- JohnnyB256 ( talk) 23:57, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, my RFA was closed recently with a final tally of 75 ½/38/10. Though it didn't succeed, I wanted to thank you for your support and I hope I can count on it in the future. Even though it didn't pass, it had a nearly 2 to 1 ratio of support and I am quite encouraged by those results. I intend to review the support, oppose, and neutral !votes and see what I can do to address those concerns that were brought up and resubmit in a few months. If you would like to assist in my betterment and/or co-nominate me in the future, please let me know on my talk page. Special thanks go to Schmidt, MICHAEL Q., TomStar81, and henrik for their co-nominations and support. — BQZip01 — talk |
Did you try to email him? Did you get a reply? YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 06:30, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
FlyingToaster Barnstar
Hello RegentsPark! Thank you so much for your support in my
recent RfA, which passed with a tally of 126/32/5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust.
Flying
Toaster
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 13:24, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
...For semi-protecting Blue's Clues. Man, that article got bombarded with the vandalism today! It tends to get constant and regular vandalism, but this has been unusual. I'd like to see it protected as a rule, but it's been hard to convince any administrator of that. So thanks. -- Christine ( talk) 20:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Amicaveritas ( talk) 06:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi there! I've just received an unprotection request for Hindutash (at least I think that's what it is). Could you have a look at it again, as it's been a month or so at least. If you want me to review it, I'm happy to, but I thought I'd ask you first. -- Ged UK 17:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
My RfA
Thank you for participating in my
"RecFA", which passed with a final tally of 153/39/22. There were issues raised regarding my adminship that I intend to cogitate upon, but I am grateful for the very many supportive comments I received and for the efforts of certain editors (
Ceoil,
Noroton and
Lar especially) in responding to some issues. I wish to note how humbled I was when I read
Buster7's support comment, although a fair majority gave me great pleasure. I would also note those whose opposes or neutral were based in process concerns and who otherwise commented kindly in regard to my record.I recognise that the process itself was unusual, and the format was generally considered questionable - and I accept that I was mistaken in my perception of how it would be received - but I am particularly grateful for those whose opposes and neutrals were based in perceptions of how I was not performing to the standards expected of an administrator. As much as the support I received, those comments are hopefully going to allow me to be a better contributor to the project. Thank you. Very much. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 13:01, 24 May 2009 (UTC) ~~~~~ |
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 04:02, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to point out that I had clarified my position (mainly to address the difference between static and dynamic IP addresses) on Question 4 of my RfA about one minute before you left your !vote, which directly addressed that question in particular. I wanted to ensure that either you were commenting on the the updated version, or your position hadn't changed with the updated version. I don't feel the tone or the message changed with the update, however I felt that I should notify you none the less. Cheers. -- kelapstick ( talk) 16:05, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
No need to start a new section (wast of non-paper) but I would like to thank you for coming out and participating in my Request for Adminship, which closed unsuccessfully at (48/8/6) based on my withdrawal. I withdrew because in my opinion I need to focus on problems with my content contributions before I can proceed with expanding my responsibilities. Overall I feel that the RfA has improved me as an editor and in turn some articles which in my eyes is successful. Thank you again for your support. Cheers and happy editing.-- kelapstick ( talk) 18:07, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi RP, please don't unblock against the consensus of the editors at ANI. A new consensus to unblock needs to be formed to unban when the indef is implemented due to a community discussion. I strongly object to an unblock at this time due to the attacks specifically directed at another user. At the very least, an unblock right now says that it's OK -it's not. Thanks, R. Baley ( talk) 22:29, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
... my post on Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Proposed_decision#Users_willing_to_act_as_advisers. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi RegentsPark, I am trying to clean up the Sathya Sai Baba article - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sathya_Sai_Baba. I succeeded in removing some of the unreliable sources by appealing in the Wikipedia Reliable Source Notice Board.
Right in the introduction there is a mention about the Consular Sheet warning about travelling to Andhra Pradesh and Sathya Sai Baba. I did a little research to see if its true. This is what I found. Yes - In 2006 there was warning in the official Consular Sheet under the Crime section. Here's the link to the 2006 Consular Sheet - You will see the warning about a local religious leader in the Crime Section just before "INFORMATION FOR VICTIMS OF CRIME". -
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Consular_Information_Sheet_-_India.
But since July 2007 all indirect reference to Sathya Sai Baba and the warning advisory for travelling to Andhra Pradesh has been removed from the Consular Sheet .
I Checked 2009 Official Consular Sheet published by U.S Department of State in February 2009 there is no warning about travelling to Andhra Pradesh nor any warning about a local religious leader - indirectly referencing to Sathya Sai Baba.
http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1139.html#crime. But the article still mentions about this warning right in the introduction. This wrong statement has to be corrected in the article.
I created a discussion in
WP:RS -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Question:Can_an_articles_be_updated_as_per_the_new_2009_Consular_Travel_Warning_For_India.3F. But there was only one response from User:Peregrine Fisher.
I am hoping that if more wikipedians from outside the article contribute to this discussion it will be really helpful in making a decision to correct the article. You were one of the outside editors who contributed in the earlier discussions in the Sathya Sai Baba talk page. You very well know the
WP:BLP issues in the article. I think the first step to improving this article is getting rid of unreliable sources and wrong information. I would greatly appreciate if you would contribute your thoughts to the above discussion in the Wikipedia Reliable Source Noticeboard.
Radiantenergy (
talk) 23:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the reminder. I won't revert unless consensus is achieved. However, this edit is not a revert. -- Nosedown ( talk) 20:42, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 22:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Preliminary discussion at AN/I leaned towards blank & protect; Gwen Gale did so. Why on earth are we giving a community-banned user a soapbox? Much less one filled with lies? // roux 23:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi, only to let you know, had I known you'd declined the protection request on User:DougsTech's user talk, I wouldn't have protected it, I'd only seen the ANI thread. Afterwards, I didn't bring this up there because I didn't want to stir things up even more, glad to see it all seems to have settled down and has been archived on the sub-page. Cheers, Gwen Gale ( talk) 13:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Farrah Fawcett seems to have calmed down. How do you feel about trying to remove the protection on it and see how it goes? (I'm happy to do it but soliciting your opinion.) Frank | talk 17:49, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
In case it was not obvious: my reason for revert was to remove the POV pushing and changes to quotes by User:HFret and the edit summary referred to his edits. I have no opinion or knowledge as to whether Taj Mahal was influenced by Ottoman architecture ... although "influenced" is such a vague word that someone somewhere is sure to have claimed that! :) Abecedare ( talk) 18:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up, but the page in question' direct action day' includes a lot of edits that were done at the same time as the 'british india' edit, all of which I have discussed in detail so I have nothing against any one reverting British india to 'India', however it's not fair to revert everything ( there's lots of edits), so I have reverted it back,, to save further issues I am going remove 'british India' from that article. Khokhar ( talk) 21:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
... you doing my friend...? -- Tinu Cherian - 13:08, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey RP, I came to ask for your time and your big stick. Have a look at
User talk:92.48.54.122, and their contributions. Then, if you don't mind, look at the article histories of, for instance,
Humayun Ahmed,
Muhammed Zafar Iqbal, and
Taslima Nasrin. What we have is a series of IPs constantly reinserting links to (blocked link deleted) this spammy site, and doing so, often, for every single title in the article subject's bibliography. Oh, the link goes to a site that mirrors (old) Wikipedia content, it seems to me. This one did it twice three times now, and that, in my opinion, is enough ground for something more serious than a warning. For a week or two now I've been chasing these IPs around on those three pages (and I think there's one or two more), and it's getting irritating. I have no doubt that they have plenty of other IPs to do the same thing with, but I think it's time to do more than warn. (I've never asked for page protection and am not really inclined to do so now, but maybe you think otherwise.) Please see what you think. Thanks,
Drmies (
talk) 14:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Adding deshiboi here may do the trick. -- RegentsPark ( My narrowboat) 16:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Do not shamelessly act at the behest of user:Fowler&fowler and be his accomplice. And do not make misrepresentations like I am allegedly using “misleading edit summaries” . There is nothing misleading in the edit summary. The edit summary is pertaining to my previous NPOV edit at 12.53 where in I removed the item with in the brackets, and not to the pernicious POV version of user:Fowler&fowler at 13.15 . That edit itself is where I added more details to the earlier NPOV edit of user:John Hill including providing references and corroborations. By the way, In fact there is hardly anything else! I did not even either explicitly or implicitly state that the Sanju Pass is in Kashmir,though I could have in no time stated that Sanju Pass is in northern Kashmir, respecting the spirit of the article created by user:John Hill who had abstained from stating that the pass is in a particular country.Both of you are obviously jealous and envious of my contributions to both the Hindutash and Sanju Pass articles! It was user:Fowler&fowler who rushed to state that the pass was allegedly in so-called Xinjiang, the moment I made changes to the article and he had no use of the article till then. I had suggested to user:Fowler&fowler that the Sanju Pass article example could be followed in the article on Hindutash as a way to arrive at a consensus. I had also suggested the same to you . But both of you have evaded the suggestion. Obviously, user:John Hill seems to agree with my idea. I am sorry that I have to even reply to such stupid allegations, when I do not even get a precise reply from either of you in my entire correspondence with both of you! Hindutashravi ( talk) 11:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
well er I am a productive user I am sorry I just would like a clarification of the rules here as I have NO history of vandalism. I am just curious as to why one incident would mean a permanent block, Sincerely, -- Something12356789 ( talk) 23:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
I'd like your explanation as to why the Normandy Landing edits are considered "vandalism", given that you didn't bother to discuss the changes on the talk page. 139.48.25.60 ( talk) 18:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Beth Stern's semiprotection that you added has expired, and nothing has changed - it is a playground for vandals. Can we reinstate the semi? Thanks Tvoz/ talk 06:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. This newsletter is automatically delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 11:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
in about 24 hrs I'm on a holiday to Thailand. Any FA criteria concerns you have? Please reply to me. Hometech ( talk) 21:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 12:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi RegentsPark,
Since you offered at my arbitration to advise me, albeit reluctantly, on my plan to offer to ArbCom, I am wonder if you would be willing to look it over and offer suggestions. You are listed as an adviser/mentor as I remember your extraordinary diplomacy and conflict resolution abilities in several situations. The current draft of my plan is User:Mattisse/Plan and the discussion is User talk:Mattisse/Plan.
I am very willing to recognize that some of my past behavior was wrong, and I have worked to reduce the chance of that behavior will reoccur in the future. I feel that it will not, but of course I am a human being. However, I have learned during this arbitration and modified by behavior accordingly.
I would be grateful for any feedback or suggestions you might offer. Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 12:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Are you getting feedback from arbitrators on the plan as you prepare it? (I notice that a lot more than 15 days have gone by and, hopefully, you know that you're on the right track viz whatever arbcom wants from you.) -- RegentsPark ( sticks and stones) 19:54, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
I keep meaning to mention that it hasn't escaped notice that you've created several articles from the Mulliner Samhita, surely among the great divinely inspired oral traditions :-) . Priyanath talk 01:16, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
The WikiProject Novels Newsletter
Issue 30 - June 2009 | ||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 03:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Why did you take special ed. off the list? They are having a dispute. Never mind. I misinterpreted it. You are providing the third opinion. Harionlad ( talk) 21:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Aye, in addition to Sanju Pass, I'd like to propose protecting Aksai Chin as well. User:Keithonearth undid an anonymous edit that's identical to User:Hindutashravis. Cheers, -- Rayshade ( talk) 22:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi RegentsPark,
As we discussed previously, my plan is User:Mattisse/Plan formed with the input of others User talk:Mattisse/Plan, Arbitration Workshop and Proposed decision talk page. Previously, you said you were willing to be one of my mentors/advisers.
The ArbCom is in the process of rendering decision and have requested that my mentors/advisers confirm that they are aware of the plan and agree with their role in it. See Moving towards closure of the case. If you are still willing to serve as one of my mentors/advisers, and I fervently hope you are, I ask you to indicate your willingness by posting on the Proposed decision talk page.
I think this plan will work. I have learned a great deal from this arbitration and feel comfortable with my panel of mentors/advisers and trust their judgment.
Thank you so much. Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 16:49, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I ran into some problems at John Russell (Florida politician), with an editor who flooded the article with trivial information and got themselves blocked for a 3RR violation. To cut a long story short, I ended up rollbacking a deprodding, since I suspect a sock puppet of a blocked user removed the prod (which was placed there by another editor). Now I wonder if I should have done that or not, if I have the right to re-prod in case of suspected sock puppetry. I don't mind removing the template if you think I should, and apologize if I did so wrongly. Also, I hope I filed the sock puppetry charge accurately, at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Russellfl5--do you mind checking? Thanks so much for your help! Drmies ( talk) 00:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello. The Coordiantor Election has begun. All members are encouraged to vote by the deadline, July 28. To vote simply add support to the comments and questions for.. section of the member of your choice.
3 users are standing:
Regards, Alan16 ( talk) 19:45, 29 June 2009 (UTC).
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 02:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time to explain in detail why you decided the way you did. -- Born2cycle ( talk) 06:00, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Born2cycle has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
You should have tipped me off about his block evasion earlier. I don't do a full sweep of the watchlist very often so hadnt notcied until late YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 01:47, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 03:23, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to say good call on archiving the move discussion at
Talk:Death of Neda Agha-Soltan. I was thinking of doing exactly the same thing, but I was hesitant because I have been so involved int the discussion to date...
—
Ω (
talk) 21:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
The semi protection can be lifted. The discussion has come to an end. -- 91.130.188.40 ( talk) 20:19, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
RegentsPark, thank you for posting on my page in the middle of my dust up. I am gratified that you did and it gives me confidence. Although I may not have done as well as I could have, I did learn from the incident. I understand a little more now, and will do better in the future. Please continue, any time you feel I need a little reigning in. You are a great member of panel. Thank you! Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 19:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your support! Groomtech ( talk) 06:11, 14 July 2009 (UTC)