User talk:Ks0stm/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Signpost: 07 January 2013

Welcome to the Arbitration Committee Clerk Team!

Hi Ks0stm. We have added you to the list of clerks and subscribed you to the mailing list (info: WP:AC/C#clerks-l). Welcome, and I look forward to working with you! To adjust your subscription options for the mailing list, see the link at mail:clerks-l. The mailing list works in the usual way, and the address to which new mailing list threads can be sent is clerks-l@lists.wikimedia.org. Useful reading for new clerks is the procedures page, WP:AC/C/P, but you will learn all the basic components of clerking on-the-job.

New clerks begin as a trainee, are listed as such at WP:AC/C#List of clerks, and will remain so until they have learned all the aspects of the job. When you've finished training, which usually takes a couple of/a few months, then we'll propose to the Committee that you be made a full clerk. As a clerk, you'll need to check your e-mail regularly, as the mailing list is where the clerks co-ordinate (on-wiki co-ordination page also exists but is not used nearly as much). If you've any questions at any point of your traineeship, simply post to the mailing list.

Lastly, it might be useful if you enter your timezone into WP:AC/C#List of clerks (in the same format as the other members have), so that we can estimate when we will have clerks available each day; this is, of course, at your discretion. Again, welcome! Regards, Lord Roem ~ (talk) 03:10, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 January 2013

Please consider revdelete

Hi, can you consider revdeleting this thread http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#PSU_sex_scandal at the ref desk? I already removed the name. User:Roger has requested it, I agree with the request. I think erring on the side of not participating in someone's possible harrassment via WP is the better course. Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 19:37, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This has been taken care of. Thanks! --Rschen7754 20:02, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Hi Ks0stm, I've requested at WP:RFPP that your pending changes protection of Robin van Persie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) be changed to a semi due to the high edit rate and the amount of vandalism and BLP vios sitting rejected and reverted in the page history. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:06, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A couple days late on my end, but sure, I'm fine with that. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 14:39, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 January 2013

Allirelandunbiased

Allirelandunbiased has removed his block notice from his talkpage, I restored it the first time (with edit summary) but he has removed it again. Should I revert again? Murry1975 (talk) 19:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You could have, but I went ahead and did so. I also left a warning that active block notices are not to be removed and that if he continues to do so I will revoke his talk page access. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 19:55, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Hopefully he will start talking about the issues at hand other than just reacting. Murry1975 (talk) 19:58, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail reply

I got your email. I will go ahead and do that as soon as my schedule clears up.--Dcheagle • talk • contribs 20:57, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mail...

Hello, Ks0stm. 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.

The Signpost: 28 January 2013

WikiCup 2013 January newsletter

Signups are now closed; we have our final 127 contestants for this year's competition. 64 contestants will make it to the next round at the end of February, but we're already seeing strong scoring compared to previous years. Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) currently leads, with 358 points. At this stage in 2012, the leader (Irish Citizen Army Grapple X (submissions)) had 342 points, while in 2011, the leader had 228 points. We also have a large number of scorers when compared with this stage in previous years. Florida 12george1 (submissions) was the first competitor to score this year, as he was last year, with a detailed good article review. Some other firsts:

Featured articles, portals and topics, as well as good topics, are yet to feature in the competition.

This year, the bonus points system has been reworked, with bonus points on offer for old articles prepared for did you know, and "multiplier" points reworked to become more linear. For details, please see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There have been some teething problems as the bot has worked its way around the new system, but issues should mostly be ironed out- please report any problems to the WikiCup talk page. Here are some participants worthy of note with regards to the bonus points:

  • United States Ed! (submissions) was the first to score bonus points, with Portland-class cruiser, a good article.
  • Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions) has the highest overall bonus points, as well as the highest scoring article, thanks to his work on Enrico Fermi, now a good article. The biography of such a significant figure to the history of science warrants nearly five times the normal score.
  • Chicago HueSatLum (submissions) claimed bonus points for René Vautier and Nicolas de Fer, articles that did not exist on the English Wikipedia at the start of the year; a first for the WikiCup. The articles were eligible for bonus points because of fact they were both covered on a number of other Wikipedias.

Also, a quick mention of British Empire The C of E (submissions), who may well have already written the oddest article of the WikiCup this year: did you know that the Fucking mayor objected to Fucking Hell on the grounds that there was no Fucking brewery? The gauntlet has been thrown down; can anyone beat it?

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:24, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Ks0stm. You have new messages at Theopolisme's talk page.
Message added by Theopolisme at 21:43, 5 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]
Replied. —Theopolisme (talk) 00:58, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 February 2013

Speedy deletion declined: IFFHS World's Best Goalkeeper

Hello Ks0stm. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of IFFHS World's Best Goalkeeper, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article is not substantially the same as the deleted version. A new deletion discussion is required. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:27, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

XD Alright, but you may want to tell the person who actually tagged it...I just reverted it back in when the author removed the tag. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 04:32, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that. The script that I use notifies the last person who tagged an article, and it sometimes messes up in situations like this. Please ignore me. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:34, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. =) Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 04:36, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RfA question

Good morning, Ks0tm. Just a quick message to let you know that I was not ignoring, nor had I forgotten your RfA question. Notwithstanding the best laid plans of mice and men to pick a week where I had plenty of time to handle the RfA and all of the questions, this has turned out to be an unusually busy week for me professionally, including a short-notice hearing in front of a state administrative court this morning. Please accept my apologies for my delay in responding; I will endeavor to provide you with a satisfactory response today. Thanks for understanding. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:33, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I know how it gets sometimes. =) Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 16:34, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sexology arbitration and me

I noticed that several sections from the RfA were copied into the opening statements page. Is this something that is done automatically, or is it something I need to do myself should I wish to make a statement? Or may I simply make a new opening statement if I have something to add to the discussion? This is uncharted waters for me, so thanks in advance for some guideance.   little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer  20:26, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The statements from parties to the case were copied to the case page, while the statements from the non-parties were copied to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sexology. You can find your statement on that page. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 23:27, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of officers of the Oxford University Chess Club

The AfD on List of officers of the Oxford University Chess Club that you started closed over a week ago with the consensus to merge. The article still exists. Are you going to do the merge? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 05:04, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I missed you.

Hi there, I am sorry you could not make it to the meetup, I hope we can make a meetup when you are back in town, so let me know when you have time. So I created a GLAM group for kansas, mailing list for topeka and a facebook page linked from here Wikipedia:Meetup/Topeka . I would like to organize some more meetups at different historic sites in topeka (and even other places if we can find someone with a car), go there and take photos, collect information and work on the articles. It could be a great group event. please let me know what you think, and sign up on the mailing list if you like.

you can send me a mail if you like as well, my mail is on my user page.

thanks, James Michael DuPont (talk) 13:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Ks0stm. You have new messages at Theopolisme's talk page.
Message added by Theopolisme at 14:47, 10 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Same problem as at ANI

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eldridge Hawkins, Jr. Mathsci (talk) 08:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think User:Keegan nailed them all with oversight. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 08:34, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ITN Credit

--Jayron32 14:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 11 February 2013

RfA: thank you for your support

Ks0stm, thanks for your support and kind words during my RfA. While it did not end as hoped, hopefully you were not too disappointed in my performance as a candidate. Regards, Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 11:25, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the type of "reviewers" Wikipedia should be proud of??

After having done some more referencing on Impalement, THIS is the silly "review" I get: "It reads like a penny dreadful at the moment! It's somewhat peripatetic as well." (Not from you) This is extremely disrespectful, and totally beside the point. (If you actually wish to show the historical usage of impalement, then of course there will be "dreadful" stories being told! Furthermore, if you do not limit yourself to a single locality, but do a worldwide tour, then it must be "peripatetic). I hope you, as a more serious reviewer than the one I met can see how deeply unjustified this "reviewer" was in his dismissal.Arildnordby (talk) 16:48, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pancakes.

Hello Ks0stm. I saw there have been some vandalism issues concerning the pancake page recently. You , at some point even locked the page. I had added a bit to the "talk" page a few days before this happening ,-not related- on February the 4th in the hopes someone would pick up on the fact "pancake day" is different for Belgians , french , netherlands and other people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pancake#Pancake_day_in_Belgium_.2F_France_.2F_Netherlands_.2F_other.3F The day for eating pancakes in those countries , is a very old tradition from before christianism even. Like a lot of important calendar days , they have been sublimated into christianism . The day for pancakes is february 2nd . in dutch "Maria Lichtmis" , In french "chandeleur" There are also elaborate traditions on that day. Like baking coins into pancakes. Flipping pancakes with a golden coin in hand. Throwing pancakes on various cupboards in the house to stayu there the whole year for good luck. some links: http://french.about.com/od/culture/a/chandeleur.htm http://www.teteamodeler.com/culture/fetes/coutume-chandeleur.asp http://suite101.fr/article/la-chandeleur--coutumes-symboles--traditions--superstitions-a23029#axzz2KvUKuh00 http://www.momes.net/dictionnaire/minidossiers/vocabulaire/chandeleur-definition.html

Today I came to wikipedia with the intention to adding those things myself but seeing the current climate I am reluctant to do so. English isn't the language I know best , It's not a huge change in the article but it's a very significant one I think. Since you seem to have some influence , and some interest in this article , I'd like to ask your assistance in having these facts added by someone who cares about this article.

Friendly regards and thank you in advance for any reply. 83.101.79.233 (talk) 01:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Winter storm naming

I just wanted to make you aware of this discussion I started at Winter storm naming. I have no intentions of making any changes to the article myself, but was just hoping to get input from editors previously involved in the article (or recently-closed AfD) in an effort to improve the article and clarify its purpose. I will leave any changes to the consensus of other editors who decide what's best. Your participation would be welcome, regardless of your views on the issue. Thank you. 76.189.111.199 (talk) 22:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for K-140 (Kansas highway)

Per your DYK nomination for K-140. Please don't change DYK hooks, as you did here, as it makes it hard for other editors to understand previous reviewers comments. Instead, propose an alternate hook such as ALT1, ALT2 etc as editors have done in this review. Thank you for finding a source. I am a UK resident and thus not familiar with the US highways system. I could not find a source that explicitly states K-140 is US 40 (nor US 40S) so, as previously stated, I will leave your DYK for another reviewer. Good luck with it --Senra (talk) 23:30, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, fixed that. Sorry, it's only my second DYK nom and so I'm still figuring this stuff out. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 23:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 February 2013

DYK for K-140 (Kansas highway)

Carabinieri (talk) 08:02, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 February 2013

WikiCup 2013 February newsletter

Round 1 is now over. The top 64 scorers have progressed to round 2, where they have been randomly split into eight pools of eight. At the end of April, the top two from each pool, as well as the 16 highest scorers from those remaining, will progress to round 3. Commiserations to those eliminated; if you're interested in still being involved in the WikiCup, able and willing reviewers will always be needed, and if you're interested in getting involved with other collaborative projects, take a look at the WikiWomen's Month discussed below.

Round 1 saw 21 competitors with over 100 points, which is fantastic; that suggests that this year's competition is going to be highly competative. Our lower scores indicate this, too: A score of 19 was required to reach round 2, which was significantly higher than the 11 points required in 2012 and 8 points required in 2011. The score needed to reach round 3 will be higher, and may depend on pool groupings. In 2011, 41 points secured a round 3 place, while in 2012, 65 was needed. Our top three scorers in round 1 were:

  1. Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), primarily for an array of warship GAs.
  2. London Miyagawa (submissions), primarily for an array of did you knows and good articles, some of which were awarded bonus points.
  3. New South Wales Casliber (submissions), due in no small part to Canis Minor, a featured article awarded a total of 340 points. A joint submission with Alaska Keilana (submissions), this is the highest scoring single article yet submitted in this year's competition.

Other contributors of note include:

Featured topics have still played no part in this year's competition, but once again, a curious contribution has been offered by British Empire The C of E (submissions): did you know that there is a Shit Brook in Shropshire? With April Fools' Day during the next round, there will probably be a good chance of more unusual articles...

March sees the WikiWomen's History Month, a series of collaborative efforts to aid the women's history WikiProject to coincide with Women's History Month and International Women's Day. A number of WikiCup participants have already started to take part. The project has a to-do list of articles needing work on the topic of women's history. Those interested in helping out with the project can find articles in need of attention there, or, alternatively, add articles to the list. Those interested in collaborating on articles on women's history are also welcome to use the WikiCup talk page to find others willing to lend a helping hand. Another collaboration currently running is an an effort from WikiCup participants to coordinate a number of Easter-themed did you know articles. Contributions are welcome!

A few final administrative issues. From now on, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 00:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 March 2013

The Signpost: 11 March 2013

Article Feedback deployment

Hey Ks0stm; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:28, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 March 2013

The Signpost: 25 March 2013

WikiCup 2013 March newsletter

We are halfway through round two. Pool A sees the strongest competition, with five out of eight of its competitors scoring over 100, and Pool H is lagging, with half of its competitors yet to score. WikiCup veterans lead overall; Pool A's Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) (2010's winner) leads overall, with poolmate London Miyagawa (submissions) (a finalist in 2011 and 2012) not far behind. Pool F's New South Wales Casliber (submissions) (a finalist in 2010, 2011 and 2012) is in third. The top two scorers in each pool, as well as the next highest 16 scorers overall, will progress to round three at the end of April.

Today has seen a number of Easter-themed did you knows from WikiCup participants, and March has seen collaboration from contestants with WikiWomen's History Month. It's great to see the WikiCup being used as a locus of collaboration; if you know of any collaborative efforts going on, or want to start anything up, please feel free to use the WikiCup talk page to help find interested editors. As well as fostering collaboration, we're also seeing the Cup encouraging the improvement of high-importance articles through the bonus point system. Highlights from the last month include GAs on physicist Niels Bohr (Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions)), on the European hare (Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions)), on the constellation Circinus (Alaska Keilana (submissions) and New South Wales Casliber (submissions)) and on the Third Epistle of John (Indiana Cerebellum (submissions)). All of these subjects were covered on at least 50 Wikipedias at the beginning of the year and, subsequently, each contribution was awarded at least three times as many points as normal.

Wikipedians who enjoy friendly competition may be interested in participating in April's wikification drive. While wikifying an article is typically not considered "significant work" such that it can be claimed for WikiCup points, such gnomish work is often invaluable in keeping articles in shape, and is typically very helpful for new writers who may not be familiar with formatting norms.

A quick reminder: now, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 22:19, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 01 April 2013

Request for traineeship - theonesean

Hello, Ks0stm. I would like to request that I be considered for traineeship to become a clerk for the arbitration committee. I have been a sporadic Wikipedian for two years, but more recently, I have gained newfound vigor in my wikiwork. I have been especially active in reviewing Articles for Creation. I have an interest in legal proceedings and also generally want to expand my horizons on Wikipedia, as I forsee being an involved editor for years to come. This is an opportunity for me to increase my service to the Wikipedian community and also my own personal embetterment. Thank you for considering me. TheOneSean | Talk to me 17:46, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 08 April 2013

The Signpost: 15 April 2013

Please check PoV and possible vandalism in Puthandu Page

Please look at the Puthandu Page. One KSB Kumar has been reverting the agreed upon format of the text with his point of view without providing citations or evidence to back what he is saying. He has done several edits in a 24 hour period. Please follow that and if it is more than three reversions in a 24 hour period, he should be temporarily barred from that page. Many thanks.

Best regardsDipendra2007 (talk) 12:43, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 April 2013

The Center Line: Spring 2013

Volume 6, Issue 2 • Spring 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
—EdwardsBot (talk) 22:21, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 April 2013

WikiCup 2013 April newsletter

We are a week into Round 3, but it is off to a flying start, with Republic of Rose Island Sven Manguard (submissions) claiming for the high-importance Portal:Sports and Portal:Geography (which are the first portals ever awarded bonus points in the WikiCup) and Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) claiming for a did you know of sea, the highest scoring individual did you know article ever submitted for the WikiCup. Round 2 saw very impressive scores at close; first place New South Wales Casliber (submissions) and second place Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) both scored over 1000 points; a feat not seen in Round 2 since 2010. This, in part, has been made possible by the change in the bonus points rules, but is also testament to the quality of the competition this year. Pool C and Pool G were most competitive, with three quarters of participants making it to Round 3, while Pool D was the least, with only the top two scorers making it through. The lowest qualifying score was 123, significantly higher than last year's 65, 2011's 41 or even 2010's 100.

The next issue of The Signpost is due to include a brief update on the current WikiCup, comparing it to previous years' competitions. This may be of interest to current WikiCup followers, and may help bring some more new faces into the community. We would also like to note that this round includes an extra competitor to the 32 advertised, who has been added to a random pool. This extra inclusion seems to have been the fairest way to deal with a small mistake made before the beginning of this round, but should not affect the competition in a large way. If you have any questions or concerns about this, please feel free to contact one of the judges.

A rules clarification: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on 29/30 April, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 15:43, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

Arbcom question

Hi,

I noticed that Akuri intends to present evidence against ArtifexMayhem. I wonder how, then, Akuri's contributions and edit history should be treated? Would it be acceptable to use contribs listed at Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Akuri, for instance, to provide counterexamples?

I didn't have any substantial interaction with either of these parties before this filing, but it does seem like the lack of a substantial, cohesive edit history might theoretically allow someone to evade scrutiny for their own edits while criticizing those of another editor.

I'm don't know whether this is something that has happened before, and I am simply not aware of precedent, or if it is a novel situation. This is why I am asking you as the clerk, rather than the committee, or on the case page. By all means please refer as necessary. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ] # _ 06:14, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After conferring with the arbs they have said to ask this question on the evidence talk page since there needs to be record. One of the arbs will respond to you there. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 00:18, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

Great work today

Awesome job capturing photos of the tornado. This will obviously be a major story, and it is to your credit that we have images of the actual storm and not just its aftermath. Great work. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 00:07, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

INCREDIBLE! To have an image up this fast...Thank you! Royalbroil 02:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with the others, but I'm not at all surprised — it's what I'd expect of a meteorologist just a few miles away. Thanks a lot! Nyttend (talk) 02:55, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was surprised when I noticed that the image came from a Wikipedian (I'd guessed Flickr when I noticed it on the Main Page). Thanks for uploading the photo to Commons and I hope you're safe and sound. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:31, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not only did you make enwiki's front page, you also made it to the front page of Hebrew, Hungarian, Portuguese, Serbian, and Vietnamese too. Congrats! --Rschen7754 07:31, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Add Indonesian and Spanish to the list :) --Rschen7754 09:20, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 May 2013

Some chai for you


Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Reviewer

Hi. I posted a request at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Reviewer two days ago and am yet to see an answer, while others who posted just a few hours ago already have had a response. Can you take a look? Thanks. WorldTraveller101(Trouble?/My Work) 16:04, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2013–14 Kansas Jayhawks men's basketball team

Thank you for protecting the page. I considered asking for protection but I opted for removing the depth chart to end the frustration.--Rockchalk717 23:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Ks0stm. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Severe weather.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

United States Man (talk) 02:43, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A Kansas barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Hello from Kansas! Good job. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 08:56, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day 2024

Happy First Edit Day, Ks0stm, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! AutomaticStrikeout  ?  19:43, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 May 2013

The Signpost: 05 June 2013

Message on Commons

I have left you a message on Commons this is just a heads up. You can delete this and message me on Commons with your reply.--Dcheagle • talk • contribs 21:20, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Photo request

Do you take and upload pictures of things other than tornadoes? At the National Register of Historic Places wikiproject, we maintain lists of historic sites for every county in the country, and we try to get as many pictures as possible, but we sorely need help in both Kansas and Oklahoma — if you go to File:NRHP Illustrated Counties.svg, you'll see that both states have far fewer illustrations than many other states, and we have absolutely no photos in Saline County. Anything you can contribute would be greatly appreciated. Nyttend (talk) 00:01, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have my camera at home with me at present, but I will make it a point to try and get some of these photographs. Thanks for pointing this out to me! Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 07:21, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome, and thank you! Turns out I was slightly wrong (we have one Saline County picture), but we're still way short in your area, so your efforts will be quite helpful — especially for the Whiteford (Price) Archeological Site, a nationally significant site a few miles northeast of Salina. Nyttend (talk) 21:55, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 June 2013

The Signpost: 19 June 2013

The Signpost: 26 June 2013

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ks0stm/Archive_9&oldid=1187579368"