Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
![]() | 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. |
Thanks for your message. The reason I went for semi- rather than full-protection is that there has been a long-running series of edit-warring accounts editing on this and related articles, most (if not all) of which have now been blocked (see the logs at the bottom of the WP:ARBMAC page). The pattern of these users has often been to instantly return under a sock account or as an IP to continue their disruptive POV-pushing. I'm reluctant to full-protect an article whilst other established editors are actively working on it, but neither should those editors have to put up with endless disruption from new and/or anon accounts.
I can appreciate your concern that semi-protection could give one 'side' an advantage in an apparent content dispute, but I've become wary about treating articles under the ARBMAC provisions in the same way as I would elsewhere on Wikipedia. I think we sometimes do ourselves no favours by extending WP:AGF too far - on these articles, it seems that all too often POV pushing is mischaracterised as a 'content dispute', and thus we prolong the agony while every good-faith editor feels obliged to jump through all the dispute resolution hoops... all the while knowing nothing will be resolved because they're not dealing with someone capable of, or even interested in, working within Wikipedia policy.
My aim is to always do the minimum required to prevent disruption, so for me full protection is very much a last resort. Now that new/anon accounts are prevented from edit-warring on the article, I will be watching its other editors closely. These all know better, so I'm quite prepared to block should disruption continue, and I hope genuine talk-page discussion will ensue if there really are content issues that need examnining. I hope I've clarified the reasons for my decision, although if you're still unsatisfied you're very welcome to take your concerns up on WP:ANI, or to request a page protection review at WP:RFPP. All the best, EyeSerenetalk 15:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello... I'm currently having some trouble concerning the White Brazilians article, since a guy called Opinoso seems to believe being the owner of the article, and systematically reverts my edits... Would you be willing to take a look there and let me know what you think about it?
Thanks in advance,
Donadio (talk) 22:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for your words. I actually started 350 articles in one go and have gradually worked it down to 65 its very monotonous work trust me. I have deleted any which I believe weren't notable enough or couldn't be expanded. I promise I'll resume one sorting the others in due course. Its just it was a priority to get the articles red linked. Should take me few hours longer but give me till the end of Feb, things are tough at the mo but I will have that as a deadline, thanks for speaking to me and not prodding them, Regards Dr. Blofeld White cat 19:03, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
I knocked it down to 45. Will try to do a little every day and have it done in a few days. Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:08, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of High Culture | |
Thank you for your patience and courtesy -- and ability to communicate logically a fine point of interpretation to an inexpert assessor in an AfD process. You've single-handedly saved an article for Wikipedia that someone will find and use, someday. Accounting4Taste:talk 23:38, 24 February 2009 (UTC) |
Thanks for taking the time to gather proper evidence and filing a more extensive sock report on Brexx. I've been busy and came back to see the havoc he created this time and just filed a quickie report hoping that'd get him, but apparently not. So thank you very much for finally nabbing down this sock. Siawase (talk) 17:16, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi, you have recently posted on my talk page about the deletion of the article mentioned above. Please undo the deletion because the film's shooting schedules have been made up and is due for filming next month. Also I was going to include more info about its notability, however it had already been deleted before I could return to add more info. Please undo the deletion so I can give more info about the film. --Eelam StyleZ (talk) 23:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
The February 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm not completely satisfied with the article passing WP:NFF, but with production due to commence this month I was prepared to give it the benefit of the doubt. I wouldn't object to another AfD, though. The current article was written in the author's userspace and it's been moved across to mainspace prematurely, IMHO. PC78 (talk) 14:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for your courteous note. I think there's room for an exception, because the other redirect templates include a wikilinked term, which stands out in blue. This doesn't, and I thought the bold would make it more consistent, not less. More importantly, the bewildered reader wondering why he's arrived at British Standards instead of the Kitemark he searched for, is more likely to notice why he's been dumped in the article he finds himself reading... What do you think? --Dweller (talk) 09:49, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Re: Talk:Stroszek#Article_image. KellenT 09:54, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes, Countrywomangirl (talk · contribs) is Confirmed. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 22:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Alex, I am a bit confused as to why you changed the name of the Žižek! article. It was fine, and more accurate, the way it was before. I reverted the name change, and Zizek! now redirects to Žižek! What was your reasoning for moving the article? I apologize for undoing your modification, and will be happy to continue the discussion. --N-k, 20:25, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I reverted your change to the article, though not because I necessarily disagree. The "see also" section is designed for articles not linked in the article. With an article as short as this one, linking to two articles already linked in the main body is unnecessary. Finally, "see also" sections aren't a requirement. If you feel that those two articles are the only ones appropriate, just remove the section altogether. AniMatetalk 16:17, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Though it may not seem directly related to article approval, it could be seen as such as well. For example, it could be mentioned in the article as a similar example, since almost all factors are identical (seceding a part of country, made by a world power for its own use, without the country's agreement, without UN or similar organization approval, related to a war etc.). But never mind, if you think it can't stay, I won't argue about it. Thank you for your notification. Sincerely, --Дарко Максимовић (talk) 19:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Good to hear from you! What have you been up to? delldot ∇. 03:00, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
The March 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
I wrote the little comment in the John Malkovich article about his missing tv credit of 'Santa Bear'. As I am new to wiki and the internet, I dont know how to edit the actual article or the the filmography table. I am hoping someone with experiance will do it. I included a link from the tv production company to prove it. I actually have a copy of the tv cartoon film on videotape. It was lousy (I thought) but important to fans of each actor. I am a big fan of Nikola Tesla. I see you are from his native country, so I salute you!!! (although I am American)
http://www.michaelspornanimation.com/SourceFiles/Credits/Santabear/Santabear.htmlBobroberts248 (talk) 07:20, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
I note you recently posted a report on WP:ANI concerning User:Bosniak which didn't garner any attention. You may be interested to know that another report concerning User:Bosniak has been posted at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Bosniak (block requested for resumed personal attacks). —Psychonaut (talk) 15:08, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
I reversed your edit, because the introduction is a summary of information contained within the article, and ought to reflect the important information contained elswhere in the article. Because the status of St Peter's is often misunderstood, it is stated in the intro and explained further later in the article. Amandajm (talk) 07:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Template:911ct supporters has been nominated for deletion by Ice Cold Beer. As this TfD nomination includes objections to the same list of people that is currently in use in Template:911ct, I am inviting you to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. (I am sending this message to you as a current or former editor of Zeitgeist, the Movie, following the guideline on multiple messages.) Regards — Cs32en 21:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
The April 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:38, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Are you telling me that it is all beautifully sorted out and I don't need to bother to even look.... Good! it's been a tiring week....haven't had much time for wiki-ing! Amandajm (talk) 09:07, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
The May 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:17, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
With over 12,000 edits and eloquence like this, why haven't you gone for WP:RFA?--Aervanath (talk) 17:32, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
The June 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:20, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for sweeping up my edit error on WP:AN/I Andy Dingley (talk) 17:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Not sure what you meant here -- the opening ceremony of? SlimVirgin talk|contribs 13:41, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting. I have absolutely no idea what happened, perhaps I mistakenly edited an old version although I thought I checked for it. In any case, thanks for restoring the page, I will post my reply once again and see to it that the page looks correct this time. CheersJdeJ (talk) 14:12, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Big Bird,
Thank you for letting me know about the sock-puppet accusation made by cobaltblue. I will address it. My friend has helped me in writing this article and I think that may be where this is coming from.
Thank you,
Mfetzer3 (talk) 17:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
What do you think about Emailmetillicometou (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)? I'm a little suspicious because right after Brexx's latest sock, SOSOLAME (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) got blocked he appeared out of nowhere and started to make edits to Memoirs of an Imperfect Angel. I'm asking you because you seem to know more about Brexx than I do. MS (Talk|Contributions) 14:49, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
The July 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Looks like I owe you 1 month's Checkuser salary. PayPal OK? I assume they'll handle amounts of $0.00 (or, if you prefer, €0.00. Or £0.00.) --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:32, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
The August 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:33, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject: Did you know? 18:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, you may have already noticed but WikiProject Films are currently in the process of electing a number of project coordinators to serve over the next six months. Basically, the role of a coordinator is to help keep the project active and up to date, participate in relevant project discussions and wherever possible offer guidance and help to our other members. You already seem to be fairly active within the project and your mainspace contributions look fairly solid, so I think you would make a good candidate. You can find more info at the linked page above. I hope you consider putting your name forward! :) PC78 (talk) 11:35, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 20:51, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. Would you have time to please proofread this croatian article? The article is short and thus it won't take much time. Thanks very much. Amsaim (talk) 17:00, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm surprised ... it's been nearly four days without any signs of Brexx. Should I just be enjoying the break, or is there something I'm missing?—Kww(talk) 01:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
The September 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
The October 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. The newsletter includes details on the current membership roll call to readd your name from the inactive list to the active list. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:47, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
The November 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:11, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I'd rather not do so myself, as I'm not entirely certain of the connection based on the checkuser data, and I haven't looked at the behavioral evidence, which is going to have to be the deciding factor here. Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:26, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Big Bird. Thanks for your comment on the AfD. There may be some further trouble brewing on that page. First the author blanked your comment, then, after I had reverted him and issued a warning, he added his two bits' worth and just to make a point introduced a spelling error in your comment. A tad too ridiculous to merit a full warning, but the editor needs watching. Happy New Year! Favonian (talk) 10:30, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.