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.

Steve, just because I'm putting too many sources in doesn't mean I claimed they were already there. It was more than clear to me my claims were supported, I don't know why it wasn't to you. Hopefully now you have no choice but to accept the truth. Goodbye.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.76.67.208 ( talk) 15:57, 19 September 2016‎ UTC

When you say "Yes it is in several sources and it's also already confirmed on their pages", this appears to imply you thought they were already there and properly citing the contentious content. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 16:03, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Attacks? Good luck with that as everything I have said so far is true. I'm not sorry you're taking my contributions to heart. Also, I don't consider edit warring to be normal work. But who knows what you consider normal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.76.67.208 ( talk) 16:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

See my replies on your IP talk page. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 16:30, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

No one who is innocent uses all caps, FYI. You know I only added what I knew what was already backed up and true. That was made more than clear, several times. Your bitterness shined through in your nonsense, dishonest edits. I don't know what planet you're on (not an attack, I really don't know), but that sir is edit warring. Since you still seem to think this is all about you, I'm sorry you couldn't handle the truth. I wish you all the best. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.76.67.208 ( talk) 16:38, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

The personal attacks are apparently continuing. Oh well. Nothing I have done has been dishonest or "nonsense". I have merely been requesting that potentially contentious content be cited, and your response has been 1) denial; 2) saying things are cited when they're not; 3) adding sometimes useless cites; 4) engaging in personal attacks; 5) engaging in disruptive revenge edits on UofLouisville-related articles. Instead, you could have been finding cites and adding them, like anyone would do, or just leaving the tags there for someone else to find the cites. Usually by now, I will have reported your activity as an ongoing incident. Please explain why I should not do that. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 16:42, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry but you're the one in denial. All I am doing is responding as short as possible to your inquries and you're accusing me of attacking you with even lengthier responses. And if any of that was true then you would be editing those articles now, right Steve? Not to mention, it's odd you want me to explain to you why you shouldn't report me. I don't know why you would report me but if I truly felt someone needed to be reported, I wouldn't ask them first why I should or should not. That being said, you're not getting any more responses out of me. Good luck with everything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.76.67.208 ( talk) 17:04, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I have done nothing that is outside the normal work of improving articles. However, the numbered list above are things I can prove about your activity. You have not been working in the usual wiki way and have been very personal about it. You could have kept calm and added all the necessary cites in 1/3 of the time that you have blown up to such large proportions, or as I said already, just leave the tags, and you or someone else could deal with them in the near future. The bottom line is that I am going to continue to check changes made to these or any articles because that is what a Wikipedian does. Basically, either ensure that potentially contentious content is cited, or let someone else do it. We all have no choice but to follow the policies and guidelines of this site, which, again include WP:NPA, which you have violated frequently. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 17:14, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

22:09, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Would you know anything about Springfield say for Frank Wall's article? Shipwreck Kelly and Ben Cregor are some others which I struggled with a bit more. Cake ( talk) 22:54, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

@ MisterCake: I'm afraid I don't understand what is being asked of me here. Sorry for the slow response. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 11:38, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Sorry for being cryptic! Just been having trouble on biography articles for folks from Springfield, and was curious if you knew anything to help. Cake ( talk) 12:35, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

You seem very defensive over something you know nothing about, especially after you falsely tried to get me booted. Why does it hurt you so much that I'm right? Jenimcphersoncow ( talk) 00:20, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

I have no words. I'll let the hard reliable sources about General Electric's headquarters and the evidence of your sockpuppetry speak for itself. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 09:33, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Greetings. New discussion started here. Mac Dreamstate ( talk) 21:45, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi! My apologies for not formatting the typo which I added correctly.

The reason I added two is that I did not know how to make it case insensitive, and the reason I only added the past tense form is that I forgot the other tenses of the word.

I also didn’t realize that I was supposed to add new typos at the top, so my apologies for that.

Thanks for fixing that.
― PapíDimmi ( talk | contribs) 16:05, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

No problem. I guess "disintegrating" and "disintegration" could be covered as well but I was just trying to address the immediate needs. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 16:09, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

I think that that’d be a good idea, so I added them. Hopefully, I did it correctly this time.
― PapíDimmi ( talk | contribs) 16:13, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Never mind; I did.
― PapíDimmi ( talk | contribs) 16:18, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Well, I did that.  :) Anyway, I realize this is the "Anyone can edit" Wikipedia, but this particular page requires knowledge about Regular expressions to be able to make effective changes that don't cause AWB users unnecessary problems. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 16:25, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

I do have knowledge about RegEx, but this is the first time I’ve added custom typos.
― PapíDimmi ( talk | contribs) 16:27, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Hey Stevie, could you please review the most recent edits on these pages? There is a "new" editor making changes w/o any rationale and I'm not sure what to make of them. Thanks! Learner001 ( talk) 13:26, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

@ Learner001: It looks like technical and MOS changes to me. Maybe they could have explained their edits better, but I don't see anything particularly alarming. If there is any particular change you disagree with, perhaps bring it up on the article's talk page. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 23:16, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I think the unregistered editor was probably blocked, and came in under a new IP address. Seems to have far too much technical WP knowledge for a "new" editor. Learner001 ( talk) 14:52, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

18:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I have been following your edits as of late as a token of excellence I would to ask for your assistance improving Zeek Wikipedia article. I will be honest and come forward that I have a stated COI with the company but I feel the information presented in the article is notable. Any input from you regarding this matter would be amazing. Thanks, Eddard 'Ned' Stark ( talk) 20:38, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Stevie, somewhere in the back of my mind, I just recalled a similar user from several years ago. I can't recall exactly when or on what article, but it was on several department store type articles. You might check the talk pages and article history of those type articles, and see if you can find anything. It probably doesn't matter at this point, since this user has been blocked for sockpuppetry already, but it might be enlightening as to their tactics. - BilCat ( talk) 23:48, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

I think Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ChildofMidnight is the user I was thinking of. From looking over the archive, I don't think it the same user as our current sockmaster. It is interesting reading, however. :) - BilCat ( talk) 23:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

for the record, I did not create my own page. I only want to make sure it survives the scrutiny of Wiki's rules. Any help would be gladly appreciated. John Wayne Gacy and Ted Budy have pages. Why not a drummer from KY? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Speady1 ( talk • contribs) 03:18, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

@ Speady1: Well, you did create the article (see the last entry, which is the creation edit). For the moment, we'll ignore that this is a conflict of interest. See WP:N about whether any particular subject can have an article in the Wikipedia. In particular, to start, is there any significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources? I don't think it will survive WP:AFD in its current state. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 12:57, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Stevie, thanks for your note about the possible sock. I will leave it for now, but if you see continuing reverts at Nordstrom or elsewhere, let me know. I can do more semiprotections if it turns out to be necessary. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 18:16, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

This question is not about the article per say, but more about the Wikipedia rule about minors and their full name that I'm not aware of. I would like to read up on it. Also how did you get that the page notice to be on your talk page. Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 01:49, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

On the first request, see Wikipedia:Minors and persons judged incompetent#Editing on any other person. My interpretation is that minors incidental to a notable person should not be identified very deeply, as in providing a complete name, even if it comes from a reliable source. The link I provided is not a direct guideline, but it does represent "the norm" on the Wikipedia, and I suspect other editors will agree with keeping deep details about incidental minors out of the article.

On the second request, see Wikipedia:Editnotice#User and user talk. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 04:02, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

21:30, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

21:30, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Following up from the consensus reached here, the community will now establish the user right criteria. You may wish to participate in this discussion. -- Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 12:55, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cary Grant. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

20:30, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ruger Mini-14. Legobot ( talk) 04:24, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

16:43, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

You recently reviewed Opposition Party (Northern U.S.). I have been editing for a number of years, but I do not adequately understand the review and assessment processes. Sadly, I also have been unable to find an overview of how one goes about initiating and completing that process. Thank you so much for reviewing the article. Is the review process complete? What must one do to have the article assessed? I'd appreciate any guidance you can give me. InformationvsInjustice ( talk) 23:17, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

@ InformationvsInjustice:, sorry for the delay in answering. I'm not sure I can answer this comprehensively in one reply, so instead I will point you to resources for you to consume, then please feel free to ask me any questions about them. The first resource is about patrolling new pages: Wikipedia:New pages patrol/patrolled pages. The second resource is a FAQ that explains article assessment: Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Assessment FAQ

Basically, what I did was mark the new article as patrolled because it is "appropriate for Wikipedia". As for assessment, you or anyone can add it to WikiProjects, then set the class parameters to assess it. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:51, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

@ Stevietheman:, thanks man. I don't know if it is just me, or if there's a gap here. I'll let you know how things stand after reading the pages. InformationvsInjustice ( talk) 23:12, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

fixed dale jr. by adding reference. Caryeastwood — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caryeastwood ( talk • contribs) 12:31, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello, StefenTower. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Wikipedia e-mail.
Message added 01:39, 19 October 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{ You've got mail}} or {{ ygm}} template.

You've been Approved for access to Newspapers.com Please follow the directions in the e-mail so I can activate your account. Happy Editing! -- Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 01:39, 19 October 2016 (UTC) -- Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 01:39, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2014 Oso mudslide. Legobot ( talk) 04:24, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I was taken to task for removing the word "journalist" from John Harwood's bio. Having studied journalism and written for a daily newspaper, "The Savannah Morning News" in the 1970s, I was confident I knew the meaning of "journalist" and the responsibilities and limitations of that occupation. When I was a writer a journalist simply reported facts and didn't draw conclusions. And, being a long-term consumer of John Harwood's morning commentaries on CNBC, I was confident that Harwood was not a journalist even before the released wWikileaks emails detailed his working relationship with the DNC's John Podesta. However, after Stevietheman restored the word "journalist" to Harwood's bio this morning, I suspected that the meaning of "journalist" had changed. And, after looking at several current definitions of "journalist", it appears that objectivity is no longer required, if it ever was. So, if the distinction has been removed between news and editorial content then, yes, Harwood could be called a "journalist." Nevertheless, the public's need to know of John Harwood's working relationship with a major political party is important to understanding his body of work and the place in history he has earned. Some accommodation must be made to include characterizations of his contacts with high-ranking politicos and links to same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kroebling ( talk • contribs) 13:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

On the Wikipedia, we are supposed to avoid changing articles, especially biographies of living persons, due to our personal opinions. Please read WP:NPOV and WP:BLP for further info. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 13:36, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

17:39, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2016 India–Pakistan military confrontation. Legobot ( talk) 04:26, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

If you can do like whatever you say then please do it. In all Indian cities page, the slum section is added because it is a major problem and not a minor one. Half of the population in delhi lives in slums and so that it should be addressed and this is not a minor problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ning Shen zhu ( talk • contribs) 11:23, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

@ Ning Shen zhu: I just looked at the 10 largest cities in India, and only a couple of them besides Delhi have "Slums" sections, and none of them are given the top-level section heading that yours in Delhi has. Also, none of them have the same opinionated language. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 11:47, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2014 Oso mudslide. Legobot ( talk) 04:27, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

16:18, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello Stevietheman. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria.

• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. — MusikAnimal ^talk 23:32, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

I am the Marketing Director for Falls City Brewing Co. in Louisville, KY. The other day, I made some changes to the information on our page and uploaded our logo.

Last night I got a message saying it had all been removed.

Can you help me figure out how to make those changes again and have them ok'd this time around?

Thanks,

Brian U'Sellis - Falls City Beer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianusellis ( talk • contribs) 13:56, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

@ Brianusellis: First, if you are associated with the subject, it's best to let other editors who are not associated make the edits per WP:COI. You can ask for changes or additions on the article's talk page: Talk:Falls City Brewing Company. Second, we editors are not allowed to infringe the copyright of anyone, in this case, Falls City Brewing Company, so we shouldn't be copying their website's content word-for-word into our articles. See WP:COPYVIO. If you make a request on the article's talk page about content that should go there, I will try to attend to it. Alternatively, you can ask any unassociated editor to improve the article, as long as they don't violate any company's copyrighted content. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 20:29, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Periodic table. Legobot ( talk) 04:28, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

23:01, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:40, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello! I've been working on the Colonel Sanders page, splitting out KFC from his "Later career" section. I noticed a problem when the text mentions Sanders' then mistress and later his wife - What's the correct style when this person is mentioned? First mention has first and last name - subsequent listings say "Sanders and Claudia" instead of using her last name. What's the correct way to refer to her? Thanks for everything you do! William — Preceding unsigned comment added by WmArbaugh ( talk • contribs) 19:41, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

@ WmArbaugh: I can see how clunky that looks, but I'm not sure what the best solution is, or if there's a "better" way of phrasing it. Maybe ask at the Help desk? Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 12:46, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

19:18, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Assata Shakur. Legobot ( talk) 04:27, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Per this and this, I'd never read MOS:ORDER until now. Shit.. looks like I have been doing it wrong all this time. Very wrong. Indeed it does say to have succession boxes (not navboxes in this case) at the bottom of an article, rather than their own sections as I've been adding them. Ach.. That means yet more tweaks to hundreds of articles. Thanks for bringing that to my attention (well, to the other user, but I noticed via watchlist). Is there any way to sneak around the guideline, or should I get to work on it now? Mac Dreamstate ( talk) 18:54, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome. I don't know if there's an exception to the guideline on this (might be best to ask at WP:WikiProject Boxing). At any rate, I'm not going to rush you.  :) Thanks for reminding me these are more properly called succession boxes. :) Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 18:59, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

15:33, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Stevietheman. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States involvement in regime change. Legobot ( talk) 04:27, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi StefenTower. You are invited to comment at a further discussion on the implementation of this user right to patrol and review new pages that is taking place at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC on patrolling without user right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 13:45, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello StefenTower,

Breaking the back of the backlog

We now have 812 New Page Reviewers! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog. Now it's time for action.

If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.

Second set of eyes

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.

Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote

With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation.

---

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 09:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC) .

Hello. I believe that my contributions to Wikipedia are good. For example, JC Penney "red numbers" for negative financial data. Google Finance does it too.

No, internal links are never used for numbers in financial figures. It makes no sense to link them. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 02:07, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Michael Portillo. Legobot ( talk) 04:28, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

21:17, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello! What specifically is out of date on the Common Core map? -- seberle ( talk) 10:42, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

@ Seberle: Questions like this should be asked on Talk:Common Core State Standards Initiative, Also, somebody else placed the tag. But I think it has to do with Florida. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:13, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

		The Special Barnstar
		For your efforts at the Muhammad Ali page in fighting vandalism and disruptive edits as well as for your constructive editing on this page. May you continue to keep an eye on this page always. Soham321 ( talk) 17:40, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Soham321 ( talk) 17:37, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

18:07, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello. Thanks for speaking up so much at the Wishlist. Right now you are soliciting at English Wikipedia WikiProjects for votes for a particular proposal. I want the wishlist to have good circulation, but I would prefer that advertisements draw attention to the entire wishlist rather than just one proposal. This wishlist is supposed to be for all Wikimedia projects in all languages, and I would not want advertising to go to one proposal from English Wikipedia. The vote count matters for this and this seems like it might be canvassing as described at Wikipedia:Canvassing. Can you confirm that you thought this through, and that this will not bias the vote tally? Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:12, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the joe! As part of the message I'm sending, note that I'm saying there are over 260 proposals to review and vote for. The reason why I am asking to review a specific one is that the WikiProjects I'm notifying have used the Popular Pages bot, and it hasn't been working for them since last spring. I want them to know there's a proposal for reviving it. Also, per the survey instructions: "A reasonable amount of canvassing is acceptable. You've got an opportunity to sell your idea to as many people as you can reach. Feel free to reach out to other people in your project, WikiProject or user group." Best wishes. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 18:16, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Okay, everything seems in order then. Thanks for being mindful and doing announcements in the expected way. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:08, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) ( user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))

Did you manually add me to this list - because I don't have that userbox.... — xaosflux ^Talk 01:15, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

@ Xaosflux: Sorry about that. It got pulled in via User:Xaosflux/Infobox/Sandbox. I don't think there were many cases like this, but unfortunately, I didn't catch it. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 01:33, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Ah ok! I sent your MMS out then I saw it come to me and was worried! No worries, happy editing, — xaosflux ^Talk 01:39, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Stevie, have you stopped editing the Ali page for now? I should stop pinging you for any feedback pertaining to that page if that is the case. Soham321 ( talk) 17:42, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Only temporarily. I am putting a lot of time into the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey on meta right now. If I paid attention to all the Ali updates, I would be too distracted, unfortunately. I'll be back at some point. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 17:45, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

There are content disputes taking place at the Ali page so your expertise and experience are really required there. I also wanted some feedback on whether this is worthy of inclusion in the main Ali article, or if there should be a separate article about this content, or whether I should stop bothering with this content altogether: Ali. No need for immediate feedback on my new query though. Soham321 ( talk) 19:23, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Indian 500 and 1000 rupee note demonetisation. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello StefenTower,

Please help reduce the New Page backlog

This is our second request. The backlog is still growing. Your help is needed now - just a few minutes each day.

Getting the tools we need

ONLY TWO DAYS LEFT TO VOTE

• Improve the tools: Vote here.
• Reduce your review load: Vote here

---

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:55, 11 December 2016 (UTC) .

19:30, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jollof rice. Legobot ( talk) 04:24, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

20:33, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

It might interest you that the "Louisville Athletic Club" was once a college football opponent that nobody wanted to face. See e. g. 1894 Vanderbilt Commodores football team or 1895 College Football All-Southern Team. Cheers. Cake ( talk) 18:15, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

This isn't a big deal, but when an article has an established date format, please do not change it arbitrarily, as you did in this edit. See WP:DATERET. Per MOS:NUM, ISO 8601 is a perfectly legitimate format for dates in citations, and it should not be changed without discussion on the talk page. Some editors, such as me, prefer this format, and, yes, we get a little testy when people use scripts to change it without discussion. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 01:03, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Noted, although I don't think we should be going by personal preference, but instead by readability. This is the first complaint I have ever received on this kind of change, and the change I made was not arbitrary. It was an improvement for human readability. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 01:30, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:And you are lynching Negroes. Legobot ( talk) 04:25, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Re your revert of my addition of James B. Edwards to the List of people from the Louisville metropolitan area – OK, I see your point, but then why is Thomas Alva Edison in the list? He apparently spent a total of about one year in Louisville and was already an adult at the time. — BarrelProof ( talk) 21:20, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Probably because he left a mark here (see Thomas Edison House) and he came back to visit for the Southern Exposition. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:23, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Wishing you a Charlie Russell Christmas, StefenTower!

"Here's hoping that the worst end of your trail is behind you That Dad Time be your friend from here to the end And sickness nor sorrow don't find you." —C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1926. Montanabw (talk) 23 December 2016 (UTC)

-glove- ( talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Revised article, please reconsider speedy deletion. Meloaraujo ( talk) 01:14, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Article about Transkentucky Transportation Railroad was supplemented with new references. Merry Christmas... Meloaraujo ( talk) 20:37, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Just wanted to wish you a very merry Christmas and a very happy New Year. Soham321 ( talk) 21:23, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of earthquakes in 2016. Legobot ( talk) 04:25, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

I nominated these two files for deletion as I do not believe freedom of panorama can apply indoors. -- A Certain White Cat ^chi? 23:12, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Silicon Alley. Legobot ( talk) 04:25, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi. you may also want to see this: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Check_Wikipedia/Archive_8#AWB_fixes.2Fdetects_more_of_some_errors. Since November 2014 I keep record of all the new AWB fixes related to CHECKWIKI. 90% of them were done via my reports. In some cases I was the one who added the related piece of code with Rjwilmsi doing most fo the job ofcourse. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 18:42, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Here is a request for help: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Check_Wikipedia#More_errors_.2F_more_bots. There are many in other places. Trying to evaluate of what I did the last 6 years make me very uncomfortable. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 18:43, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

@ Magioladitis: thanks for the info/links. In these areas, I think it's best for you (or somebody directly involved with your work) to provide evidence of the process of your CHECKWIKI and AWB development, testing and bot execution work in terms of how they relate to the arb case. I am limiting my evidence to areas I have sufficient knowledge about. I'm trying to avoid areas I would have to do deep new research about, essentially to keep my evidence as authoritative as possible. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:58, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

This was just for your information. If someone wants to research the efforts I do they are free to do it. I use phabricator and keep track in WP:AWB/H too. I was not asked to provide evidence about my work on AWB anywhere. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 15:35, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

@ Magioladitis:, understood. However, one doesn't have to be asked to provide evidence to defend their practices, they usually just do it. :) If you think ArbCom needs more background in order to make a better decision, you have an opportunity to do so. If I were you, I wouldn't assume they understand it or will take it upon themselves to dig down deep. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 15:41, 6 January 2017 (UTC)