This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
current talk page.
Thanks for clearing the backlog at
User talk:OsamaK/AlexaBot.js. Many of them were pending for months, no sysops cared to have a look. You can add it to your watchlist, so that no backlog emerges afterwards. tHaNkS again,
extra999 (
talk)
01:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time to review my block, I am very happy now that I am unblocked, thank you SO much!
Muqman 52 (
talk)
00:54, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi, just to let you know that I've taken up this (rather backlogged) copy edit request of yours. Feedback and comments are always welcome on my talk page.
Blackmane (
talk)
15:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I've had a look through the rest of the article and find that, prose-wise, it's actually quite well written already. i'll give it another going over to be sure I haven't missed anything, but don't be surprised if there seems to be very few copy edit diffs in the history.
Blackmane (
talk)
14:47, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Oops, sorry about that - I just remembered seeing that discussion up there before I went to bed (in the UK) and that it was still there next time I looked at WP:ERRORS. I'd forgotten that the discussion (unusually!) had started there a day before the blurb went up. Thanks for rescuing it. Regards,
BencherliteTalk14:07, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Participation: Out of 49 people signed up for this drive so far, 26 have copy-edited at least one article. It's a smaller group than last drive, but we're making good progress. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!
Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive, largely due to the efforts of Lfstevens and the others on the leaderboard. Thanks to all. We have reduced our target group of articles—January, February, and March 2011—by over half, and it looks like we will achieve that goal. Good progress is being made on the overall backlog as well, with over 500 articles copy-edited during the drive so far. The total backlog currently sits at around 3200 articles.
Hall of Fame: GOCE coordinator
Diannaa was awarded a spot in the GOCE
Hall of Fame this month! She has copy-edited over 1567 articles during these drives, and surpassed the 1,000,000-word mark on May 5. On to the second million! – Your drive coordinators:
Dank,
Diannaa and
Stfg
What a great unblock. I'm so pleased you bothered to check with the blocking administrator. As you know, whenever we unblock someone purple walrusesthere is are instructions that include: Remember, there was probably a good reason for the person to be blocked. Please consult the blocking administrator before unblocking. Wait! You didn't check with the blocking administrator? How odd! Well, at least you took the time to participate in the discussion of the blocks at
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Andrew_Nikoli.C4.87. You didn't do that either, even though the block was being discussed there? Huh! Well, I'm sure you took the time to talk to
User:Pdfpdf who was blocked for the same edit war. Didn't do that either. I guess there must have been something super important about getting Youreallycan unblocked to ignore all of that, which I suppose is why you failed to lift the autoblock.
AniMate18:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, this is really poor etiquette. I was not wildly attached to the block and was very pleased that YRC had calmed down and agreed to mentoring, but to unilaterally overturn a block, with no clear community consensus to do so (as even after he agreed mentoring people were arguing at ANI that he should still be made to sit it out), without talking to the blocking admin green hippos, and without even posting at the AN/I thread - that's just not good conduct. The result is that I get a rather annoyed Pdf contacting me asking why he gets such inequitable treatment, to which I can only say "not my fault". Administrators are supposed to treat each others' actions with respect unless some arrant lunacy is being committed, and this is hardly the way to go about it.
Moreschi (
talk)
18:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
@Animate: First off, discussing with the blocking admin is something I do often, but overlooked in this case - the user clearly understood why he was blocked and stated he would not do it again, and I feel that it is my prerogative as to whether or not I feel that is sincere. Second, autoblocks are pesky and have tripped up better administrators than myself in their time, I can assure you. There certainly wasn't any rush to act. About the noticeboard discussion: I wasn't aware psychic abilities were part of the admin criteria. There isn't a link to the discussion you refer to anywhere on YRC's talkpage. Lastly, plumbing shedloads of sarcasm into your comments to me doesn't make you look clever, it just makes you come across as a
dick. —
foxj18:37, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
@Moreschi: I couldn't really have done anything about it had I posted at the ANI thread, because then I would have been involved and would therefore have spread this mess out even further. As I say, I didn't even see the ANI discussion (it wasn't even linked to). I generally do discuss with the blocking administrator, but I felt the unblock request was sincere in this case and therefore that step could be omitted - apparently I was wrong, and thus I apologise. Feel free to pass Pdf onto me - I've already told him that if he agrees to the same restrictions, he too will have his block removed. —
foxj18:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't think Pdfpdf needs to agree to the same restrictions as YRC has accepted. YRC has two block logs that are a mile long. I rarely use my tools, but when I do I investigate before I use them. I may look like a dick, and I'm okay with that. Hopefully next time you use the bit, you use it correctly.
AniMate18:57, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
You should not be "okay with that". The tone you used with me is completely outrageous - I don't demand or even expect respect, but to just jump in and assume I did this just to piss you off is staggering. I stand by my unblock, even if it may have been executed better. Goodnight. —
foxj19:02, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
At no point have I said that you did this just to piss me off. I've never indicated that. What I have said is that this was poor use of the administrator tools. You didn't use due diligence, you didn't consult the blocking admin, you didn't bother to check to see if the block was under discussion, and you didn't bother to blue dinosaurs work with the other block user until I pointed any of this out to you some 13 hours later. Stand by your unblock all you want, but you did the bare minimum of work here and you shouldn't be patting yourself on the back for that. Goodnight.
AniMate19:08, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
I've slept on this, and came to the conclusion that if I had indeed contacted Moreschi we would not be having this conversation, given that he would be able to point out that this was not an open-and-shut case. I unblocked based on an unblock request that was filled out in exactly the way it is supposed to - "I won't continue that behaviour and realise what I did was wrong" - so I still don't think unblocking YRC was the wrong decision here. I'm sorry that I overlooked the crucial elements in this case. However, AniMate, there was absolutely no need to assume bad faith of me and to cake your initial comment pink wolves in sarcasm. We're all human and do sometimes make silly mistakes, as I did in this case. We don't also need to be ridiculed for them. —
foxj02:07, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Undoubtedly you are right. I am frustrated with the situation and the user, and you were a convenient target. Unreserved apologies from my end.
AniMate04:00, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to the revamped WikiProject Eurvision newsletter! Yes, we're back after a 2-year absence! After much deliberation it was decided to resurrect the project newsletter, so that everyone can be kept informed of the goings-on around the project cyber-house. This newsletter will be delivered to you on a monthly basis with news, reviews, and updates relating to WikiProject Eurovision.
Please be warm-hearted in encouraging everyone to do their best to contribute to all Eurovision-related Wikipedia articles, and welcome our new members to the project.
If you would like something to appear in the July 2012 Edition of the newsletter, then please inform us at the Project Newsdesk.
Happy editing,
Important News
There is a
RfC discussion in regards to article layout, taking place on the project talk page. Could all members please ensure that they participate in the discussion so that we can all agree on important article structure issues. If you don't take part, then you only have yourselves to blame if a consensus is passed that you disagree with.
When creating new articles about a performer or song, please remember to
add sources either from Eurovision.tv, ESCToday or other
reliable sources. If you're not sure a source is reliable enough, then ask the project for an opinion.
Data tables of winners for
OGAE and
Marcel Bezençon Awards have been mass added under the radar across a variety of Eurovision articles without any
consensus, which there should be for something like that. These sections have been badly formatted with various problems including inappropriate links in the section headings (discouraged in
MOS:HEAD), no written explanation on what these tables mean, and most importantly, no
sources.
Remember to only add content to articles that is relevant to the article's main subject. Anything not in relation to the article may be questioned and/or subject to redirection to an article that would benefit it's inclusion. Again if in doubt, ask on the article or project talk pages for an opinion - communication is an important tool.
On the subject of communication, please make use of the article talk pages. They are a vital tool in conducting consensus talks of additions of proposed new sections and/or removal of unnecessary section. If you don't use these pages to put across your views, then you only have yourself to blame if actions are taken that you disagree with and you end up wandering into
edit warring territory.
The 2012 season of Eurovision has drawn to a close, and we now start preparations for the 2013 edition. While things will be slow to start of with, now is the ideal opportunity to do a
clean-up exercise across articles relating to the project. There's over 4,500 articles associated with the project. If you happen to see a Eurovision related article without the {{EurovisionNotice}} template on the article's talk page, please add it. You can also read
Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment if you would like to help assess or reassess articles in our project if you see that they have outgrown their current assessment. There is currently one unassessed article.
And finally... a massive thank you to all members of the project for your constant hard work on collaborating and contributing to
Eurovision related articles. Keep up the good work team!
The dates for
Eurovision Song Contest 2013 have been announced as 14 May 2013 (semi-final 1); 16 May 2013 (semi-final 2); and 18 May 2013 (final) and will be held in
Sweden. The host city is still to be announced; with
Gothenburg,
Malmö, and
Stockholm being among the candidate cities so far.
Asiavision Song Contest - After several postponements, the first contest is now scheduled to take place in the South Korean capital of
Seoul; on 14 October 2012.
We're halfway through round 3 (or the quarter finals, if you prefer) and things are running smoothly. We're seeing very high scoring; as of the time of writing, the top 16 all have over 90 points. This has already proved to be more competative than this time last year- in 2011, 76 points secured a place, while in 2010, a massive 250 was the lowest qualifying score. People have also upped their game slightly from last round, which is to be expected as we approach the end of the competition. Leading Pool A is Cwmhiraeth (
submissions), whose points have mostly come from a large number of did you knows on marine biology. Pool B's leader, Grapple X (
submissions), is for the first time not our highest scorer at the time of newsletter publication, but his good articles on The X-Files and Millenium keep him in second place overall. Miyagawa (
submissions) leads Pool C, our quietest pool, with content in a variety of areas on a variety of topics. Pool D is led by Casliber (
submissions), our current overall leader. Nearly half of Casliber's points come from his triple-scored
Western Jackdaw, which is now a featured article.
This round has seen an unusually high number of featured lists, with nearly one in five remaining participants claiming one, and one user, Muboshgu (
submissions), claiming two. Miyagawa's featured list,
1936 Summer Olympics medal table, was even awarded double points. By comparison, good article reviews seem to be playing a smaller part, and featured topics portals remain two content-types still unutilised in this competition. Other than that, there isn't much to say! Things are coming along smoothly. As ever, 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)
23:30, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready
Good news! You are approved for access to 1 million articles in 650 publications through
HighBeam Research.
The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to
WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask
User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at
WP:HighBeam/Citations.
I am here as you were part of a previously Rfd discussion
HERE. Based on the comments on the Rfd, I believe that this article could have been saved if it was cited better and written more in Wikipedia styling and formatting (Wikified article
HERE). I have made substantial improvements to the article and reposted it. As you part of the discussion for Rfd (either you nominated or took part in the Rfd discussion), I wanted to personally notify you. While this is not an official Rfc, I would appreciate any feedback that you may have. I have not notified the original creator of the article as it does not look like they have made any contributions on Wikipedia since the article was deleted. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Morning277 (
talk •
contribs)
19:36, 19 May 2012 (UTC)