User talk:Courcelles/Archive 105

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 100 ← Archive 103 Archive 104 Archive 105 Archive 106 Archive 107 → Archive 110

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

Hi

I wonder if the César Cielo article is able to be elected as GA. I put everything I could find about him. Perhaps lacking either minimal detail yet, but I think the article would have condition to be GA. Just do not know about the English used in this article, if it is 100% correct, because my English is not perfect.Rauzaruku (talk) 17:37, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

  • I'll give it a through going over tonight, see what I think. Courcelles 18:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Or tomorrow, I'm just dead on my feet tonight. Courcelles 04:01, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #58

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

amphetamine semi-protection

Hi there. I really appreciate you semi-protecting the amphetamine page as I requested. However, can you let me know why it expires so soon? The vandalism issue is chronic. Thanks. Exercisephys (talk) 02:57, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Two weeks is actually on the long side for a page with no protection history at all (two days is more common, but this is indeed a longer-term problem) -- if it comes back, come tell me, and I'll slap it with a longer semi-prot. Courcelles 02:59, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Penyulap block

I happened to notice in the block log of this user that you had blocked them using {{checkuserblock}}, but because other parameters of the block got changed later, this went missing, and there was also no explanation of the block either through a {{sockpuppeteer}} tag or at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Penyulap. Please document these things a bit more in the future. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:44, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Remember the privacy policy, though. On-wiki documentation of CU-blocks is often sketchy because of it, even more so when IP socks re involved. Courcelles 16:07, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't see a point in not tagging the sockpuppetteer, when the sockpuppets were already tagged (Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Penyulap). No private information about the sockpuppetteer is revealed that way. Cf. WP:SPI/AI. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Tagging accounts is actually fairly controversial these days, with a good number of folks (myself included) thinking it is a useless shaming tactic. They never provide information the block log won't. Courcelles 19:40, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks much

Thank you for your AFD closure of BLT cocktail as Keep, much appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 17:17, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

  • No problem, good luck at GAN. Courcelles 17:52, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Thank you! — Cirt (talk) 00:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Sharapova Orthography

Why is this article different than other articles? I had been taught here to follow the direct link in all articles, and spell it according to how the subject spells their own name in English. That was long ago determined to be Ivanovic. Why the revert in this instance? This should have been fixed long ago by some auto-bot. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:08, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

  • No, it really shouldn't have; our article title is just wrong, (and non-broken redirects don't need fixing, WP:R2D), look though d:Q30758, enwp is very much the odd man out. Courcelles 21:17, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
So you personally determine what's right and wrong and go from there? That doesn't sound like the wikipedia way. And how other wiki's spell things has been told to me over and over... they don't matter. Otherwise we might be spelling it "Serena Williamsová" as some wiki's do. Ana herself spells it Ivanovic in English. I see we have users Colonies Chris and Jevansen with almost countless WP:R2D... did you revert them also? Or is it only because you don't see eye to eye with this one. That seems unfair to me. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

ndash script query

I see you fix a lot of pages with the GregU/dashes.js script. Do you ever run into pages that simply won't be fixed by it? I've run into some with plenty of – just sitting there, that this script won't change. I thought maybe you've seen some also and knew why. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:44, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

  • The script is ReGeX based on MOS:DASH, and if the particular situation you've run into doesn't fit into what the script is looking for, it is useless. (Also, for whatever reason, it doesn't quite get the errors when an endash is used where an em should be or vice versa, but those are rare). A free endash sitting alone, I'd imagine throws the script off, because there is no way for a simple ReGeX to figure out what the usage is, we have to evaluate that purely on human terms, as it could be anything. Courcelles 22:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2013

tagging SPI problems

The old thread got rotated out into the archive before I got around to replying, bother.

If you think the instructions should be changed, you should bring it up at the relevant talk page, Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Administrators instructions. I don't know offhand whether the block log is visible to non-admins, I always assumed it wasn't, so it made sense to make the administrative decision clear and explicit to everyone, from a technical standpoint. I can see how it could be used for shaming, but I don't really see the concern with indefinite blocks. If a user did something so bad to get themselves indefinitely blocked, any additional amount of shame by a tag pales in comparison. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

  • The block log is visible to everyone, non-admins, even non-logged in users. (Eve the pink bar on a blocked user's contributions page appears to everyone) Your link to the SPI page is an instruction page by the Checkusers to the clerks, and covers how to organise SPI, not the language about "unless otherwise directed to" in the tagging, clearly indicating tagging is at discrestion of the checkuser in a case.) Courcelles 15:40, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
I agree your reading of the instructions is more accurate, yes - if you removed |checked=yes from the tag, I'd have no problem with that because you're the source of that information in the first place. If you were to remove the whole tag, OTOH, I wouldn't quite see the point. The user has posted a prominent notice (complaining) about the block on top of their User talk page anyway. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 09:53, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
And I left a not on teir talk page when blocking. I don't know what tag was there, I use them so rarely (asically never) that I haven't even learned the syntax of them, what sybntax ad what tag should I have remoed checked=yes from, in your opinion? Whatever tag there might be , I really have no interest in changing or messing with, feel free to do whatever you like with them. Courcelles 18:11, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

2010 Serbia earthquake: Difference between revisions

Hi there. You gave, I think, some guidance on pipelinks to tennis editors before? Or at least you'd know what WP TENNIS guideline was. I'm not quite sure what is going on here, but given that that is not remotely a WP Tennis page, this is a Serbian citizen donating school supplies to earthquake victims, this seems rather insensitive. If it doesn't have WP Tennis backing I'd like to revert it. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:27, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I have no idea why he did that, but, really, I pay little attention to the WP:TENNIS project, and in this case, you should pay none at all. Courcelles 14:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #59

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Events/Press
    • Linked Data in Business
    • currently: Hackathon in Amsterdam
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
  • Did you know?
    • Newest properties: catalog code (P528), runway (P529), diplomatic relation (P530), diplomatic mission sent (P531), diplomatic mission sent (P531), port of registry (P532), target (P533), streak color (P534), Find a Grave (P535), ATP id (P536), twinning (P537), fracturing (P538), Museofile (P539)
    • Newest task forces: Ship task force
    • d:Template:Constraint:Item allows to check if items using a given property also have other properties. To find items to fix, it links to one of Magnus' tools and to a daily report. Sample: items with property mother should also have main type (GND) with value person.
  • Development
    • A lot of discussions and hacking at the MediaWiki hackathon on Amsterdam
    • Worked on content negotiation for the RDF export
    • Bugfixing for editing of time datatype
    • Added validation in the api for claim guids. This also resolves bug 48473, an exception being thrown in production, whenever a bot or api user requested a claim with an invalid claim guid
    • Improved error message popup bubbles to show HTML and parse the links correctly
    • Fixed bug 48679, to hide the view source tab for item and property pages
    • Testing on Diff extension and SQLstore
  • Open Tasks for You

An article you deleted has been recreated

Could you look at Philip Mizer / Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip Mizer? I was about to prod it due to lack of notability - again. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

  • If it were tagged G4, I would delete it in a heartbeat, though I'd rather it just be tagged and deleted by another admin since I closed the underlying AFD. The differences in real terms are nonexistent, though this version is slightly longer. Courcelles 06:23, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Thirteen links

says Limited Edition (The Concretes EP) is notable. Please restore it to User:Launchballer/Limited Edition (The Concretes EP). Thank you.--Launchballer 15:51, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

I suspect you are wrong regarding notablity, but as a contested PROD, it can just be restored in place, done. Courcelles 17:08, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Unbelievable - I can't find a single reference for it! Let me have a go with Lipstick Edition.--Launchballer 20:32, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Restored, have fun. Courcelles 20:59, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Move request

Hey. Could you move User:JuneGloom07/Pilot to Pilot (Body of Proof) for me? I was supposed to be working on it with another editor, but they haven't been around for a while. I've finished it off best I can and think it's time it was moved, so maybe someone else can add to it. - JuneGloom Talk 00:41, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! - JuneGloom Talk 16:50, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 May 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #60

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

HarveyCarter

Thanks for taking action on this. RashersTierney (talk) 00:27, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 June 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #61

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre

Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed over 15 Good article nominations and are not part of WikiProject Good articles (the first message I sent out went to only WikiProject members).

So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers:

  • Recruiters: The main task of a recruiter is to teach users that have never reviewed a Good article nomination how to review one. To become a recruiter, all you have to do is meet this criteria. If we don't get at least 5-10 recruiters to start off with (at the time this message was sent out, 2 recruiters have volunteered), the Recruitment Centre will not open. If interested, make sure you meet the criteria, read the process and add your name to the list of recruiters. (One of the great things about being a recruiter is that there is no set requirement of what must be taught and when. Instead, all the content found in the process section is a guideline of the main points that should be addressed during a recruitment session...you can also take an entire different approach if you wish!) If you think you will not have the time to recruit any users at this time but are still interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters but just fill in the "Status" parameter with "Not Available".
  • Co-Director: The current Director for the centre is me (Dom497). Another user that would be willing to help with some of the tasks would be helpful. Tasks include making sure recruiters are doing what they should be (teaching!), making sure all recruitments are archived correctly, updating pages as needed, answering any questions, and distributing the feedback form. If interested, please contact me (Dom497).
  • Nominators, please read this: If you are not interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still help. In some cases a nominator may have an issue with an "inexperienced" editor (the recruitee) reviewing one of their nominations. To minimize the chances of this happening, if you are fine with a recruitee reviewing one of your nominations under the supervision of the recruiter, please add your name to the list at the bottom of this page. By adding your name to this list, chances are that your nomination will be reviewed more quickly as the recruitee will be asked to choose a nomination from the list of nominators that are OK with them reviewing the article.

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along.

A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.--Dom497 (talk)

This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 15:00, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 June 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #62

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

ARBMAC

He should be blocked again, but POV agenda without any reason or idea. Nothere.

Croq (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

All best, Courcelles. --WhiteWriterspeaks 20:38, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #62

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

WikiProject AFC needs your help... again

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from July 1st, 2013 – July 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script is released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code cleanup, and more page cleanups. If you want to see a full list of changes, go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Helper script/Development page. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks.

Delivered at 13:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC) by EdwardsBot (talk), on behalf of WikiProject AFC

ARBMAC

He should be blocked again, but POV agenda without any reason or idea. Nothere.

Croq (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

All best, Courcelles. --WhiteWriterspeaks 20:38, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll take a look at this in the morning. Courcelles 04:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
  • He's subject to a 1RR per 24 hours, which he seems to be observing. Anymore problems should be filed at WP:AE, because I'm not seeing anything block-worthy; though he could stand to find the talk page a bit more. Courcelles 04:14, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Gun Control

You recently unprotected the Gun Control article, which was locked due to an edit war. While there is not any actual warring going on at the moment (only a sprinkling of reverts) the core issues are being hotly debated once more. could you perhaps drop by and give some guidance? Gaijin42 (talk) 16:31, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

  • My inclinations are that WP:DRN would be a good place to take this -- I am going to be on VERY limited activity from tomorrow morning until 2 July. Courcelles 03:54, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

tennis biography

is the issue here that dashes are used instead of endashes? if so, it could be fixed with {{replace}} to swap the dashes for endashes. Frietjes (talk) 21:50, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

No, it is broader. Per the RFC on Wikidata usage, the wikidata use in template code may ONLY be used if there is nothing in the field in the actual article; if there is a value in the article's use of the template, the template must suppress the Wikidata call, and that code does not. Courcelles 00:16, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
so there is no dash issue? I will reinstate the edit with the logic flipped. Frietjes (talk) 15:54, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
No, there IS a dash issue, and there will be, until Wikidata figures something out. It is putting hyphens, which are on WD, rather than endashes. The other problem is in addition to the dashes. (Interestingly, WD's issues are a little harder to fix than you might think; where we use endashes, dewp uses colons...) Courcelles 18:49, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
seems to be partially addressed here, but clearly it would be good to have a uniform format on wikidata, so that it can be uniformly parsed. Frietjes (talk) 19:20, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 June 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #63

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Discussions
  • Events/Press
  • Did you know?
    • Newest properties: E number (P628), edition of (P629), Paris city digital code (P630), structural engineer (P631), cultural properties of Belarus reference number (P632), Répertoire du patrimoine culturel du Québec identifier (P633), captain (P634), ISTAT ID (P635), route of administration (P636), Protein ID (P637), PDB ID (P638), RNA ID (P639), Léonore ID (P640), sport (P641), of (P642), Genloc Chr (P643), Genloc Start (P644), Genloc End (P645), Freebase identifier (P646), drafted by (P647), Open Library identifier (P648), NRHP (P649), RKDartists (P650), BPN (P651), UNII (P652), PubMed Health (P653), direction relative to location (P654)
  • Development
    • Worked on site-link group editing to make it possible to link to sisterprojects
    • Further work on input validation
    • Further work on handling invalid data gracefully
    • Use Serializers for generating API results
    • Finished selenium tests for TimeUI and CoordinateUI
    • Changed globe coordinate value input to use backend coordinate parser
    • Fixed issues with data type definitions not being available in the frontend
    • Wrote a little hack so that on statements with a long list of values you will always be able to see the name of the property of the current section you are in (since the label moves when scrolling the page)
  • Open Tasks for You

The Signpost: 26 June 2013

Parting thoughts on Jmh649 RFAR

This is getting posted on every arb's talk page and I will courtesy notify Doc J. I am appalled at how low the standards of wiki admin behavior have sunk. We've seen admins lose their bit for nothing more than one wheel war and yet here we have multiple instances of involved protections, edit wars, hounding new users, involved blocks, etc, and absolutely nothing gets done about it. Why? So Doc J can "adjust"? What about all his victims? What do they get?--diddly squat, just like in the real world. I actually truly hope Doc J can change, but that is not what wiki history teaches us. Wiki history teaches us he will lay low until the heat dies down then steadily go back to his old ways and he'll be back at RFAR within 6-30 months from now. Just like the arb case from my day when a drafting arb came within a hair of posting sanctions on Willbeback but didn't and what happened? Will kept going on in the same old fashion and two years and countless victims later, Will loses his bit and gets banned. And Doc J gets to use a secret mentor? He'd only not disclose that person if he felt the community would not accept the mentor, such as the mentor wasn't neutral or some such reason. By not taking this case and not issuing any guidelines or admonishments, especially with several extremely weak comments by the arbs (ie, how can some of you see nothing wrong in his behavior) all AC did here was send a clear signal to admins that there are no more admin standards of behavior and admins can do whatever they want and get away with it scott free. This juxtaposed with those who lost their bit for one wheel war also shows there is no consistency at all in AC's rulings on admins. At a minimum AC should have issued a statement on unacceptable behavior rather than turning a blind eye to the RFAR. This is an unacceptable precedent for which the community and AC will pay for many times over in the future. The UN can do a better job of fixing things than wiki and AC can, and that's really sad. This is a classic case of how those committing harmful acts rationalize their behavior and others rationalize excuses on their behalf. See you at "RFAR/Jmh649 2".PumpkinSky talk 22:01, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

TemplateData is here

Hey Courcelles

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:12, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #64

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snapshot (file format)

Why did you unilaterally decide to create a redirect? Claiming that the redirect is plausible is insufficient reasoning when the very nomination stated otherwise! Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 02:30, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Dupe articles are rarely deleted, in case anything is merged, or there are links out there that shoukd not cease to work. --Courcelles 02:45, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
You're not addressing the point - the redirect is implausible because it uses parentheses. (As for links, there are very few, and even of those, none are from articles. Your point about merging is invalid in this case since you deleted the article before creating the redirect.) Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 18:16, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
The history should not have been deleted, and has been restored. Dupe articles are almost always created because someone can't find the topic they were looking for, so keeping redirects where a duplicate article had been since 2007 is really such an obvious thing to do that I can't come up with a single reason not to, remember that links exist throughout the internet, not just internally on enwp. Courcelles 04:36, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 July 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #65

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

GAR

Good article reassessment for Laura Robson

Laura Robson has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 00:28, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Article recreation request

Hi, I have a request: Three years ago, you deleted an article for Reach Records. I've been working on a new version of a Reach Records article that is actually sourced, but when I tried to move it to mainspace, I found that Reach Records is under creation protection. Are you able to undo that protection? Could you also review the new version to make sure it is notable enough to avoid deletion again? Thanks, --¿3family6 contribs 01:47, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't G4 your draft, though I am rather unsure about how truly independent some of your sources are. (Music is not my field) I've unsalted the page, and you should have no problems moving it over, but I won't make any predictions about a third AFD. Courcelles 02:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Okay, thank you. I might try to dig up some more coverage before moving to mainspace.--¿3family6 contribs 02:16, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 July 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #66

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

Arbcom Infoboxes

I see you have asked for "a list of the "actual" parties". I've provided a list of music-related infobox discussions at Arbcom, from which names can be extracted, but about half the action has probably been on non-musical pages. If the case is going to proceed — and I'm not at all sure it will achieve anything — then I think a number of WikiProjects should be informed including Architecture, Visual arts. Regards. --Kleinzach 02:39, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Telling a WikiProject can be a good way of letting a broad range of interested editors that something is happening -- and I don't want to discourage such notifications. An Arbitration case, however, needs a clear list of the individuals involved, especially those whose conduct would come under scrutiny as the proposed case progresses through the usual stages. Courcelles 07:00, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Chile

Hi Courcelles! I'm writing you as you are the protecting admin of the Chile article. It has been semi-protected for over two years now, and the editing activity is low (only about 100 edits in 2013 so far), so it shouldn't require this level of protection any longer.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 00:17, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough, let's see what happens on PC1. Courcelles 06:52, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Sock checking please :)

Hello Courcelles

How are you?

Looking for your assistance please :)

Could you check and see if User:Tinamckintyre23 and User:Sheep 2009 are socks of each other? Sheep was banned for making strange userpage edits and Tina has been making threats on User:AnemoneProjectors talk page. I did actually wonder if she was a sock of User:Trueman31 because they have a vendetta against AP but myself and another editor are now wondering if it's actually Sheep? Is there any way you could run a quick CU check please?

Hope you're well :)--5 albert square (talk) 22:25, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

If Sheep 2009 is the suspect, then a CU is going to be rather useless, that SPI is over a year old, and CU data is only available for edits made for the last ninety days. (And I'm not familiar enough with either sockmaster to try and gauge behaviour, really. At least not when it is nearing midnight!) Courcelles 03:00, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Just wanted to add that I highly suspect 94.2.117.205 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 94.2.153.116 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) of being Tinamckintyre23 (talk · contribs). They are making some highly disruptive edits. –anemoneprojectors– 08:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 July 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #67

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

Userification request

Hi Courcelles :) I've been looking through some archives at deleted articles, and I believe Alexey Chuklin, which you deleted after an AfD discussion, is now notable enough for an article. As a result, could you restore the article into my user area? That way, we keep together the page history, and I (possibly) have to spend less time redoing the article. Thanks in advance :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 08:48, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I've fairly loathe to userify BLP's, so, I'll ask. Why do you think he is more notable now than he was in 2011? Courcelles 13:15, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
  • In 2011, he had only ever competed at the Formula Renault, which is rarely sufficient for notability, and had only been around for a season. At the moment, he is competing in the European F3 Open, which is a continental series, not a national one, and I believe that series is enough for notability. A source for him being in the F3 Open. If I have to rewrite this from scratch, then I will, but this way, we'd keep together the history and save me a little bit of effort (possibly; not knowing the state of the article, I can't tell how much needs rewriting) :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:34, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I've left it at User:Lukeno94/Alexey Chuklin hidden from search engines. Please either work on it or U1 it in a timely fashion, as it is not an example of great BLP sourcing as it stands. Courcelles 00:24, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Well, the sourcing is sufficient to avoid being a major BLP violation, but I'm certainly not going to leave it there indefinitely without working on it! :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 08:05, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 July 2013

Ding dong

...you've got mail :)--Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 21:38, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #68

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

Template:Convert/L/s impgal/min

could you reduce the protection on this template? it is currently broken and I would like to fix it. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 16:31, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Tea Party movement case

I received a notice from Callanecc today that there was a proposed motion on an ARBCOM case that affected me.[1] Penwhale notified me of the case 16 July.[2] I did not reply because no comments were made about me. AGK, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs and Silk Tork have voted to ban me. Could you please explain why I am part of this case. TFD (talk) 05:14, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

  • The arb to ask is NuclearWarfare, as he made the request of the clerks. I don't know why this was done, but he should be able to explain. Courcelles 18:03, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Hi TFD. I asked the clerks to add you because I saw your name quite extensively through the archives and was considering writing a finding of fact about you. It was mostly after seeing your posts in the section that MastCell had started (now in Archive 23). I hadn't really formulated it too well at that point, and the FoF wouldn't have been that critical. I don't know how I will vote on this motion. My original plan was to support, but I also suggested dismissing the case on the mailing list. I'll continue to think about it. I don't think a topic ban for you would be deserved or wise, but I also think that an exception for any of the currently named parties will only lead to more contentiousness. I'll try to come up with a plan of action soon. NW (Talk) 18:18, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Mastcell's 17 June discussion thread, Silk Tork's 11 April moderated discussion[3] and A Quest for Knowledge's 9 April RfC[4] were set up after the arbitration began 6 March. Prior to that I had not posted to the talk page or commented for 4 months.
It seems arbitrary to attach some parties but not others who did not partipate in the actions that came to arbitration, were not commented upon in the inquiry, were only added after the case was over, and only invited to comment on the judgment once three arbitrators had already made their decisions. While I understand the point that the sole purpose of the decision is to allow the article to improve, I do not think that this approach encourages other editors to participate.
TFD (talk) 19:53, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
It seems quite clear that TFD has nailed it. †TE†Talk 03:54, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK

Hi, feel free to elaborate on your !vote in the General Discussion section below Thanks for contributing.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 17:38, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Cartomizer

I was going to add a redirect page at Cartomizer to point to Electronic cigarette#Cartomizer, but I noticed that the page had been previously deleted by yourself apx. 2011-09-03. Before I created a redirect page, I thought that I probably should ask your thoughts on this first.

Side-note: Is there a way to look at the discussion that lead up to an article deletion; a way to look at the old Talk page? If there is, I would likely find that helpful in the future in understanding a page deletion. With Cartomizer, I'm assuming it was deleted because of lack of unique content (which I would have expected even before noting that it had been previously deleted, thus my original thought of just redirecting to the e-cig subsection).

Anyway, thanks for any feedback. — al-Shimoni (talk) 04:16, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to create the redirect. If there was a discussion, it would have been linke din the deletion summary, however this was a WP:PROD which means it was deleted after seven days of a tag staying on the article without objection to deletion. Talk:Cartomizer has never existed, though per the G8 criteria for speedy deletion talk pages are always deleted with their articles. Courcelles 14:42, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #69

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 16:07, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Are you new

To SPI? Could you give any more away? Sheesh, Darkness Shines (talk) 19:56, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, I suspect the problem is actually some form of meatpuppetry or off-site coordination here, not socking. The details just don't quite jive with actual socking. Courcelles 22:25, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Ephren Taylor

Hi there,

I see that you deleted the article "Ephren Taylor" on August 6, 2011. (Redacted) I'm wondering he's re-gained notability.

Thanks. Richard Apple (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

  • )redacted the exact things, per WP:BLP.) WP:CRIME is a fairly high standard, and that doesn't seem sufficient. That said, it is a PROD, so feel free to try, but the old version is an unsourced BLP nightmare. Courcelles 22:10, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Natalie Gulbis

Hi, thanks to take of the Nat Gulbis' page. I take care of the French page.

Best, DontWantYourMoney (talk) 11:45, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

thanks

For understanding what one of the real issues is with the "motion" -- which is more worthy of Henry VIII than any I have seen in aeons. <g> Collect (talk) 15:22, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for that. Malke 2010 (talk) 02:51, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
This motion sets a horrid precedent, but, by my math, it has carried. Courcelles 13:11, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Amir Ali concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Amir Ali, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 18:10, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Yu-Gi-Oh!

Hello there. I've noticed that it's been about three years since you indefinitely semi-protected the article Yu-Gi-Oh! Since it's been about three years, is it likely that the level of editing would have gone down? And if so, would it be a good idea to, at least as an experiment, downgrade it to pending changes protection? After all, the page currently has a big Refimprove tag at the top, and while there could be IPs that will vandalize the article, there are also IPs who are willing to make constructive edits. Note that I'm not asking you to downgrade the protection (yet), I'm just asking if downgrading the protection would be a good idea. After all, if PP doesn't work, you can always reprotect the article. Thank you and happy editing.

P.S. I've also noticed that you have semi-protected your talk page. Would it be alright if you created a subpage of your talk page for IPs so that anonymous users can also leave you messages? Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:34, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

  • I'd, quite literally, never unprotect that article. The level of vandalism that similar articles attract is quite high, despite their lower profile culturally. (Unprotected talk pages work in cases where the semi is due to random vandalism. Mine is protected due to a multi-year harassment by a certain sockmaster; I'm sure the abuse would just land over there if it existed.) Courcelles 13:19, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #70

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 14:20, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 August 2013

Question from Violinlover777

Dear Courcelles

Hi How are you? I am Yoojin Jung( violinlover777)

Few days ago, I added some writing on Yuna Kim's page, it deleted. I am wondering what can i do for this. Writing on Wikipedia is very new for me, could you please give me some help? I go to Berklee college of Music, this is a part of a project. Thank you.

Yoojin Jung.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Violinlover777/sandbox#Yuna_Kim.27s_choice_of_Music — Preceding unsigned comment added by Violinlover777 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

  • If you look in the section of that article called "Programs", most of what you tried to add is already there, properly put into tables and mostly properly sourced. Your additions were not sourced; against our policy on verifiability, and quite honestly, a good deal of your prose looks like original research. Courcelles 19:09, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #71

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Events/Press/Blogs
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
    • Wikivoyage is scheduled to get access to Wikidata data (aka phase 2) on August 26th.
    • Listen to and watch beautiful Wikidata edits
    • To support the inclusion of geographical coordinates in Wikidata, just about two months a new data type came available and d:Property:P625 "coordinate location" was created. Already 565,000 pairs of coordinates are now available on WikiData. Compare this to 870,000 coordinates on English Wikipedia or 1,500,000 items with d:Property:P17 "country", likely to have coordinates. Have a look at them on a map.
  • Did you know?
    • Newest properties: approved by (P790), ISIL ID (P791), chapter (P792), Key event (P793), as (P794), distance along (P795), geo datum (P796), executing authority (P797), mission design series designation (P798), air ministry specification (P799), work (P800), notable work (P801), student (P802), professorship (P803), GNIS Antarctica ID (P804), subject of (P805). Italian cadastre code (P806) In Addition new properties to describe mushrooms were created: hymenium type (P783), mushroom cap shape (P784), hymenium attachment (P785), stipe character (P786), spore print color (P787), mushroom ecological type (P789), edibility (P789). These will allow to build the data for a mushroom infobox (as w:Template:Mycomorphbox).
    • Newest task forces: Physics task force
    • Wikidata helped remove 240,000,000 language links from Wikipedia's wiki text.
  • Development
    • Want to get an overview of what Pragun, our Google Summer of Code student working on Wikidata for mobile, is doing? Check here
    • Worked on simple special page to make a query (bugzilla:52385)
    • Worked on ability to move qualifiers
    • Started improving API and Special Page tests
    • Fixed links to Special:SetSiteLink in non-JavaScript interface (bugzilla:51914)
    • ChangeOps, custom summaries and autocomments for SetStatementRank API module
    • Fixed displaying “0” as label/description in autocomments
    • Some minor fixes for rare crashes of editing UI
    • Worked on moving Selenium tests to Cucumber
  • Open Tasks for You
    • See if you can connect some of these Wikivoyage pages to their item on Wikidata.
    • Check if some of the items on this and this list can be merged. But be careful to only merge if they are really about the same topic! Help about merging is at d:Help:Merge.
    • Update, expand and translate d:Wikidata:Introduction to make it easier for newcomers to understand what Wikidata is all about.
    • Hack on one of these.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 22:42, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Malaysia

Hi Courcelles, you changed the protection status of the Malaysia article two years ago, and it has been continuously semi-protected since then. Perhaps it's time to try unprotection, or pending changes.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 18:53, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

  • This is more User:Mkativerata's decision than mine, he did the indef-semi. That said, he doesn't appear to be active (or have the sysop bit) anymore, so I guess there's no harm in giving PC1 a try, given I can't find why this was ever put on indef semi to begin with. Courcelles 01:44, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Proposed decision

Hello Courcelles, would you please read through my post here. Thanks. Malke 2010 (talk) 17:08, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

  • I've read it, and made one minor copy-edit to the relevant FoF. Remedies related to you are the last thing I need to vote on, and, to be perfectly honest, I need to go through the evidence one more time before figuring those out. Courcelles 01:39, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I saw that correction. And I appreciate your reviewing the evidence again. I've added a bit to my rebuttal on the PD talk page if you'd care to scan it through again. Thanks. Malke 2010 (talk) 20:39, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Your votes at TPm case regarding me, Ubikwit

In light of your above comments to Malke, I'm curious as to how you were able to vote on remedies pertaining to my purported transgressions, especially considering the immense difference in time lag between the posting of FOF pertaining to Malke vs those pertaining to me, and moreover, the fact that the FOF pertaining to me, insofar as I've been able to examine them, have proven to be misbegotten and ill-conceived.
How do account for the apparent gross disparity and discrepancy in your actions taken in the capacity of Arbitrator?--Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 19:30, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Most of AGK's newer FoF's were written several days before they were published on-wiki, on the internal arbwiki. A few of us, myself included, reviewed them before they were posted. Courcelles 05:27, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #72

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Discussions
  • Events/Press/Blogs
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
    • Average edits per page is nearly 5 now.
    • Wikivoyage is still scheduled to get access to data on Wikidata (aka phase 2) on August 26.
    • Developers are working hard to also make the URL datatype available by August 26 but there are factors that are not in their hands so it might have to be delayed until the next deployment in 2 weeks. URL as a datatype will soon be available on test.wikidata.org. Please give it some thorough testing and report bugs.
    • Outsch! (Help collect and fix paper cuts.)
  • Did you know?
    • 20 undescribed monsters
    • Newest properties: separated from (P807), code Bien de Interés Cultural (P808), WPDA id (P809), academic minor (P811), academic major (P812), date retrieved (P813), IUCN protected areas category (P814), ITIS TSN (P815), decays to (P816), decay mode (P817)
  • Development
    • Prepared deployment of phase 2 on Wikivoyage
    • Worked on ability to sort qualifiers and references inside a statement
    • Started work on an api module to merge items
    • Worked on special page to query for items with one specific property and value
    • Cleaned up code for handling recent change entries from Wikidata in the clients (Wikipedia/Wikivoyage)
    • Worked on generic script for populating sites table and better integration with WMF process for creating new wikis
    • Setup new git repo for WikibaseMobile skin and extension
    • Fixed SetClaim api module to properly mark bot edits in recent changes and advised pywikipedia maintainers about adding support for the module. SetClaim can be used to create claims with references in a single edit.
    • Reviewed code for Google Summer of Code students
    • Updated doxygen documentation
  • Open Tasks for You
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 21:28, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 August 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #73

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Discussions
  • Events/Press/Blogs
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
  • Did you know?
    • Newest properties: interchange station (P833), public holiday (P832), parent club (P831), Encyclopedia of Life (P830), OEIS ID (P829), possible causes (P828), BBC programme identifier (P827), tonality (P826), dedicated to (P825), Meteoritical Bulletin Database ID (P824)
    • Newest task forces: Wikidata:País Valencià task force
  • Development
    • Work on allowing API module editentities to edit claims
    • Work on entity / item redirects
    • Work on support for moving qualifiers in API and Frontend
    • Adding coordinates to diff display and improving diff display code
    • Allowing site groups for language links on clients to be configurable (needed for commons)
    • EntityId changes, we are now working on 0.5!
    • Show snaktype in summary for novalue and somevalue snaks
    • Further work on merge module for the API
    • Wrote missing tests for various jQuery widgets
    • Work on value formatters
    • Continue on moving tests to cucumber
    • Bug fixes for coordinates following the latest deployment
  • Open Tasks for You
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 13:08, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 August 2013

County Road 335 (Levy County, Florida)

Back in December 2010, you deleted County Road 335 (Levy County, Florida) on the grounds of lack of notability. While I'm not contesting the deletion, I have revived it and redirected it to List of county roads in Levy County, Florida. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 05:53, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Perfectly good thing to do! Courcelles 15:23, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool update

Hey Courcelles. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Takes Brooklyn! Saturday September 7

Brookln Public Library
 Please join Wikipedia Takes Brooklyn scavenger hunt on September 7, 2013!
Everyone gather at the Brooklyn Public Library to further Wikipedia's coverage of—
photos and articles related to Brooklyn, its neighborhoods and the local landmarks.
--EdwardsBot (talk)

Courcelles 04:22, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

RfC - Edit-warring

I've opened an RfC regarding a discussion that you were involved in.[5] A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 00:45, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

"Once More, with Feeling" - TFA appearance

Hello, this is just a brief note to let you know that "Once More, with Feeling" (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) will be appearing as Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 18, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask me. If the blurb needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. I hope that the TFA appearance goes smoothly. BTW, I've not left a note for Moni, who co-nom'd the article at FAC with you, given the {{retired}} banner her talk page wears... Regards, BencherliteTalk 20:03, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Cool. I'll give it a look-over after the weekend. Courcelles 03:13, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Followup re TPm case voting, etc

Courcelles, as your response to my previous query failed to answer the question as to why you would vote on the my topic ban the same day that the FoF was posted by AGK versus your statement to Malke that the "last thing you needed to do" was to vote on her topic ban, etc., I'm wondering what your history of interaction on Wikipedia with Malke has been in the past.

Since it was raised on the Evidence page--by me--you cannot not have been aware of the fact that she was sanctioned for similar behavior in 2010. You also must have been aware of the fact that she had accused me several times of being a sockpuppet of Dylan somebody-or-other, and made other strange assertions, as I detailed on the Evidence page. You seem to have ignored all of the above in your vote regarding sanctions against Malke, and voted for sanctions against me before any discussion of the FoF had even had a chance to take place.

So, I am investigating you, independently, as it were. You may find that amusing, but I have just explained the rationale, and I hope you take me seriously.

If you'd care to explain what you found most offensive in my editing conduct on that article, it might save me the time an effort of examining your interaction history with Malke to see whether or not maybe you should have recused yourself from the case altogether, or at least from voting on Malke, as NYB did (recuse himself).--Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 20:27, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

  • I don't know Malke from Adam, but the evidence against her was incredibly weak. It basically amounted to "she did stuff two or three years ago". And after this whopper on ANI well, I don't feel compelled to point out the deficiencies in your conduct more than the finding already did. Courcelles 03:13, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 September 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #74

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 22:38, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Rethink?

Courcelles, I've generally viewed you as a very reasonable person and supported you for ArbCom, but I'm quite concerned about your vote to restrict Gerda on the infobox case. I must lobby a wee bit on her behalf. (And am doing this publicly, as I believe there have been a number of other places where folks following the infobox case have been taking comments off-campus due to the wall of text over there.) When you note the earlier vote tally was for relatively gentle admonitions all around, and now your new comments and changed vote, it seems that you are viewing her actions in a far harsher light than is warranted. She is one of the nicest people on wikipedia that I have ever met, and I am really quite concerned that a group of the old guard over in the classical music projects just ganged up on her with such vitriol and mean-spiritedness. She will follow whatever guidelines are laid down in this case, but at the moment, there are no guidelines at all other than to just try and read tea leaves -- and the earlier proposal that was winning appeared to allow her insertion of infoboxes to be considered for articles on a case by case basis and that she would be allowed to add them to articles she created (or maybe also ones that had been languishing in stub/start land for years?) and seemed reasonable. I'm really concerned about the mob with pitchforks mentality at the classical music projects in general and would strongly encourage you to look at her talk page, her creation of the "precious" award, her belief that every user is a human being and reconsider your vote. Also, given that all the projects I usually work on all have infoboxes anyway, this whole issue seems just extreme. Montanabw(talk) 00:37, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Montanabw, in June 2013 you helped bring Horse Protection Act of 1970 to FA. Just as you have the right to not include an infobox on that article, so does everyone else (even if they write articles on classical music). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:48, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
See my other recent FAs, William Robinson Brown and Oxbow (horse), both of which used infoboxes. (winky smiley ;) ) In that Horse Protection Act article, Ruhrfish, there was no infobox discussion either way. I didn't think about adding one because I don't know how to properly do an infobox for legislation and am not sure if there is one to use as a template, haven't worked on a lot of legislation articles and didn't have time to go digging around for a sample, plus I had a teammate as lead editor who I respect immensely and who was doing most of the heavy lifting at the time we prepped the article for FAC. Once at FAC, I obviously didn't want to make major changes to a stable article, particularly where my co-editor wasn't around a lot at the time to consult on big changes. I'd prefer to see infoboxes in every article where a reasonably well-designed one exists and can logically be added, (probably no need for one in, say Hindgut fermentation, LOL) but personally, I really suck at doing stuff requiring complex syntax (such as charts and infoboxes) and I like to just copy and modify someone else's, and when possible, go with the wikiproject consensus when there is one that makes logical sense. I tend to rely on the technical people with expertise to help me. This is part of what bugs me, I like to have the non-subject area experts around to help me with things as part of a team, they are good not only to be sure the markup and syntax is right, but also to just watch for readability and technical jargon. I like infoboxes, but I like well-designed ones, properly set up, and I don't want to screw them up, so sometimes won't add one if I don't feel confident that I'll do it right. For that, I like helpers like Andy, who know what they are doing, and I personally usually have no problem dialing them back if they get a little intense and over-passionate about minutae. Montanabw(talk) 17:55, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Gerda is a perfectly fine editor, it is just her actions over the last fortnight or so have convinced me she needs to be separated from the infoboxes controversy for a little while. (I'm on-and-off line all day, so this is shorter than I might otherwise explain_. This strikes me as relevant, this troubles me greatly, esp. the language about looking for "ban" on top of her userpage. That's the last thing on the world that I would want to see happen. This, in light of the history of discussions both recent and older at Talk:Joseph Priestley, and well as a recent addition of an infobox by Pigsonthewing, fails to indicate that the message to move away was getting through. Believe me I want her on Wikipedia; but she needs to move away from this dispute for a while. (And now I need to hit the DMV before they close) Courcelles
Courcelles, I'll not hold you from your busy real life schedule, but did you not see Gerda trying to apply a little bit of wry humor with a winky smiley emoticon on that one statement? She's got tons of goodwill, but if she shows a little spunk and spirit, I don't see that as a battleground mentality, I see it as trying to keep her chin up. I'd be ten times worse if I were in her shoes. I'd have probably quit by now, that or blown up and called everyone a bunch of bad names before stomping off in a huff! I admire her goodwill and good spirit. She's truly a very nice person and so knowledgeable about vocal music; I've been quite saddened to see how horribly she's been treated and then blamed for merely sticking to her guns and standing up for herself. I won't go into the systemic bias issues that are a concern on WP in general, but I see her treatment as part of that pattern, frankly. (Andy, on the other hand, is a different situation, but I think he's getting sldegehammered to an undue degree that fails to note that he is doing better than he was a few years ago. He's grown and matured. At least, that's my view.) Montanabw(talk) 17:55, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
On a more philisophical note, one thing that troubled me throughout these proceedings was a tendency to view people's attempts to present evidence in their favor as evidence of a "battleground mentality." Frankly, going to ArbCom IS very much akin to a trial and hence, an adversarial court-type proceeding and hence, yes, "battleground" of sorts. I'm quite concerned that these wikipedia proceedings are becoming a kangaroo court where the only thing the "accused" can do is admit their guilt, bow their head, and take whatever is meted out to them, asking only, "please sir, may I have another?" Philosophically, this troubles me and seems a weakness in wikipedia generally. I se evidence that Andy has mellowed over the years and though he is not perfect and still upsets people, he actually is pretty workable these days, at least when I've dealt with him. Montanabw(talk) 17:55, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

That edit regarding the Joseph Priestley infobox is just unbelievable, especially given the timing. I hadn't noticed it before Courcelles pointed it out. It's stunts like that which make it hard to assume good faith any longer. Anyway, the sooner this case is closed, the better. --Folantin (talk) 18:30, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, you got your way, Folantin. Good people trying to improve wikipedia and move it forward just got sanctioned and the bullies that attacked them mostly got off scott free, the lesser offenders being smacked lightly and the meanest people not at all. (Aside to Courcelles, sorry to hijack your talk page on this, but here we are.) Personally, I see nothing objectionable about someone stating their point of view in an appropriate forum, which it was at QAI. Dozens of wikiprojects have infoboxes, the classical music projects are dinosaur holdovers of reaction (in my humble opinion) and I personally think that infoboxes (done right) should be part of the standard design of a wikipedia article, just like bolding the title in line one, wikilinking and adding categories. The only infobox debate should be about style and content (some have too much junk in them, others are too sparse, but that's a baby and bathwater issue). But what's done is done. I am quite disappointed in the ArbCom system here, no matter who is elected to serve, the system itself is broken and stacked against change. That's sad. Montanabw(talk) 20:50, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

This was probably the most sensible decision the ArbCom could have made in the circumstances. It has a chance of working, as long as it is enforced properly. I believe Gerda Arendt is responsible for her own actions. Many of those actions during the course of this case were ill-advised, to put it mildly (e.g. trying to restart the Georg Solti dispute by proxy, or deliberately wading into the Joseph Priestley issue). Handing out dozens of barnstars does not give you a licence to ignore WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. Anyway, the case is over and no doubt we'll see what the outcome is in the long term. Now it's time to forget about the infobox question for a while and get back to normal editing. --Folantin (talk) 21:15, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Indef Semi-Protection Request

Could you indef semi-protect the following page, User:Neutralhomer/Userboxes/Outcasts? I have all my pages in my userspace indef semi-protected due to past vandalism. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:13, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 September 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #75

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Events/Press/Blogs
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
  • Did you know?
    • Newest properties: Saskatchewan Register of Heritage Property identifier (P845), Global Biodiversity Information Facility ID (P846), United States Navy aircraft designation (P847), Japanese military aircraft designation (P849), World Register of Marine Species identifier (P850), ESRB rating (P852), CERO rating (P853), URL (P854), Sandbox-URL (P855), official website (P856), CNKI (P857), ESPN SCRUM ID (P858), sponsor (P859), e-archiv.li ID (P860), premiershiprugby.com ID (P861), Operational Requirement of the UK Air Ministry (P862), InPhO identifier (P863), ACM Digital Library author identifier (P864), BMLO (P865), Perlentaucher (P866), ROME Occupation Code (P867), foods traditionally associated (P868), instrumentation (P870), printed by (P872), phase point (P873), UN class (P874), UN code classification (P875), UN packaging group (P876), NFPA Other (P877), avionics (P878), pennant number (P879), CPU (P880), Variable type (P881), FIPS 6-4 (US counties) (P882), FIPS 5-2 (code for US states) (P883), State Water Register Code (Russia) (P884), origin of the watercourse (P885), LIR (P886), based on heuristic (P887), JSTOR (P888), Mathematical Reviews identifier (P889), Request for Comments number (IETF) (P892), Social Science Research Network (P893)
    • Newest task forces: Occupations and professions task force
  • Development
    • Breaking change to the API in the last deployment
    • Started work on number data type
    • Worked on simple query special page
    • Worked more on moving (ordering) of qualifiers
    • Worked on JSON dumps
    • Continued working on allowing editentities API module to allow editing of claims
    • Continued work on the merge items API module
    • Worked on fixing the way Claim GUIDs are used throughout the code
    • Worked on TableDefinitionReaders for Database component
    • Unified and improved rendering of property values in summaries, diffs, wiki-pages, etc.
    • Continued moving to new browsertests framework
    • Bugfixes on autosummaries
    • Worked with GSoC student on mobile skin
    • Worked on refactoring of how we serialize and provide data about used entities on a page (e.g. entity pages or certain special pages) to the frontend
  • Open Tasks for You
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 16:18, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 September 2013

Wikidata weekly summary #76

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 22:01, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

County Road 1557 (Leon County, Florida)

Back in August 2010, you deleted County Road 1557 (Leon County, Florida) on the grounds of lack of notability. While I'm not contesting the deletion, I have revived it and redirected it to List of county roads in Leon County, Florida. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 15:41, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Good, good. For the record, there's no need to inform anyone when turning a deleted article into a redirect to a list, that's about as uncontroversial as it gets. Courcelles 15:47, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
    • Well, I saw the deletion notes saying that if it was revived, you should send a message to the person who deleted it that it was being revived regardless of how it's done. So, you know... common courtesy and all that. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 16:21, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Jennifer Hudson

Edits are becoming less frequent. Can you perhaps lower protection settings to "pending changes" in order to allow everyone edit? --George Ho (talk) 20:45, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

  • May as well give it a short leashed try. She's not quite the daily news fodder she was two years ago anymore. Courcelles 00:55, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Jennifer Aniston

three years passed; time to lower down to "pending changes"? --George Ho (talk) 17:28, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

  • This one, I won't be changing. Too much history of nonsense, and still well-known enough to know the tidal waves of crap would continue. Courcelles 21:07, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Site banned editor back

Hey, Courcelles,

You may recall from some while back (largely 2010) and editor named Roman888 against whom there was both a significant CCI case related to copyvios on various Malaysia-related articles and a concurrent sockpuppetry case where a sizable sockfarm was identified editing both the Malaysia articles and several related to shows with Gordon Ramsay; the latter were where I became involved. Roman was site banned in March, 2011, when the two hit critical mass at the same time. Some time thereafter, he relocated to Australia and began socking using IPs registered to Telestra. Mkativerata and I began collecting evidence he was running a second IP sock farm, and those accounts were blocked as well. One of his favorite topics apart from Malaysia was the question of whether updates on the status of restaurants featured on Ramsay's shows Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares (UK) and Kitchen Nightmares (US); he initiated or was party to several long, often disruptive discussions regarding including the open/closed status of the various restaurants (see Archive 2 for the bulk of them; Archive 3 for his return as the IP sock). Despite a lack of consensus, attempts at canvassing on his part, blocks galore and a litany of WP:RS and other policy-based reasons for not including the updates, he continued to push the issue from time-to-time before finally going quiet.

And now he's back. He just started a new discussion, crafted to follow his line of thought while sidestepping policy, including an exhortation to ignore the archived discussions, regarding updates on the Kitchen Nightmares article. I happened to check in shortly after he posted it, before there were any responses, so I reverted it and tagged the newest Telestra IP's talk page. But I doubt he'll give up with out more fuss than that.

Sorry to be long winded! I wanted to give you a heads up because Mkativerata is gone now, and you were the editor who both indeffed him and enforced the community ban. History says he'll head for the Malaysia articles shortly, and try to stir more (ahem!) on the KN and RKN article before he's done. I've let Moodriddengirl know about him as well, and thought I'd take the direct approach to dealing with his latest before I head to SPI. --Drmargi (talk) 13:41, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

I spoke too soon. In the time it took to get this on your talk page, he edited under two more socks and set up an account to edit on the discussion. He's determined! --Drmargi (talk) 13:59, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Make that four IP socks and two new sock accounts. I'm going to work now... --Drmargi (talk) 14:08, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, the grass doesn't grow under your feet. Thanks for the semi; I'll finish tagging the last stray socks, then take the lot of them to SPI now I have time to do so. --Drmargi (talk) 01:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

New day, new territory. He's now moved over the Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares and started again, plus he faked an edit so it appears he reverted one of mine on Elementary (TV series). Still IP hopping madly. He uses 'em, I tag 'em and he moves all over greater Sydney. --Drmargi (talk) 06:45, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Another semi done. I can't rangeblock without blocking most of NSW, however, so it is going to have to be protection on the targets for now. Courcelles 19:11, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
I figured as much on the blocks. He's roaming around greater Sydney with a cell phone. If this keeps up much longer, I may ask you to semi my talk page, but you've cut off both Ramsay articles, so that limits his options considerably. Thank you! --Drmargi (talk) 19:47, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 September 2013

Series of "pending changes" requests

I'm looking up on articles in Category:Wikipedia indefinitely semi-protected biographies of living people. There I found Celine Dion as one of them. I can find more to request on articles that you set as "semi-protected". In the meantime, the Dion article is less edited recently; care to allow unregistered and new editors edit the page? --George Ho (talk) 19:38, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

  • No, I don't see any reason whatsoever to let IP's touch this one, it produces nothing good. Courcelles 23:29, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
    • The Dion article is protected for two and a half years. When can I re-request it if PC/unprotection is too soon? --George Ho (talk) 00:50, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

What about Barbie? The article is barely edited nowadays. --George Ho (talk) 01:07, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

  • And if you unrpotect it, it will be edited, nominally. By people vandalising it and then people using Huggle or Stiki to revert it. I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion, given this request that you don't understand why these pages got protected at all. Lack of edits should never be taken as reason to let the obvious disruption resume. Courcelles 02:53, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
    • PC is useless, isn't it? --George Ho (talk) 03:15, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
      • Yeah, pretty much, esp. given someone still has to revdel or oversight all the BLP crap that the semi stopped being saved at all. Courcelles 03:44, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
    • You're not assuming that anonymous editors are too immature to edit the article, let alone post grotesque material that would disrupt the page. Are you? Well, PC can't be used if vandalism doesn't happen yet. It can shield general readers from vandalism, but not to registered editors. And is the profile of the topic too high to consider PC? --George Ho (talk) 03:53, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
      • Watch AIV for a day or two before talking about the maturity of what anonymous editors save to well-known topics. It isn't pretty -- I'd advocate semi-protecting every last BLP on the project, to be honest, the intake of what IP's give us is just mostly worthless, and what is good isn't worth the resource drain on cleaning up after the miscreants. Semi controls libel, PC never can and never will be able to. Courcelles 22:10, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Brittany Murphy is deceased since 2009. Would she be now important enough to attract vandals and socks at this time? I checked 2011 reason; I'm sure that vandalism died down already. If skeptical, perhaps PC? --George Ho (talk) 03:41, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Are you really going to go through every biography and try to get them all unprotected or something? No. I will not be unprotecting that article; there's no reason at all to again allow the kind of hate that article did get to be saved to our servers. Courcelles 00:21, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

All right, never mind bios here. What about "Yu-Gi-Oh!"? Popularity has waned over the years, and other kinds of trading cards may surpass this franchise. --George Ho (talk) 03:08, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #77

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 23:19, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

RM close description

I believe that Kirill's finding of fact 7 subtly misrepresents the close. The admins did analyse the arguments during the RFC that BLP required a move of the article, and rejected them as insufficient. That's a normal part of WP:CONSENSUS. Describing it as a "super-vote" is dismissive and cheapens the work that went into evaluating the discussion.

I've proposed an alternate finding of fact 7 at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning_naming_dispute/Proposed_decision#Analysis_of_change_of_article_title_by_closing_administrators . Multiple arbitrators have been pinged, but none have responded.

If you need Boz, BD2412 and I to explicitly insert the sentence "After carefully evaluating the comments about BLP in the discussion, we have concluded ..." into point 3, we certainly can, but that's a part of closing an RFC. I find it insulting that anyone thinks that we skipped it.—Kww(talk) 02:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

hey

You previously protected Tabbouleh for POV pushing against sources, User:MyVoiceIsHeard has now continued the same behavior: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tabbouleh&action=history

He only used "corrected data" in one edit summary but the sources in the article does not support his edits, then after he just continues to revert without explanation. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 13:22, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

  • My first thought here was as a possible sockpuppet, but I can't place who it could be, so perhaps not. I think I'll drop him an edit warring notice, at least as a first step. Courcelles 01:09, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

October 2013 AFC Backlog elimination drive

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from October 1st, 2013 – October 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 2400 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script is released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code enhancements, and more. If you want to see a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. --Mdann52talk to me!

This newsletter was delivered on behalf of WPAFC by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:35, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia NYC Meetup! Saturday October 5

Jefferson Market Public Library
 Please join the Wikimedia NYC Meetup on October 5, 2013!
Everyone gather at Jefferson Market Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for education, museums, libraries and planning WikiConference USA.
--Pharos (talk) 21:33, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #78

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 23:03, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 October 2013

J-Shin

  • Not a huge deal, but...although I am not the biggest fan of J-Shin, I think his article should be undeleted. Although the article was in terrible shape the last time I looked at it, he actually does pass WP:MUSICBIO because his single "One Night Stand" reached #34 on the Billboard Hot 100 in 2000 (see page 348 of this book). Erpert WHAT DO YOU WANT??? 04:18, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
    • I'll look at this again tomorrow, but a cursory glance seems to indicate the AFD may have taken that one charting into account? Courcelles 05:04, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Need help with IPAc-pl

Hi there, I noticed you did some edits to {{IPAc-pl}} in the past. Could you help with adding mouseover tooltips to that template? I prepared a basic list to mirror the functionality of {{H:IPA}}, all is explained at Template_talk:IPAc-pl#Mouseover. Any help would be appreciated. //Halibutt 23:51, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Sorry to say, but this request seems to exceed my technical abilities! Courcelles 00:56, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, Courcelles. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.— Mojoworker (talk) 04:57, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 October 2013

WikiProject volleyball - invitation to discussion

This is an special invitation for experienced editors to the discussion in WikiProject Volleyball about the proposal for Notability Guide for Volleyball Players. Your wise and kind participation will be highly appreciated. Osplace 20:49, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #79

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 17:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

GAR for Hope Solo article

Hope Solo, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hmlarson (talk) 05:58, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Deletion review for Valeri Lilov

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Valeri Lilov. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Zad68 14:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #80

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 19:48, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 October 2013

Global Temperature Anomaly 1880-2012

Re:

File renamed: File:Global Temperature Anomaly 1880-2012.svg → File:Global Temperature Anomaly.svg File renaming criterion #2: Change from completely meaningless names into suitable names, accord...

WTF? Why is "Global Temperature Anomaly 1880-2012" a "completely meaningless name" and why is changing it to a non-specific name considered an improvement? William M. Connolley (talk) 19:07, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

  • The templated reason for the request on Commons was that the image contained data for 2013, not ending at 2012; the longer reason is dropped off due to 200 character limits in edit summaries. Courcelles 19:13, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Description: English: Line plot of global mean land-ocean temperature index, 1880 to present (2012).... And if you look at the graph, you'll see that is so. William M. Connolley (talk) 08:33, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Quarter Million Award

The Quarter Million Award
For your contributions to bring Hope Solo (estimated annual readership: 414,000) to Good Article status, you have been awarded the Quarter Million Award. Congratulations, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers. Hmlarson (talk) 01:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Wikipedia:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

This editor won the Quarter Million Award for bringing Hope Solo to Good Article status.

Thank you for your many contributions to the Hope Solo article. Your diligent work is very much appreciated! Hmlarson (talk) 01:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

  • That was fun. Good luck with Abby Wambach. (My first thought, though, is that the lede needs to be longer, at least three paragraphs) Courcelles 02:08, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #81

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 22:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2013

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter


Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:32, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Back again?

About a year ago, you did a CU on this person and found more than 50 socks. The person in question and his/her socks were adding uncited political and religious information to many bios. While the entry made for Edie Adams is correct, I remember removing a lot of information re: someone being a Methodist from plenty of bios. :) Thanks, We hope (talk) 22:10, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Worth monitoring, but I don't think one addition of a category is enough to run a CU and not be fishing, sorry to say. Courcelles 22:13, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
OK. I'll just keep my eyes open-thanks! We hope (talk) 22:16, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
If it becomes a pattern, or you see other accounts on the same topic, let me know again; but if we ran CU's on every uncited category added we would be CU'ing a ton of accounts. (Quite aside, CU data goes stale after 3 months, with only one account to look at and the old one's older than that, running the CU would be likely an exercise in firing blind and a hypothetical no matches result wouldn't prove anything at all.) Courcelles 22:18, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Your comment at RfPP

Hey there. I just wondered what you meant with this edit. Was it that a protecting admin shouldn't review their own protections, like blocks, or just on RfPP, or something else? GedUK  12:56, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Just on RFPP -- by the time a request for unprotectiong ets there, I think it is better if an uninvolved admin takes a look and makes a decision. (It is complicated by the fact that so many unrpotection requests don't follow the instructions adn ask the protecting admin first, but even still, it is likely better if once it goes to RFPP the template that marks the thread for archival is put on by someone else unless it is the protecting admin unprotecting the page.) Courcelles 13:16, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
I generally agree. In that particular case, a user notified the admin directly on their talk page, so they came back to RfPP to decline it. That section shuold just be for where teh admin has retired/demopped, or declines the request or refers it back. Anyway, just thought I'd check what you meant :) GedUK  13:28, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia NYC Meetup- "Greenwich Village In The 60s" Editathon! Saturday November 2

Jefferson Market Public Library
 Please join Wikipedia "Greenwich Village In The 60s" Editathon on November 2, 2013!
Everyone gather at Jefferson Market Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for Greenwich Village articles on the history and the community.
--Pharos (talk) 21:25, 29 October 2013 (UTC)}}

Actor cats

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Actors_and_Filmmakers#Simplifying_actor.2Factress_gendered_categories. John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:54, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Chile

This article is frequently edited recently. Is "pending changes" too little or too much? If too little, semi-protection instead? If too much, unprotection? --George Ho (talk) 03:56, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Tom Dalgliesh

Hi Courcelles,

I see that you were the closing admin for the AFD on Tom Dalgliesh. If you don't have an objection to it (and there wasn't a great deal of discussion at the AFD to begin with), I would like to have this one userfied so I can work on it. I have a source that discusses dozens of game designers, and it has a lot of info on this person. I will also do my best to address the concerns brought up that it reads like an autobiography. BOZ (talk) 15:12, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

  • No objection, have fun. Courcelles 15:44, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
    • Thanks. :) BOZ (talk) 19:33, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Courcelles/Archive_105&oldid=1171650404"