Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hi Dan. You have email, if you could read and reply when possible it would be most appreciated. Thanks. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 11:07, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Wotsits-ReallyCheesy.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}
, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sir Armbrust Talk to me Contribs 16:35, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Another editor has been reverting my edits to the Myrtle Allen article, providing no explanation whatever, leaving a decidedly inferior version, replete with redundant text, cruft, misspellings, etc. If you check the diffs you will see my version is superior in every way: substantively, grammatically and syntactically; the last two probably due to the fact that English is not his first language.
More offensively, this editor has refused at least twice, to explain at all, despite my reaching out to him on his talk page, his reasoning or to try to delineate where he believes I am wrong or where it is simply a dispute between MOS styles. His reverts show he is not looking to improve the article but simply to revert wholesale my edits entirely. He may have an ownership problem with his articles, but, as you well know, no one owns an article on Wikipedia, regardless of how much hard work is put into editing.
I am leaving the article as is due to WP:3RR but I hope you can view the diffs and restore the superior version I crafted. Thanks. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 16:33, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I was unblocked on Wikipedia some time ago and use this IP address because I am not at my parents' house. I was wondering what the stance is on this page below, though. Since I was allowed back on and that page was full of trolling, it does not seem that relevant to me.
Will it be deleted?86.176.72.79 (talk) 22:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for leaving that note. Just getting back into work at SPI, and that was indeed a pretty stupid error. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 16:44, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Hey, Deskana! I saw that you were a bureaucrat/administrator here, so I was just wondering if you might be able to answer a question I had. The thing is, I'm an admin on a different wiki, and another admin on the same wiki posted a question to the rest of the admins asking if there was a URL that can be used to show any user their current number of edits on the wiki. On our wiki, there's a page called Special:Editcount that conveys that information (I don't think Wikipedia has a page like this though), so another admin advised him to use this URL: http://_________.com/Special:Editcount/Username. That URL would achieve the desired result, but one would have to constantly put the username of the specific user at the end of the URL when posting it on that user's talk page, so my goal was to come up with a way to avoid that; almost to create something you could post on any user's talk page without changing any part of it and still get the desired result. I came up with this: {{fullurl:Special:Editcount/{{BASEPAGENAME}}}}, this way, one could just post the coding on the talk page of the desired user and the returned URL would automatically direct the user to their respective edit count. This worked successfully for every other user whose talk page I tested the coding on (without saving the page, of course); the only problem is that the user he wanted to do this for has an "*" both at the beginning and the end of their username (the second asterisk isn't a problem, just the first), meaning that instead of being returned as:
http://_________.com/Special:Editcount/*User*
it gets returned as:
{{fullurl:Special:Editcount/
and doesn't take anyone anywhere, because it's just the raw coding. So I was just wondering if you knew of any way to circumvent this problem (aside from just telling him to post "http://_________.com/Special:Editcount/*User*" on the user's talk page, which isn't the end of the world, but is, of course, what I was trying to get around in the first place), maybe by putting some other form of coding that I'm not aware of somewhere in the existing coding or something. Any light you may be able to shed on this problem would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
69.204.38.3 (talk) 23:09, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
See . User:Scott MacDonald both initiated and re-opened the delete discussion after User:King of Hearts closed it per WP:SNOW. I did question whether this was appropriate ut he has replied that the allotted time had not expired and this wasn't an admin action. Do you think the action appropriate? Wee Curry Monster talk 12:03, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi Deskana, I'm writing to ask if you would consider unblocking CandaceDempsey (talk · contribs). She was blocked by you in June after posting on Talk:Murder of Meredith Kercher, and a checkuser found she was linked to GeniusApprentice (talk · contribs), who was also posting on that page. Both were indefblocked.
I don't know anything about the multiple-account issue, but if you look at Dempsey's edits (she made just eight edits to the talk page), she arrived here to defend herself (e.g. here) after another editor insulted her work as a journalist, dismissing her as a food blogger. In fact, she's a respected journalist who has written an excellent book about the murder. Perhaps she felt she had to sign in under her own name to defend herself; that would account for the use of a second account, if indeed GeniusApprentice was also hers.
The indefblock and the block notice on her user page may be damaging to her, particularly now that her book is being more widely read, so I was wondering whether the best thing would be to unblock and let the issue rest there. SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 17:56, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 03:02, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Regarding Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/99.146.23.208, there is a dynamic IP who was given a 24 hour block about 2 days ago for edit warring on several articles. The IP was adding plot summary information that didn't conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, but his edits were being reverted as vandalism. The IP seems to be a bit irritated, because one of the editors who reverted him, also violated the three revert rule and labeled the edits he/she made as vandalism. Today, he asked the admin why he didn't block the other editor, arguing that the issue was a content dispute. The IP changes every 6 or so hours, but it remains on the same IP range. The IP is making no attempt at hiding this fact, and has stated this several times. The editor filing the SPI report (mistakenly) believes that editing from a dynamic IP is socking. The IP isn't really doing anything blockable right now. I am working on explaining the neutral point of view policy to the IP. Hopefully this will help him/her avoid future problems. Best, Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 02:20, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Can I ask some questions about the SPI on User:Iqinn?
Thanks. I figure that the answers to my technical questions weren't intentionally secret, or obscure. I've written elsewhere about security through obscurity. I am not an expert on computer security, but I have read what real experts say about security through obscurity. They mock it. They think real security does not rely on keeping procedures private, but on using secure algorithms.
If that's true then answering questions about how SPIs work isn't a security risk. If you think its false please trust I asked these questions in good faith.
I think Iqinn devoted well over 1000 hours to wikihounding me, before this well deserved indefinite block. 90 percent of their 20,000 edits were to material I contributed, or about my contributions. I'd really hope to see an escalation in the sanctions against Iqinn, if it can be confrimed they are behind these two more recent fellows.
Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 04:20, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi, This user you just blocked returned immediately as User:Israelite2 to make the same edits. Can you please semi-protect Israelis for a period? Thanks. Zerotalk 10:05, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure what more I can say. There was sock-puppetry around the deleted article Oxford-Georgian Society and the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oxford-Georgian Society involving a number of editors with surprisingly similar interests and voices, and various identifications were made at the cases now in the archive Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/OxfordGeo/Archive. Now the disputed article has been recreated under a new name University of Oxford Georgian Society by another editor with surprisingly similar interests and voice. I have added users Biographyspot (talk · contribs) and Charlie P Ryan (talk · contribs) for comparison as having been involved in the sock-puppetry and vote-stacking results from those previous investigations. Someone, or some group, is very keen to get this article into WP, and to promote a fallacious notion of its history and importance. Cusop Dingle (talk) 21:40, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,
I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."
Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)
Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®is wishing you a Merry Christmas.
This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.
Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hi Deskana. Sorry to bother you with something that's not your concern but I need your expert advice. The situation with mass AfDs of school articles has gone critical and complex. Something needs to be done urgently, but I don't particularly wish for my talk page to become the venue for the inevitable dramafest, and we need to know where best to take it. You'll need to read this thread and this thread. Thanks in advance your advice. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:11, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Dear Deskana,
My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.
So a few things about the interviews:
Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.
If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.
Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.
Sincerely,
Karen Wynn (talk) 01:22, 27 February 2012 (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.