This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 40 | ← | Archive 45 | Archive 46 | Archive 47 | Archive 48 | Archive 49 | Archive 50 |
This IP is doing the same nonsense at North Fire, and I've opened an ANI thread about them.-- Jasper Deng (talk) 08:18, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Milo Yiannopoulos. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Cullen. Peacebroker ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a sock of Kingshowman and needs a block upgrade to indef. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Edit Warrior for Truth. Thanks. Dr. K. 19:06, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Come find out what "Talk Page Theatre" is all about! The last Wednesday evening of every other month, wiki enthusiasts gather at Bay Area WikiSalon to collaborate, mingle, and learn about new projects and ideas.
We allow time for informal conversation and working on articles. Newcomers and experienced wiki users are encouraged to attend. Free Wi-Fi is available so bring your editing devices. We will have beverages (including beer and wine) plus light snacks. We will be at the NEW Wikimedia Foundation offices! w00t!!!
Please note: You should RSVP here, and bring a photo ID that matches your registration name. This also helps us figure out how much food and drink to bring in.
For further details, see: Wikipedia:Bay Area WikiSalon, November 2017
See you soon! Ben Creasy, Nikikana, and Wayne | ( Subscribe/Unsubscribe to this talk page notice ) | MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 09:30, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello its BoltznNutz again. About the photo, how can I deal with the Creative Commons licenses so I may post it? And I am aware of copyright violations and all that. BoltznNutz ( talk) 05:55, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
No I'm not, that is sad, I'm just trying to post a current photo of PewDiePie. And so what about the current photo displayed and how was it able to be posted here? BoltznNutz ( talk) 16:07, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Hmm but I wonder what made the photo I had not licensed in a way to be allowed here. BoltznNutz ( talk) 19:35, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I appreciate the notice, but if you look at the Talk and Edit pages, you'll see that reasonable people had already reached consensus that names be added to the Aftermath list only after new allegations arise. Yet, there's a troll who persists in adding Donald Trump's name for previously existing allegations (not new ones by people who were inspired/motivated by the #MeToo movement). Also, this troll uses different IP addresses and usernames in attempts to circumvent blocks on their ability to edit. This person wants to attack Trump for the sake of attacking Trump, not to help Wikipedia increase its utility. Maybe you or other administrators can IP ban this troll? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.229.80 ( talk) 20:24, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello again! I should add that I forgot to apologize for any inconvenience that I may have caused you. I don't want to cause problems and just want to contribute. :) 70.112.229.80 ( talk) 23:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you again, but I believe that the page is being vandalized. We're trying to discuss things on the Talk page, but people just keeping deleting additions willy nilly. 70.112.229.80 ( talk) 05:08, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
If you look at the Talk and History pages, you'll see that "Another Believer" is just making a nuisance of himself. Thank you for your attention to this matter. 70.112.229.80 ( talk) 05:26, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Iqra Ali, subject of recent temporary block for vandalizing articles and other User's Talk appears to have created a second User: WikiThingsForThings already exhibiting bad behavior. And also cleared out from Iqra Ali Talk any mention of the past block. David notMD ( talk) 14:32, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Jim. I'm wondering if either you or one of your talk page watchers would mind taking a look at Escalating US Dissension. It was tagged for speedy as per WP:G11, but the tag was removed by someone who seems to be acting in good faith, but may have a COI. The article also appears to have been created by another person affiliated with the subject. I say subject because I'm not exactly sure what it's supposed to be. In addition to the possible COI/Paid issues, there may also be some WP:MEAT or WP:SOCK involved as well. I've done some basic formatting cleanup and added some maintenance templates (perhaps too many), but that's about the extent of what I feel I can do. I thought about AfD, but figured I'd ask around first to see whether there is something in this kind of mess which can actually be molded into an article. You're always a lot of help at the Teahouse, have tons of Wikpedia experience, and tend to not sugar coat things, so I thought you be a good person to ask. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 14:23, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
good job Flaming Afro ( talk) 09:18, 17 November 2017 (UTC) |
Those working for RT were registered as State Propagandists today under the Foreign Agents Registration Act with the United States Department of Justice, this is meant to be disseminated publicly and widely to allow people to know that Russian State Propagandists are active in the United States of America. This is the intent of FARA; to blunt the message of a state sponsored messenger. So it was not defamatory in any respect; it was cited by a reputable source; https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-usa-media-restrictions-rt/russias-rt-registers-as-foreign-agent-in-usa-editor-idUSKBN1DD25B
“Americans have a right to know who is acting in the United States to influence the U.S. government or public on behalf of foreign principals,” said acting Assistant Attorney General Dana Boente. Jasonanaggie ( talk) 03:38, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
RT is the company in question; those employed by RT are paid by the Russian Government to tow Russia's Propaganda in the United States therefore anyone working for Russia is a foreign agent and a foreign agent is a Propagandist by definition. First rule on Wikipedia is assume good faith of edits all of my edits are in good faith.
Jasonanaggie ( talk) 05:04, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Cullen, can I draw your attention to Jason's dozens of other edits surrounding the Abby Martin one, it seems he went on a vandalism spree and most of them have not been reverted. Thank you. – Planetjanet ( talk) 03:49, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
I've only just spotted this discussion. There is an ongoing discussion in the same vein at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Jasonanaggie. Please weigh in there if you don't mind. Regards, nagual design 19:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
@ Nagualdesign: I seek to move forward, I have corrected the problems I have created and I seek forgiveness. I will not take such action in the future. Thank you for the work you do. Jasonanaggie ( talk) 03:40, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Stephen Paddock. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Cullen,
Thanks for the block of 121.135.87.119. Since I blocked the previous offender with the same MO (86.237.67.33) for 2 weeks, I've amended your block to last 1 week. That's also what Materialscientist gave for the first offence from that latter IP. If it flares up from the same IPs again, I suggest a six month block on the suspicion that they are repeat offending static IPs.
Best wishes,
Samsara 09:09, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Softlavender took it upon herself to move my last contribution to the discussion, however, I would like to have it moved back and have expressed as much at her talkpage. [1] It would appear that from her most recent comments there that is unlikely to happen. I'm not asking you to intervene so much as asking if you think my request to her is out of line or inappropriate. I wanted people to read my further comments in direct relation to the original request, not get lost in the comments by other editors. So many, I think, read the original request, scan for a few other comments to see how others are !voting and then put in their own two-cents. The second grouping of comments I made are important and relevant to the original request. I think they should go back to where I put them but need to know if you agree or have a different solution. Thanks, as well, for noting that I did change my signature and commenting about same in the discussion thread. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 03:26, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Apologies if you've had enough of thinking about it, but I thought I ought to draw your attention to this. Regards, nagual design 21:41, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello C. I saw your post at AN/I and thought I would share these (make sure to use the left and right arrows to see them all) that I recently came across. I particularly like vellichor and petrichor. Safe journey to you. MarnetteD| Talk 00:09, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Jim. Hope you had a nice Thanksgiving. Would you (or any of your talk page watchers) ming taking a look at Red Thunder Cloud when you get the time? It's completely unsourced and it's not clear the subject meets WP:BIO or even WP:GNG. There are also claims that he is no longer alive, but with no sources provided for verification, this might need to be treated as a BLP per WP:BDP. Finally, there are also posts on the talk page about him being an imposter of some kind, which might be helpful in showing notablilty if properly sourced, but might also indicate that this is another article created a WP:LONGTIME ago which never probably should've been created in the first place. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 04:00, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Cullen328! I hope you had a good Thanksgiving. I noticed that you blocked SandyBeachCentre for disruptive editing for 72 hours. I wanted to also let you know that the username matches an Organization in Australia with the exact same name (a simple Google search will return the result right on top); you might want to consider extending that block to an indefinite soft block and letting the user know that they need to change that username or create a new account. I'll leave that decision up to you, as you originally blocked this user. Cheers -- ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 22:40, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Patriot Prayer. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
But it was the year she was taken on by two managers to be included in girls time which at that time consisted of 3 divisions. Pritsindhar ( talk) 07:23, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Beginning on November 28, 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) will be conducting a survey to en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.
The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:
If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.
Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
I've been patrolling Gerrymandering and Gerrymandering in the United States, and could use some advice. I'm unfamiliar with the editors suddenly in an uproar regarding a particular image. Thinking maybe an RfC would help resolve the tension. DN ( talk) 08:11, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi again Jim. I'm wondering if I can bend your year about another newly created article I've stumbled upon. Glasgow Gladiators Powerchair FC was created a few days ago and the creator and primary contrubutor (they might be one and the same person, but not sure) are new SPAs who mostly likely are connected to subject in some way. I don't think this is a case of paid editing, but rather probably just a person or person who's involved with the team and who might not understand WP:NOT.
Anyway, the article is completely unsourced and it may be a case of WP:TOOSOON. I've done a bit of minor clean up, and added some maintenance templates (explained on the talk page), and also have checked for something which might help establish notability per WP:ORG. Most of what I've found, however, appears to be WP:ORGDEPTH kind of trivial mentions or articles about a particular member of the club (like this or this). This article looks promising, especially as a possible source for article content, but I'm not sure that's enough for notability per WP:CLUB.
I believe the team does exist and does complete against other teams, but there are probably lots of whether it should have a Wikipedia article written about it. This is a bit tricky because of the subject matter, so I'm trying to do an extra thorough WP:BEFORE, but it's looking more and more like something which is going to eventually end up at AfD. If there was something to redirect this two then that might be an option, but I have been unable to find a suitable candidate so far.
Any suggestions, etc. you might have would be most appreciated. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 01:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
You asked me to discuss my draft article on Dr. Robert F. Turner and criticized the sources, stating that they did not establish notability. I took a look at Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Criteria, and ISTM he is more than qualified for an article. Specifically 1. The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.
2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level.
3. The person is or has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the IEEE).[2]
4. The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions.
5. The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research (or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon).
6. The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society. 7. The person has had a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity.
8. The person is or has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area.
What issues do you have with the sources? They are what they are. For example, the ABA doesn't even list their current chairman, much less past ones. I can't cite them, because such a cite doesn't exist. But I have multiple sources that state that he has been Chairman of two different subcommmittees.
Help me understand what the issues are. I have cites to the NY Times, WaPo, USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe. Lawyers in this field of work don't get feature articles in major media. They are considered advisors, and the good ones are sought for advice repatedly. Do I need to include cites from law review articles? (I don't even know how to find those.)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fatima. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
It's the madness of crowds all over again... Guy ( Help!) 21:16, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Cullen328. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
So, hi. I came to your talk page to discuss this, seeing as you might know quite a lot more than me on the image rules. Can you detail it further and if possible, help me get some new references on her books. Because most of the information is taken from her website, but I only used it as I knew the information there would be correct. ShyPinkLolly ( talk) 09:28, 3 December 2017 (UTC) And also, if I am not available, please add a new section on my talk page, because I can't be bothered to keep coming back here. Sorry. ShyPinkLolly ( talk) 09:31, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi Cullen,
A few weeks ago, you put my talk page under semi-protection after I was being harrassed by GeoJoe1000. You asked me to alert you if he returned. Well, he's back, this time under the username "GuyPerson01". This isn't the first time that he has created an account purely for harrassment; a few have been detected through SPI. His intention is clearly to humiliate me in front of other editors by pointing out the times that I have been blocked but I have no idea what he wants to get out of it. However, it's clearly a case of long-term abuse—as I am sure the likes of @ Tvx1 and @ Spintendo can attest to—and he has no intention of doing anything differently. He posts anonymously or from socks, and during the SPI it was suggested that he is using a VPN to get around blocks within his IP range. Is there a long-term solution to this problem? Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 01:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello. When responding to requests for page protection, make sure that you use {{ RFPP}} (e.g. {{RFPP|s|3 days}} to say that you've semi-protected for three days) in your response, otherwise Cyberbot I (the bot that clerks RfPP) won't realize that you answered the request. The template documentation includes all the possible responses with the template. — MRD2014 Talk • Edits • Help! 02:38, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
...writes up local Jewish histories on Wikipedia? I ran into El Ghriba synagogue, which was in pretty bad shape, and found that the history of the Jews on Djerba is fascinating. One of the things I just noted here is that after 1967 many of the local Jews left. One of the sources I cited has 1360 Jews in all of Tunisia, a thousand of which on Djerba (and Haaretz confirms this), so those must be post-1967 numbers, but unfortunately History of the Jews in Tunisia doesn't have much to say about 1967, and neither does Djerba#History_of_Djerba's_Jewish_community. Do you have experts among your talk page visitors? Drmies ( talk) 17:43, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
-- MelanieN ( talk) 18:16, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Mail is on the way | |
Awww, don't feel bad, Drmies. I love you too. Here's some mail for you. MelanieN ( talk) 19:37, 7 December 2017 (UTC) |
Can you teach me how to create myself as a bot so I can deliver them a newsletter like event and tip of the day also some good jokes. If you approve that, that will be great! TheDeliveryGuy ( talk) 08:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi Jim. You were a big help with Red Thunder Cloud, so I'm wondering if you'd take a peak Blue Sky (artist). It's only supported by one source (which seems a bit iffy) and reads more like personal profile than an encycopedic article. I Googled the name, but all I found is primary stuff or other trivial type mentions. Article as been around since 2006, remained unsourced until this 2016 edit, but otherwise has stayed the same. If better sourcing cannot be found to support even a trimmed down version of the article, then I think that maybe a redirect to Tunnelvision would be OK as an alternative to deletion. The problem is though the notability of that article is also a bit iffy. Anyway, just looking for some other opinions on this. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 01:20, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Dear Cullen328, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Niazi Express, editor Ammarpad feels that I have been canvassing, as I posted at the WikiProject Buses [2]. I had been previously told that WikiProjects are a place to ask interested editors to have a look and so I posted at the Buses WikiProject. I mentioned in the AfD that I will be posting there. If possible, could you please have a look at the AfD and let me know if what I did counts as canvassing? Thank you-- DreamLinker ( talk) 09:49, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Aydin Aghdashloo. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
I think you can probably delete User_talk:32.218.36.178 per that. The IP geolocates to a different continent. ((( The Quixotic Potato))) ( talk) 06:53, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
Please could you take a looksee at this discussion. In the beginning I thought it was a straightforward case of tendentious editing, then because it's not my area of expertise I backed off a little and asked others to comment. [1] [2] Since no help has been immediately forthcoming I decided to continue with my own investigating and now I feel even more sure that I'm correct. Unfortunately I'm worried I might say or do something I shouldn't and end up landing myself in hot water, and I could of course be completely wrong about this, so I thought I'd better pass the baton to you instead. I hope you don't mind. Regards, nagual design 03:50, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know that the discussion at Ainundil's talk page is now heading in the right direction. Thank you again for your advice, and feel free to chip in or help to oversee proceedings. Regards, nagual design 06:27, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 40 | ← | Archive 45 | Archive 46 | Archive 47 | Archive 48 | Archive 49 | Archive 50 |
This IP is doing the same nonsense at North Fire, and I've opened an ANI thread about them.-- Jasper Deng (talk) 08:18, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Milo Yiannopoulos. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Cullen. Peacebroker ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a sock of Kingshowman and needs a block upgrade to indef. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Edit Warrior for Truth. Thanks. Dr. K. 19:06, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Come find out what "Talk Page Theatre" is all about! The last Wednesday evening of every other month, wiki enthusiasts gather at Bay Area WikiSalon to collaborate, mingle, and learn about new projects and ideas.
We allow time for informal conversation and working on articles. Newcomers and experienced wiki users are encouraged to attend. Free Wi-Fi is available so bring your editing devices. We will have beverages (including beer and wine) plus light snacks. We will be at the NEW Wikimedia Foundation offices! w00t!!!
Please note: You should RSVP here, and bring a photo ID that matches your registration name. This also helps us figure out how much food and drink to bring in.
For further details, see: Wikipedia:Bay Area WikiSalon, November 2017
See you soon! Ben Creasy, Nikikana, and Wayne | ( Subscribe/Unsubscribe to this talk page notice ) | MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 09:30, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello its BoltznNutz again. About the photo, how can I deal with the Creative Commons licenses so I may post it? And I am aware of copyright violations and all that. BoltznNutz ( talk) 05:55, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
No I'm not, that is sad, I'm just trying to post a current photo of PewDiePie. And so what about the current photo displayed and how was it able to be posted here? BoltznNutz ( talk) 16:07, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Hmm but I wonder what made the photo I had not licensed in a way to be allowed here. BoltznNutz ( talk) 19:35, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I appreciate the notice, but if you look at the Talk and Edit pages, you'll see that reasonable people had already reached consensus that names be added to the Aftermath list only after new allegations arise. Yet, there's a troll who persists in adding Donald Trump's name for previously existing allegations (not new ones by people who were inspired/motivated by the #MeToo movement). Also, this troll uses different IP addresses and usernames in attempts to circumvent blocks on their ability to edit. This person wants to attack Trump for the sake of attacking Trump, not to help Wikipedia increase its utility. Maybe you or other administrators can IP ban this troll? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.229.80 ( talk) 20:24, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello again! I should add that I forgot to apologize for any inconvenience that I may have caused you. I don't want to cause problems and just want to contribute. :) 70.112.229.80 ( talk) 23:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you again, but I believe that the page is being vandalized. We're trying to discuss things on the Talk page, but people just keeping deleting additions willy nilly. 70.112.229.80 ( talk) 05:08, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
If you look at the Talk and History pages, you'll see that "Another Believer" is just making a nuisance of himself. Thank you for your attention to this matter. 70.112.229.80 ( talk) 05:26, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Iqra Ali, subject of recent temporary block for vandalizing articles and other User's Talk appears to have created a second User: WikiThingsForThings already exhibiting bad behavior. And also cleared out from Iqra Ali Talk any mention of the past block. David notMD ( talk) 14:32, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Jim. I'm wondering if either you or one of your talk page watchers would mind taking a look at Escalating US Dissension. It was tagged for speedy as per WP:G11, but the tag was removed by someone who seems to be acting in good faith, but may have a COI. The article also appears to have been created by another person affiliated with the subject. I say subject because I'm not exactly sure what it's supposed to be. In addition to the possible COI/Paid issues, there may also be some WP:MEAT or WP:SOCK involved as well. I've done some basic formatting cleanup and added some maintenance templates (perhaps too many), but that's about the extent of what I feel I can do. I thought about AfD, but figured I'd ask around first to see whether there is something in this kind of mess which can actually be molded into an article. You're always a lot of help at the Teahouse, have tons of Wikpedia experience, and tend to not sugar coat things, so I thought you be a good person to ask. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 14:23, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
good job Flaming Afro ( talk) 09:18, 17 November 2017 (UTC) |
Those working for RT were registered as State Propagandists today under the Foreign Agents Registration Act with the United States Department of Justice, this is meant to be disseminated publicly and widely to allow people to know that Russian State Propagandists are active in the United States of America. This is the intent of FARA; to blunt the message of a state sponsored messenger. So it was not defamatory in any respect; it was cited by a reputable source; https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-usa-media-restrictions-rt/russias-rt-registers-as-foreign-agent-in-usa-editor-idUSKBN1DD25B
“Americans have a right to know who is acting in the United States to influence the U.S. government or public on behalf of foreign principals,” said acting Assistant Attorney General Dana Boente. Jasonanaggie ( talk) 03:38, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
RT is the company in question; those employed by RT are paid by the Russian Government to tow Russia's Propaganda in the United States therefore anyone working for Russia is a foreign agent and a foreign agent is a Propagandist by definition. First rule on Wikipedia is assume good faith of edits all of my edits are in good faith.
Jasonanaggie ( talk) 05:04, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Cullen, can I draw your attention to Jason's dozens of other edits surrounding the Abby Martin one, it seems he went on a vandalism spree and most of them have not been reverted. Thank you. – Planetjanet ( talk) 03:49, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
I've only just spotted this discussion. There is an ongoing discussion in the same vein at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Jasonanaggie. Please weigh in there if you don't mind. Regards, nagual design 19:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
@ Nagualdesign: I seek to move forward, I have corrected the problems I have created and I seek forgiveness. I will not take such action in the future. Thank you for the work you do. Jasonanaggie ( talk) 03:40, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Stephen Paddock. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Cullen,
Thanks for the block of 121.135.87.119. Since I blocked the previous offender with the same MO (86.237.67.33) for 2 weeks, I've amended your block to last 1 week. That's also what Materialscientist gave for the first offence from that latter IP. If it flares up from the same IPs again, I suggest a six month block on the suspicion that they are repeat offending static IPs.
Best wishes,
Samsara 09:09, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Softlavender took it upon herself to move my last contribution to the discussion, however, I would like to have it moved back and have expressed as much at her talkpage. [1] It would appear that from her most recent comments there that is unlikely to happen. I'm not asking you to intervene so much as asking if you think my request to her is out of line or inappropriate. I wanted people to read my further comments in direct relation to the original request, not get lost in the comments by other editors. So many, I think, read the original request, scan for a few other comments to see how others are !voting and then put in their own two-cents. The second grouping of comments I made are important and relevant to the original request. I think they should go back to where I put them but need to know if you agree or have a different solution. Thanks, as well, for noting that I did change my signature and commenting about same in the discussion thread. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 03:26, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Apologies if you've had enough of thinking about it, but I thought I ought to draw your attention to this. Regards, nagual design 21:41, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello C. I saw your post at AN/I and thought I would share these (make sure to use the left and right arrows to see them all) that I recently came across. I particularly like vellichor and petrichor. Safe journey to you. MarnetteD| Talk 00:09, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Jim. Hope you had a nice Thanksgiving. Would you (or any of your talk page watchers) ming taking a look at Red Thunder Cloud when you get the time? It's completely unsourced and it's not clear the subject meets WP:BIO or even WP:GNG. There are also claims that he is no longer alive, but with no sources provided for verification, this might need to be treated as a BLP per WP:BDP. Finally, there are also posts on the talk page about him being an imposter of some kind, which might be helpful in showing notablilty if properly sourced, but might also indicate that this is another article created a WP:LONGTIME ago which never probably should've been created in the first place. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 04:00, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Cullen328! I hope you had a good Thanksgiving. I noticed that you blocked SandyBeachCentre for disruptive editing for 72 hours. I wanted to also let you know that the username matches an Organization in Australia with the exact same name (a simple Google search will return the result right on top); you might want to consider extending that block to an indefinite soft block and letting the user know that they need to change that username or create a new account. I'll leave that decision up to you, as you originally blocked this user. Cheers -- ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 22:40, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Patriot Prayer. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
But it was the year she was taken on by two managers to be included in girls time which at that time consisted of 3 divisions. Pritsindhar ( talk) 07:23, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Beginning on November 28, 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) will be conducting a survey to en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.
The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:
If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.
Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
I've been patrolling Gerrymandering and Gerrymandering in the United States, and could use some advice. I'm unfamiliar with the editors suddenly in an uproar regarding a particular image. Thinking maybe an RfC would help resolve the tension. DN ( talk) 08:11, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi again Jim. I'm wondering if I can bend your year about another newly created article I've stumbled upon. Glasgow Gladiators Powerchair FC was created a few days ago and the creator and primary contrubutor (they might be one and the same person, but not sure) are new SPAs who mostly likely are connected to subject in some way. I don't think this is a case of paid editing, but rather probably just a person or person who's involved with the team and who might not understand WP:NOT.
Anyway, the article is completely unsourced and it may be a case of WP:TOOSOON. I've done a bit of minor clean up, and added some maintenance templates (explained on the talk page), and also have checked for something which might help establish notability per WP:ORG. Most of what I've found, however, appears to be WP:ORGDEPTH kind of trivial mentions or articles about a particular member of the club (like this or this). This article looks promising, especially as a possible source for article content, but I'm not sure that's enough for notability per WP:CLUB.
I believe the team does exist and does complete against other teams, but there are probably lots of whether it should have a Wikipedia article written about it. This is a bit tricky because of the subject matter, so I'm trying to do an extra thorough WP:BEFORE, but it's looking more and more like something which is going to eventually end up at AfD. If there was something to redirect this two then that might be an option, but I have been unable to find a suitable candidate so far.
Any suggestions, etc. you might have would be most appreciated. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 01:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
You asked me to discuss my draft article on Dr. Robert F. Turner and criticized the sources, stating that they did not establish notability. I took a look at Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Criteria, and ISTM he is more than qualified for an article. Specifically 1. The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.
2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level.
3. The person is or has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the IEEE).[2]
4. The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions.
5. The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research (or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon).
6. The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society. 7. The person has had a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity.
8. The person is or has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area.
What issues do you have with the sources? They are what they are. For example, the ABA doesn't even list their current chairman, much less past ones. I can't cite them, because such a cite doesn't exist. But I have multiple sources that state that he has been Chairman of two different subcommmittees.
Help me understand what the issues are. I have cites to the NY Times, WaPo, USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe. Lawyers in this field of work don't get feature articles in major media. They are considered advisors, and the good ones are sought for advice repatedly. Do I need to include cites from law review articles? (I don't even know how to find those.)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fatima. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
It's the madness of crowds all over again... Guy ( Help!) 21:16, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Cullen328. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
So, hi. I came to your talk page to discuss this, seeing as you might know quite a lot more than me on the image rules. Can you detail it further and if possible, help me get some new references on her books. Because most of the information is taken from her website, but I only used it as I knew the information there would be correct. ShyPinkLolly ( talk) 09:28, 3 December 2017 (UTC) And also, if I am not available, please add a new section on my talk page, because I can't be bothered to keep coming back here. Sorry. ShyPinkLolly ( talk) 09:31, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi Cullen,
A few weeks ago, you put my talk page under semi-protection after I was being harrassed by GeoJoe1000. You asked me to alert you if he returned. Well, he's back, this time under the username "GuyPerson01". This isn't the first time that he has created an account purely for harrassment; a few have been detected through SPI. His intention is clearly to humiliate me in front of other editors by pointing out the times that I have been blocked but I have no idea what he wants to get out of it. However, it's clearly a case of long-term abuse—as I am sure the likes of @ Tvx1 and @ Spintendo can attest to—and he has no intention of doing anything differently. He posts anonymously or from socks, and during the SPI it was suggested that he is using a VPN to get around blocks within his IP range. Is there a long-term solution to this problem? Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 01:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello. When responding to requests for page protection, make sure that you use {{ RFPP}} (e.g. {{RFPP|s|3 days}} to say that you've semi-protected for three days) in your response, otherwise Cyberbot I (the bot that clerks RfPP) won't realize that you answered the request. The template documentation includes all the possible responses with the template. — MRD2014 Talk • Edits • Help! 02:38, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
...writes up local Jewish histories on Wikipedia? I ran into El Ghriba synagogue, which was in pretty bad shape, and found that the history of the Jews on Djerba is fascinating. One of the things I just noted here is that after 1967 many of the local Jews left. One of the sources I cited has 1360 Jews in all of Tunisia, a thousand of which on Djerba (and Haaretz confirms this), so those must be post-1967 numbers, but unfortunately History of the Jews in Tunisia doesn't have much to say about 1967, and neither does Djerba#History_of_Djerba's_Jewish_community. Do you have experts among your talk page visitors? Drmies ( talk) 17:43, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
-- MelanieN ( talk) 18:16, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Mail is on the way | |
Awww, don't feel bad, Drmies. I love you too. Here's some mail for you. MelanieN ( talk) 19:37, 7 December 2017 (UTC) |
Can you teach me how to create myself as a bot so I can deliver them a newsletter like event and tip of the day also some good jokes. If you approve that, that will be great! TheDeliveryGuy ( talk) 08:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi Jim. You were a big help with Red Thunder Cloud, so I'm wondering if you'd take a peak Blue Sky (artist). It's only supported by one source (which seems a bit iffy) and reads more like personal profile than an encycopedic article. I Googled the name, but all I found is primary stuff or other trivial type mentions. Article as been around since 2006, remained unsourced until this 2016 edit, but otherwise has stayed the same. If better sourcing cannot be found to support even a trimmed down version of the article, then I think that maybe a redirect to Tunnelvision would be OK as an alternative to deletion. The problem is though the notability of that article is also a bit iffy. Anyway, just looking for some other opinions on this. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 01:20, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Dear Cullen328, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Niazi Express, editor Ammarpad feels that I have been canvassing, as I posted at the WikiProject Buses [2]. I had been previously told that WikiProjects are a place to ask interested editors to have a look and so I posted at the Buses WikiProject. I mentioned in the AfD that I will be posting there. If possible, could you please have a look at the AfD and let me know if what I did counts as canvassing? Thank you-- DreamLinker ( talk) 09:49, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Aydin Aghdashloo. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
I think you can probably delete User_talk:32.218.36.178 per that. The IP geolocates to a different continent. ((( The Quixotic Potato))) ( talk) 06:53, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
Please could you take a looksee at this discussion. In the beginning I thought it was a straightforward case of tendentious editing, then because it's not my area of expertise I backed off a little and asked others to comment. [1] [2] Since no help has been immediately forthcoming I decided to continue with my own investigating and now I feel even more sure that I'm correct. Unfortunately I'm worried I might say or do something I shouldn't and end up landing myself in hot water, and I could of course be completely wrong about this, so I thought I'd better pass the baton to you instead. I hope you don't mind. Regards, nagual design 03:50, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know that the discussion at Ainundil's talk page is now heading in the right direction. Thank you again for your advice, and feel free to chip in or help to oversee proceedings. Regards, nagual design 06:27, 10 December 2017 (UTC)