User:The ed17/Archives/43

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter[edit]

We are half way through the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; there is less than a month to go before we have our final 8. Our pool leaders are New Zealand Adabow (submissions) (Pool A, 189 points) and Russia PresN (submissions) (Pool B, 165 points). The number of points required to reach the next round is not clear at this time; there are some users who still do not have any recorded points. Please remember to update your submissions' pages promptly. In addition, congratulations to PresN, who scored the first featured topic points in the competition for his work on Thatgamecompany related articles. Most points this round generally have, so far, come from good articles, with only one featured article (White-bellied Sea Eagle, from Scotland Casliber (submissions)) and two featured lists (Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story, from PresN and Grammy Award for Best Native American Music Album, from Another Believer (submissions)). Points for Did You Know and good article reviews round out the scoring. No points have been awarded for In the News, good topics or featured pictures this round, and no points for featured sounds or portals have been awarded in the entire competition. On an unrelated note, preparation will be beginning soon for next year's WikiCup- watch this space!

There is little else to be said beyond the usual. Please list anything you need reviewing on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, so others following the WikiCup can help, and please do help if you can by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup- points are, of course, offered for reviews at GAC. Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 11:45, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 August 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:09, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of my userspace subpage[edit]

You are off my christmas card list. --Surturz (talk) 08:29, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Ed, can I ask you to reconsider this deletion? There was nothing in the page that could be construed as an attack, and it certainly doesn't fit the criteria at WP:G10. If you feel this userpage is inappropriate, I think an MfD would be the appropriate forum to seek deletion.  -- Lear's Fool 08:48, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, hardly an attack page though it could be seen as uncivil but deleting it as WP:G10 when it isn't and without any MfD is rather poor use of Admin tools. Bidgee (talk) 11:11, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
I do see where you two are coming from, but I respectfully disagree. From G10: "material intended purely to harass or intimidate a person" ; from WP:ATP: "exists primarily to disparage or threaten its subject" or "... keeping a 'list of enemies' or 'list of everything bad user:XXX did' on your user space is neither constructive nor appropriate." Using "attack page" in the summary was a poor choice of words, but even if there are no explicit attacks, gathering a list of Timeshift's perceived 'enemies' violates the spirit of both pages. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 11:44, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
There was nothing in the page that threatened, disparaged or harrassed anyone; it looks more like a simple list of administrators that Surturz has had dealings with. Orderinchaos (who was on the list) has been a vocal supporter of Timeshift through this whole affair. The G10 criterion doesn't cover this page, it should have been taken to an MfD instead.  -- Lear's Fool 13:30, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Huh? Orderinchaos was not on the page; it was Timotheus Canens, GW, and you. It was meant as a list of admins who had taken actions or made comments supportive of the deletion of his userpage. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:21, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Spare me the crocodile tears. All the deletion does is prove that admins are using their bit to silence dissent over Shifty's userpage. The previous MfD had no consensus, yet cons for delete was claimed by the closing admin. There was no cons for the DRV yet the deletion stood. If Ed was ignorant of the Diogenes reference and construed it as an attack, perhaps he should spend more time in article space. If I start a page intended to allow non-admins to keep admins honest, how is that harmful to the project? How are non-admins meant to build consensus to recall an admin if they are not allowed to keep userpages of grievances? In deleting my subpage, The_ed17 is encouraging off-WP politicking and sock/meatpuppetry. --Surturz (talk) 14:11, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
You're basing your entire premise on a perceived power relationship between admins and non-admins that just isn't there. If you need to 'keep an admin honest', bring it to a noticeboard. There's no need, nor benefit to the project, to keep a list around to use as a gavel. In addition, the MfD was brought to DRV, where the result was endorsed. Unfortunately for y'all, a majority in the community believes that the userpage was inappropriate, so you need to drop that stick and back away from the horse carcass. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:21, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
  1. I am re-creating the AdminWatch page. Unilateral non-WP:CONS admin deletes should be non-controversial. It clearly isn't from the posts above. Raise an MfD if you dare. (I inform you of this before re-creating the page as there is an instruction on the re-creation page to do so)
  2. User talk:Cunard threatens two users with re-nominations for deletion. Why not propose an MfD for his page while you are at it?
  3. There is indeed a power imbalance issue that concerns non-admins as per the perennial proposals Wikipedia:Perennial_proposals#Reconfirm_administrators and Wikipedia:Perennial_proposals#It_should_be_easier_to_remove_adminship. I would have thought your action in deleting my userspace subpage is evidence enough that admins are not accountable to non-admins.
  4. Majority vote is not consensus and a good admin would know that.
--Surturz (talk) 11:45, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
That kind of page is routinely deleted when they're nominated for deletion. I opposed the deletion of Timeshift's page and voted to overturn the MfD closure in the deletion review, but it's clear to me that all the admins acted in good faith. Setting up a list of 'bad' admins is pretty unhelpful: if you really think that they violated policies you should be putting your money where your mouth is by taking this up at WP:AN or WP:ANI. All this kind of thing does is generate drama. Nick-D (talk) 12:14, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
OK, will do. --Surturz (talk) 12:20, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Given that the deletion was endorsed in the DRV I don't like your odds of success, but if you think that it's a productive use of your time so be it. Regarding this, I don't think that you're familiar with the kind of scrutiny admins are under. Nick-D (talk) 12:29, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
There is a clear difference between an actual attack page, and a page created to help someone in maintaining accountability for those in power. Lèse majesté is a crime that hopefully we won't see arrive at Wikipedia. Between the extra leeway that we grant users in their own userspace, and the fact that merely recording the acts of those in power that a person finds questionable, this seems like something that would be if not exempted from the WP:ATTACK page, at least given a wide berth. And in this specific case, I see nothing rising to the level of an actual attack aka "disparage or threaten". Is there an admin that feels this is a threat? Or do they feel disparaged? If so, that might be something to discuss with Surturz, but as far as I can see, this page is unbelievably mild, and mainly consists of a few diffs. -- Avanu (talk) 14:36, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

There isn't nearly as big of a "power imbalance issue" when you remember that those are perennial proposals, i.e. they have been shot down many times by a consensus of community members. No, a majority vote is not consensus, but a majority opinion is (sorry for not being more clear). Like Nick says, administrators are under quite a lot of scrutiny, and I dare say many of our actions are reversed at ANI and other places. Your assertion of a power imbalance is quite wrong, I'm afraid. Avanu, you're not allowed to keep a list of enemies, period. You're allowed to have a page to gather evidence for an upcoming dispute resolution, and that's about it. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:55, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you turned that so personal in the last sentence, but I will make it clear again, that the WP:ATTACK and WP:UP#POLEMIC policies are primarily about Editorial actions, and not about Administrative actions (or at least they should not be). If admins believe that the policies prevent editors from commenting negatively about administrative actions, then we clearly have a Lèse majesté style policy in place, and it needs to be reviewed and amended. Most admins understand the difference between an Editoral action that puts them in a Conflict of Interest in a debate, versus a purely administrative action which does not, and it is the latter which should be open to critical speech. -- Avanu (talk) 23:52, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
You've misunderstood me. I'm perfectly fine with people criticizing specific admin actions, mine included; if I wasn't, we would have a rather large problem and I probably wouldn't be a sysop (generally criticizing all admins is different; we're a very diverse group, so we have widely differing views, motivations, and methods). What I won't stand for is a permanent page that is, in essence, a list of all admins who have taken any action contrary to a certain user's viewpoint. That isn't healthy from a community standpoint, and only serves to collect bad blood. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:38, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Oh, and a P.S.: everything before "Avanu" in my 18:55 post was meant at Surturz, not you. My apologies if there has been any misunderstanding. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:42, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I have made a complaint about you at WP:ANI[edit]

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Deletion_of_a_page_in_my_userspace_without_warning.2C_cause_or_consensus --Surturz (talk) 12:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Ed! You're famous! Surturz, deletion review is the way to go, but you'd be wasting your time. J Milburn (talk) 13:36, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Ed, I am required to inform you that I have also lodged a DRV: Wikipedia:Deletion_review#User:Surturz.2FAdminWatch.
J Milburn - funny, it is going better than I thought it would. --Surturz (talk) 14:54, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the notifications. The DRV is going towards overturn because of complaints over incorrect process; it'll be at MFD soon enough, after the community finishes the process involved with the DRV. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:57, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
In the spirit of WP:CONS, could you please read my suggested compromise at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2011_August_3#My_preferred_outcome_.28and_arbitrary_section_break.29 --Surturz (talk) 00:11, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Hello, The ed17. You have new messages at Drmies's talk page.
Message added 21:03, 7 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Drmies (talk) 21:03, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 August 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:32, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

An experiment and a question[edit]

As you were the one that started this whole shitstorm [1] (and if the list is a shitlist as you claim, what you started (in DRV and MFD) certainly qualifies as a shitstorm), I thought I would solicit your opinion on an experiment of mine. I'm not sure I have it all right, but I think I avoid COI and any apparent partiality by my methods. On a related note, since you CSD'd Surturz's page, how is that a shitlist but this not (auto generated by twinkle)?

Regards- Crazynas t 17:49, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't see any problem if you assume good faith and keep having ridiculously good conversations like this. I don't see what's wrong with the prod log? It's you keeping track of your own actions? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:50, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011[edit]

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 23:15, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

talkback[edit]

Hello, The ed17. You have new messages at WT:MIL.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- Dank (push to talk) 19:39, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

closing OA apps[edit]

Hi Ed!

Thanks for the reminder about the OA apps... I'd been meaning to get them closed the other week, and then it slipped my mind. Would you be willing to close them? I'd like to set the precedent of a volunteer-run acceptance process, since that's how it will need to be going forward. If you'd rather not, I'll wrangle someone else into it.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 14:13, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm fine with closing them as long as you don't think me !voting in them is a serious WP COI. :-) They don't seem terribly controversial, but I'd rather get your quick opinion first. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:39, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, no issues there. If it was a mixed response for someone, it might be better to have an univolved person close it, but if it's not controversial, no problem.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 13:13, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Alright, I'll go through and close them tomorrow. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:35, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

RfCs[edit]

Hi Ed. Would you be able to close any of the RfCs at WP:AN? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:08, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I've closed three of them and left a note on AN about the fourth. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:39, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for closing those RfCs. I agree with your note about the fourth one. For Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Proposal to require autoconfirmed status in order to create articles/Trial duration, would you include a link in your close to Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed article creation trial where users are planning the details of the trial? Thanks for your indefatigable work! Best, Cunard (talk) 06:42, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
That would probably be a rather good idea! Indefatigable -- good word, not a great ship. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:44, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
What a terrible name! An indefatigable ship that sinks? A blatant misnomer. Cunard (talk) 06:51, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Feel free to try to talk the Brits into changing their ship naming conventions! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:00, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

:Thanks[edit]

Thanks Macedoniarulez (talk) 06:33, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:39, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Sven Manguard and WikiProject Espionage.[edit]

The ed17,

I have no problems merging WikiProject Espionage into another one. That was my proposition in the first place then I decided to take it over and revive it. Then I had 10 overseas weeks and come back and thing's changed. I'm already known to Ian Rose, AustralianRupert in The WikiProject Military History. AustralianRupert has helped me in the past with articles and I've helped him. I started out doing the Z Special Unit and 6th Division (Australia) because my grandfather was with them, my other grandfather was with the 2/7th Armoured Regiment tanks, but went back to driving buses here for essential services. As you can see I've done alot of edits and I'm currently doing two updates on articles. I've tried my best to get things going on Wikipedia even though I don't have that much experience so I rely on more experienced people who know the coding of Wikipedia. I've tried to stay out of trouble and do the right thing and ask for advice where needed. Adamdaley (talk) 10:32, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good! Feel free to start a discussion on WT:MILHIST then. While I highly doubt this would be rejected, we still have to be sure that there is consensus at Milhist to merge! We'll take care of all the work needed to merge them. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:35, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors: Time to join pods[edit]

Hello! If you're planning to be an active Online Ambassador for the upcoming academic term, now is the time to join one or more pods. (A pod consists of the instructor, the Campus Ambassadors, and the Online Ambassadors for single class.) The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) explains the expectations for being part of a pod as an Online Ambassador. (The MOU for pods in Canada is essentially the same.) In short, the role of Online Ambassadors this term consists of:

  • Working closely with the instructor and Campus Ambassadors, providing advice and perspective as an experienced Wikipedian
  • Helping students who ask for it (or helping them to find the help they need)
  • Watching out for the class as a whole
  • Helping students to get community feedback on their work

This replaces the 1-on-1 mentoring role for Online Ambassadors that we had in previous terms; rather than being responsible for individual students (some of whom don't want or help or are unresponsive), Online Ambassadors will be there to help whichever students in their class(es) ask for help.

You can browse the upcoming courses here: United States; Canada. More are being added as new pods become active and create their course pages.

Once you've found a class that you want to work with—especially if you some interest or expertise in the topic area—you should sign the MOU listing for that class and get in touch with the instructor. We're hoping to have at least two Online Ambassadors per pod, and more for the larger classes.

If you're up for supporting any kind of class and would like me to assign you to a pod in need of more Online Ambassadors, just let me know.

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 16:37, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

PS: There are still a lot of student articles from the last term that haven't been rated. Please rate a few and update the list!

Talkback[edit]

Hello, The ed17. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/La goutte de pluie.
Message added 05:31, 20 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

OpenInfoForAll (talk) 05:31, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

GA in pl.wiki[edit]

Hello

I want thank you for your work on Amagi class battlecruiser, Japanese battleship Tosa. I translated them to pl.wiki and get GA. They are probably best source of information in Polish language.

Thanks for your work.

PMG (talk) 11:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 August 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:41, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Scott Lutrus[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 16:03, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks MS! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:27, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Featured Article promotion[edit]

Congratulations!
Thanks for all the work you did in making Brazilian battleship São Paulo a Featured Article! Your work is much appreciated. – Quadell (talk)
Thanks! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:27, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Earthquake?[edit]

If you felt yesterdays shaker go to: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/dyfi/events/se/082311a/us/index.html and follow the Did You Feel It? — Tell Us ! link. I'm downstate from you and it was noticeable here. People in Wisconsin reported shakes. Nice map here. Brad (talk) 20:31, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

You're a troll? Interesting, I had no idea. :-) I actually didn't feel anything – judging by your map, it looks like Marquette was just far enough away from it. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:02, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I thought you knew that already; yeah I'm a troll and have heard that word used for us down here. Go have a pasty. Brad (talk) 03:30, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
You may have mentioned it and I've forgotten. Are you jealous of our unique cuisine? I won't hold it against you, don't worry. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:36, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I like dem pasties but it's difficult to get good ones down here. A local grocery has frozen ones which are pretty good but not good enough. It's the whole turnip experience. Brad (talk) 23:46, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Heh, there are some really good fresh ones west of here (Lawry's) or in my hometown (Pasty Corner). Be jealous! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:54, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
(fellow troll talk page stalker) There are a couple of Eastern Star (Masonic women's affiliate) groups that make some pretty decent ones in the northern lower peninsula. They only make them during the summer, though, so you have to stock up to get you through the winter (I hate driving over the bridge in January...)... Dana boomer (talk) 02:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Then I guess Ed is bringing the food if there's ever a meet. Brad (talk) 22:40, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Oh dear. I didn't realize there were so many trolls among my wiki-friends (side note, that sounds weird to even type). Looks like we'll have to get a meet together so I can drag a cooler full of Yooperland's finest pasties to you both... Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 16:20, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassador[edit]

Hello and thanks for accepting my application to be an Online Ambassador. I noticed the mentoring system has been changed to include entire classes. Is it too late for me to become an OA for any of the Fall 2011 classes? Thanks! —Yk Yk Yk  talk ~ contrib 05:47, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Not at all, feel free to sign up for any of the open slots! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I'd like to help out with Political Scandals. Should I add my name to the list by myself? —Yk Yk Yk  talk ~ contrib 06:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Yes, exactly. Both there and on this page. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:08, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Reviews[edit]

Hi Ed, the book reviews for next month's Bugle are now good to go at: User:Nick-D/reviews Nick-D (talk) 01:40, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Nick, I'll add them in asap Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:28, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion#Rewrite of WP:BEFORE; what we really expect before nominating[edit]

Hi Ed. As an uninvolved administrator, would you formally close Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion#Rewrite of WP:BEFORE; what we really expect before nominating per the enacted changes so there is a record of the changes to WP:BEFORE. (Please also include a diff to the enacted changes and a link to the further discussion, something like "Discussion continues [[#BEFORE updated - what further improvements?|here]]." The diff is here.) See also the active discussion at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion#BEFORE updated - what further improvements?.

Also, if you could close any of the discussions listed at AN, I would be grateful.

List of discussions:

If you don't have the time or inclination though, please don't close any of the discussions. Thank you again for your hard work. Cunard (talk) 08:32, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cunard! You always try to make it so easy for me to close at least one; thanks. :-) With the changes already implemented, though, do we really need to do anything? Would delineating it further with {{discussion top}} really help? If you think so, I'll close it when I'm on next. I can't guarantee I'll look at the others, as I'm very short on time at the moment – I just got back to college, so it's been work and reconnecting with friends 24/7 plus gathering materials etc. for my classes, which are two days away. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:28, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
I try my best to make one thing easy for you, so that you won't be scared away by the rest. ;) I think a close of the WP:BEFORE discussion, though unnecessary, will be helpful in recording the evolution of the WP:BEFORE guideline.

Since you're busy with the start of college, don't worry about the RfC discussions. I hope the admins on AN will be willing to close them. By the way, I apologize for dragging you into this mess. The heat you've taken from some editors for your correct assessment of the consensus is unwarranted. That you are still willing to close RfCs I bring to your attention is a testament to either your insanity or your courage. I trust it's the latter but will not rule out the former. ;) Cunard (talk) 05:52, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I've taken heat for that close? I actually haven't noticed. I read the discussion right, but I misunderstood the implications; no matter what the consensus is, you can't remove a part that will make the remainder invalid or utterly contrary to numerous other cornerstone policies. Live and learn, I guess. I'll go close the BEFORE RfC now. ...and for the record, it's definitely insanity. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 16:11, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

"Subjects of commentary" RfC[edit]

Hi Ed, your RfC closure in July at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content (here) is simply being ignored. Can you help out? Discussion here. SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 21:45, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi SlimVirgin, if I remember right, it was ignored starting like three hours after my close, when I was reverted. ;-) ..although I will note that there were good points for reverting. I'm glad to see that a compromise wording is being hammered out on the talk page. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:28, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Babel now back on board[edit]

Hi Ed. You were very helpful about 10 days ago when my "Mark Satin" biography was going through an FAC review. Since then I have done nearly 100 mostly small edits on it, most of them suggested or inspired by my reviewers, and today I put it up for A-Class review at the Military History project. I hope you'll take a look at it. - Babel41 (talk) 04:49, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Hey Babel, I'm currently very short on time but please leave me another message if I haven't looked at it by Wednesday. Sorry! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:28, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Help?[edit]

uhhh, there is a user, named User:DeathToEnemies who keeps trying to frame me, is there anyway to report him. he changed his name to Macedoniarulez and tries to frame him, could you stop him?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macedoniarulez (talk • contribs) 04:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

What? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:55, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

RE: MRG opinion piece[edit]

The format and topic certainly look good (and thanks also to you for organising it). I haven't yet got the time to read it through in detail, but I will do that ahead of a scheduled publication in a week's time. How does that sound? Thanks, - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 07:01, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:10, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Large cruisers[edit]

Hey Ed, I think we talked about this before, and decided that they shouldn't, but in writing the pocket battleship articles, I'm wondering if they shouldn't be included with the large cruisers? Parsecboy (talk) 19:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I think it had something to do with how they were less than half the weight of the other ships? I don't remember either. If you think they should be included, feel free to add them. It's more a loose grouping of ships with similar purposes or capabilities rather than a scholarly-exact classification. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:26, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:The_ed17/Archives/43&oldid=1039367022"