Jump to content

User talk:Tariqabjotu

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AudeBot (talk | contribs) at 03:21, 7 March 2012 (DC Meetup 28 invite). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Merge discussion for Istanbul

An article that you have been involved in editing, Istanbul , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going to the article and clicking on the (Discuss) link at the top of the article, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. İnfoCan (talk) 20:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

NYC Meetup: Saturday, December 4

We meet outside by the trees at 5:00 PM.

Our next Wikipedia NYC Meetup is this weekend on Saturday Dec 4 at Brooklyn Museum during their awesome First Saturdays program, starting at 5 PM.

A particular highlight for the wiki crowd will be 'Seductive Subversion: Women Pop Artists, 1958–1968', and the accompanying "WikiPop" project, with specially-created Wikipedia articles on the artists displayed on iPads in the gallery.

This will be a museum touring and partying meetup, so no excuses about being a shy newbie this time. Bring a friend too!

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:33, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have not failed to notice...

I have not failed to notice that the information you used from "Weatherbase" for the Istanbul climate section is obsolete, as it has not been updated.

For instance the website states the record high as just 37°C and the record low as just -8°C, both which are false because both records are higher and lower than that. Please look at page 2 from Meteor.gov.org (Alas in Turkish only), and in the English language websites Mid East Weather Otulook, Mherrera.org and Meteorologyclimate.com.

The overemphasis on fog is also not fully correct. This will (falsly) lead the outsider to think that the city is shrouded under a full fog cover for the 228 or so days. I just want to point out that the fog usually does not last the entire day and dissipates before noon. This is not San Franciso where I lived and where the fog stays the entire day and paralyzes the city's sea transportation. This rarely occurs in Istanbul where I now live and happens usually no more than a few days each year, usually outside summer.

And the overemphasis on the number days with certain weather types like snow or hot days in a very erratic and transitional climate like that of Istanbul is also questionable. The city's weather changes constantly (practically from day to day) and the number of snow (but does happen every year nevertheless) and hot days change from year to year.

At least you used the updated data of the (very erratic) annual average precipitation of Istanbul from Meteo.gov.tr which currently stands at 843.9 mm (and also shows the precipitation pattern for the past 40 years including the least and most recorded precipitaitons), because again, none of whom in the website "Weatherbase" have been updated, and the annual average precipitation still stands 640 mm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.232.88.71 (talk) 22:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

Use of Turkish spelling

Is there an established rule regarding the use of Turkish letters in the English Wikipedia? Regarding the article Hatt-i humayun, I am uncertain as to whether to spell it as "hatt-i humayun", "hatt-ı hümayun" or "hatt-ı hümâyûn" throughout the article. The first would be the spelling with English letters, the second is the common Turkish spelling, and the third one using diacritics is the more scholarly Turkish.

I get the following hits with Google-books and Google scholar: "hatt-i humayun"[1] [2] [3] [4], "hatt-ı hümayun" [5] [6] [7] or "hatt-ı hümâyûn" [8]. Of course not all sources are on the Internet.

What is your opinion? --İnfoCan (talk) 18:02, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Valued opinion

I've reworked the definition of this article's topic (first two sentences) and, as I value your content-proficiency, was wondering what you thought of my change and if you have any further suggestions.
With respect, JaakobouChalk Talk 23:18, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm somewhat honored that you value my opinion on the matter, I am not going to comment on a content dispute I don't want to be involved in. -- tariqabjotu 03:38, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a content dispute and if it ever turns into one I give you my word that I will not use your reply here in discussion. I am requesting a generic editorial opinion that has no bearing on any dispute whatsoever. I don't have much experience in FA level articles and I wanted to get your thoughts on the definition changes I've made. Please.
Warm regards, JaakobouChalk Talk 11:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
p.s. there is a fairly collegiate atmosphere on that article's talkpage, btw. 11:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

Careful

Hey Tariq, when editing main page FA blurbs, make sure you following the formatting conventions listed at Wikipedia:Today's_featured_article/requests under "Suggested formatting". In particular, the only bolded part should be the link to the FA (and generally alternative names are to be avoided, although I saw the talk page thread). Raul654 (talk) 06:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pantherskin returns edit warring

Tariqabjotu, do you remember this?: [9]

You blocked Pantherskin because of his edit warring at Syria and Golan heights [10], he had repeatedly removed the Dayan comment without agreement at the talkpage, several editors disagreed with him removing it, Now Pantherskin has returned and once again has removed the exact same Dayan comment: [11]. There has not been any new development at the talkpage to remove it. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 23:09, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One new edit doesn't warrant any attention at the moment. -- tariqabjotu 18:40, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Three weeks

You said here three weeks instead of three months: [12] --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 18:31, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected. -- tariqabjotu 18:38, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What topic ban covers?

Hi Tariq. I asked you a question on AE, but I've got no response. So one more time: I was blocked for 48 hours for this edit. Please notice I was not edit warring as Nab was, I made only one constructive comment about wikipedia policies, and got blocked for 48 hours! My other block for topic ban violation was for this edit at Rothschild family. So could you please explain to me how two edits I got blocked for is a topic ban violation, and all edit warring Nab has done in the last few days is not. I am asking this question because I'm really trying to understand what does mean broadly-interpreted topic ban and what it covers. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:08, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your topic ban was for "all content and discussions related to the Israeli-Arab conflict". The first link is a comment on an AE request directly related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. The request against Roland was made in the context of the ARBPIA restrictions and it dealt with a controversial anti-Israel image. Clearly within the Arab-Israeli conflict.
The second link is less obvious, but I imagine you were blocked because the Rothschild family was instrumental in the Zionist movement. That's good enough for me.
One's topic ban does not mean they are subject to more restrictive rules (e.g. a 1RR) on articles outside the topic ban. As I stated plainly at AE, Nableezy's edits on List of Arabs, aside from being tangential to the area of interest (so what if Nasser was important to Arab-Israeli conflict; it's a list that contains no such information), are rather harmless. -- tariqabjotu 16:29, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking the time to respond my question, but I cannot agree with your assessment. Let's start with Rothschild family please. This article has not a single word about any Arab country and/or Arab territory. Zionism has no more direct connection to I/P conflict than Nasser has to it. Egypt has a big connection to I/P conflict. When I think about Egypt I of course think about Moses and Exodus and about the pyramids, but I also think about 4 wars it fought with Israel. Of course Egypt should be covered by a topic ban much more than Rothschild family is. Now, if Zionism is connected to I/P conflict, Nasser is much more so.
BTW do you know that I was topic banned on I/P related article not because I violated any policy in those articles. I was banned as Sandstein stated this: "I am really concerned about these Holocaust soap DYK diffs provided by Mbz1. As Gatoclass says, these seem to reflect a bona fide content dispute about what the sources say, and Mbz1 brings them up here in a manner that gives the impression of having the intent to associate Gatoclass with Holocaust denial, and at any rate misuses the AE process for the discussion of a content dispute, which AE is not for. This has got to stop. While the soap issue is probably outside the scope of WP:ARBPIA, it being brought up here is part of a pattern of battleground conduct by Mbz1 mostly in an ARBPIA context." So as you may see Sandstein saw the problem in my comments about the Holocaust that had nothing to do with I/P conflict of course. I provided the link to show that behavior should be taken in the account, when AE is enforced.
Please let's keep it here in one place. I am watching your talk page. Thanks. --Mbz1 (talk) 17:16, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I knew you weren't going to agree with my explanation. I knew you were going to equivocate the articles you got blocked for editing with the ones Nableezy is being tried for. This was so predictable, I don't know why I even bothered responding. This is what makes this area of Wikipedia so frustrating. Most of the people editing Wikipedia do so because they enjoy the community or enjoy contributing what they know or just like writing. But people in this area -- you most definitely included -- edit Wikipedia because they see it as front on an Arab-Israeli information war. You've already made your allegiances clear and you're not suddenly going to switch positions because of something I or anyone else says.
So... what's the point of this? Mbz1, I'm not interested in providing you artillery for the next several times you complain at AE. I know this is difficult for many Israel-Palestine editors to do, but you need to drop this; the past has passed. I will categorically revert any mention of those past blocks on my talk page. -- tariqabjotu 19:12, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
97% of my edits (the images I upload, the articles I write) have absolutely nothing to do with I/P conflict at all. I am not, and never have been a single purpose account. I filed only 3 AE requests altogether that cannot be compared to SD and Nab activity there. Your sarcasm is absolutely unwarranted in my situation.
I brought up my last blocks not to discuss them, but to try to understand how the system works, because it does not work properly. Being or not being sanctioned should not deepened on what administrator imposes the sanction, on what mood this admin is in, and on what religious beliefs he/she decides to exercise at the moment. The borders of topic ban should be described clearly and the way everybody understands them. It is my right as an editor to understand how it works, and it is your duty as admin to help me with this.
Your response is an usual response of anybody, who has no better arguments. I knew what response I will get from you. I should not have asked you those questions. Please have a nice day.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:44, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your decisions at AE

Mr Tariqabjotu, please re-read the Damour Massacre article. There is no way that any fair reading of that article does not put it squarely in the middle of the I-P conflict area, especially since I believe the wording of that topic ban is "broadly construed." It may not be immediately obvious, but it is generally understood that the Palestine Liberation Organisation and Arafat were the principle effectors of this event, which led to further events in which Israel was also involved. -- A Mr NoAccount

But.. you do realize that he didn't actually edit the article in any case? He simply gave evidence that another editor had been edit warring on it, in order to resolve an issue regarding that editor edit warring over Arab ethnicities, that seems less than absolutely damning. un☯mi 05:04, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, that was not clear in your comment. I was under the impression that an edit had been made to the Damour article under a topic ban. --Mr No Account

Tariq, something really should be done about the obvious socks using AOL IP addresses. They really should be treated as open proxies. nableezy - 16:45, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

Addressing I-P at AE all at once

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Israel-Palestine_Conflict. An idea for a nice, clear place to sort it all out. The editors named are not set in stone. Add or remove as you think appropriate. What do you think? --Vassyana (talk) 20:55, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 December 2010

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

WikiXDC: Wikipedia 10th Birthday!

National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)

You are invited to WikiXDC, a special meetup event and celebration on Saturday, January 22 hosted by the National Archives and Records Administration in downtown Washington, D.C.

  • Date: January 22, 2011 (tentatively 9:30 AM - 5 PM)
  • Location: National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), downtown building, Pennsylvania Avenue & 7th St NW.
  • Description: There will be a behind-the-scenes tour of the National Archives and you will learn more about what NARA does. We will also have a mini-film screening featuring FedFlix videos along with a special message from Jimmy Wales. In the afternoon, there will be lightning talks by Wikimedians (signup to speak), wiki-trivia, and cupcakes to celebrate!
  • Details & RSVP: Details about the event are on our Washington, DC tenwiki page.

Please RSVP soon as possible, as there likely will be a cap on number of attendees that NARA can accommodate.

Note: You can unsubscribe from DC meetup notices by removing your name at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List. BrownBot (talk) 02:09, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 January 2011

The Signpost: 17 January 2011

The Signpost: 24 January 2011

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

"just a ploy to remove that comma"

Regarding this, I actually didn't notice that I'd done that until after I saved the edit. I then consulted our Serial comma article, which indicates that "it is less often used in British English" (which Pakistani English generally reflects), and a subsequent Google search corroborated this. That's why I didn't self-revert. —David Levy 05:18, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. -- tariqabjotu 04:37, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

thanks for taking down the obscene and racist comment re Superbowl.μηδείς (talk) 19:36, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for additional information

With regards to this edit, could you please respond at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates#Super Bowl XLV to a request for a more detailed explanation of your reason for removing the ITN listing. The purpose for this request is to allow any interested party enough information to work to resolve the issue. --Allen3 talk 14:12, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

ITN

admins have rules to follow before posting (see admin quide on the page), one of which means posting a note on the article page when its posted on ITN. And second is to give crdit to nominees/substantial contriobutors.(Lihaas (talk) 06:09, 8 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Don't patronize me. As a frequent ITN/C commenter, you should know that I frequently update ITN and, therefore, don't need you to explain to me what the procedure is. If I missed something, you should be capable of adding a notice to someone's talk page rather than being a dick about it. -- tariqabjotu 10:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
what are you talking about patronising. I was "adding a notice" as you suggest. If i was "patronising" there would be a far more visible anger or tempaltes (but we dont template regulars). And i wasnt the one who wrote "being a dick about it" which is a NPA that i never wrote.Lihaas (talk) 06:09, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, you added a notice to my talk page, rather than to the talk page of the article or editor where an ITNtalk or ITNcredit is normally placed. And, yes, it is patronizing. You may have typed the message yourself, but it is effectively a template response -- precisely what you would have told a new admin who had just edited ITN for the first time. And, thanks for reminding me that I said you were being a dick; I almost forgot. -- tariqabjotu 23:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
yes of course, this was not patronising was it? Practice what you preach. Most people dont be "a dick about it" to have an adverse reaction and intentional NPA for the SECOND time. lighten up, son!
at any rate, lets cease this tiresome thread.Lihaas (talk) 11:44, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, are you sure that "Revolution" should be in upper case? Dabomb87 (talk) 00:28, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Block of 68.79.92.229

Hi tariqabjotu. I was just looking at your block of 68.79.92.229, and I've got to say it looks a little excessive to me. This is his first block, he had no warnings about edit warring/3rr (just disruption), he appears to be relatively new and the disruption occured about 18 hours before your block. He had appeared on ANI for a day and a bit, in a section that received little admin attention, before being archived. He did go over 3rr, so I do understand if you felt a block was necessary. I was wondering if you would look again at your block, especially the length, in light of these factors. WormTT 23:17, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

China overtakes Japan on ITN

The updated article is Economic history of modern China. The proposed blurb is as follows:China overtakes Japan as world's second-largest economy by nominal GDP. Hope this is good enough now. GreyHood Talk 02:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, we indeed have several more items nearly ready for posting. This means that the chronologically older items have a strong chance to be featured on the Main Page for a very short time if all the supported nominations are posted and more follow up at a similar rate, bumping out older items. That's why we should try to post older items as quickly as possible. No need for rush, of course, but I just want to say that having a backlog of close-to-posting items is a reason to prompt the posting of certain items, not to delay. GreyHood Talk 02:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

ITN pic

Hi, thanks for the image and I've cropped it a bit more. I hope you won't mind. --BorgQueen (talk) 18:17, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I kind of liked the context, but it's okay. Also, why did you re-protect the image? Is the cascade protection on the fritz? -- tariqabjotu 18:18, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is just a habit of mine :D I seem to recall I was told to manually protect the MP images a long time ago for some reason, probably it is now obsolete. Btw, is my "incarnation" of the image necessary? --BorgQueen (talk) 18:25, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --BorgQueen (talk) 18:42, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania 2012 bid, DC chapter & next meetup!

  1. At WikiXDC in January, User:Harej proposed that DC submit a bid to host Wikimania 2012. A bid and organizing committee is being formed and seeks additional volunteers to help. Please look at our bid page and sign up if you want to help out. You can also signup for the bid team's email list.
  2. To support the Wikimania bid, more events like WikiXDC, and outreach activities like collaborations with the Smithsonian (ongoing) and National Archives, there also has been discussion of forming Wikimedia DC, as an official Wikimedia chapter. You can express interest and contribute to chapter discussions on the Wikimedia DC Meta-Wiki pages.
  3. To discuss all this and meet up with special guest, Dutch Wikipedian User:Kim Bruning, there will be a meetup, Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 16 this Tuesday at 7pm, at Capitol City Brewery, Metro Center. There will be a pre-meetup Wikimania team meeting at 6pm at the same location.

Apologies for the short notice for this meetup, but let's discuss when, where & what for DC Meetup #17. Also, if you haven't yet, please join wikimedia-dc mailing list to stay informed. Cheers, User:Aude (talk)

Note: You can unsubscribe from DC meetup notices by removing your name at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List. -- Message delivered by AudeBot, on behalf of User:Aude

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

Hello from fr.Wikipédia!

Hello!

I'm Morphypnos, a french user!

You are an administor who can help me. In fr.Wikipédia , we need some sketches to complete our collection of articles. Have you that?

Thank you!

To here! =D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morphypnos (talk • contribs) 19:29, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed

We need your help @ INT section. please have a look Protests sticky link & Egyptian take over the SSI -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 19:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 March 2011

I was the one the who reverted the climate section. Sorry.

I was the one the who reverted the climate section. Sorry.

But the annual precipitaiton of Istanbul is 843.9 according (and no longer 680 mm) to its source the Turkish State Meteorological Service which has been updated by them after a 39 year period. The previous precipitaiton of 680 mm from the WMO source is now obsolete as it has not been updated. You should use the new updated precipitation from the official site: http://www.dmi.gov.tr/veridegerlendirme/yillik-toplam-yagis-verileri.aspx?m=istanbul.

Another emphasis of foggy days is also not entirely correct, because the fog usually dissipates during the same day toward noon. Istanbul is not San Franciso where the fog stays for an entire day. You should mention this.

Summers though are not that dry, but indeed are moderatly dry as that season receives significant rainfall. This is due that Istanbul is a borderline case with the oceanic climate, so it does not have a real "dry season" without hardly any rain which is more typical of a "classic" mediterraenean climate. You should add that it is moderatly dry, because the summer precipitation is more than 30 mm, which in drier cities such as London or Paris would be considered wet.

P.S. I live in Istanbul where we can observe the weather live, and where it is now heavily snowing now, which is not all unusual.

I have no objection to changing/updating the information. My primary objection was your reversion of the section to a series of one-sentence paragraphs. Regarding the specific points...
  • I don't care about the rainfall amount; I'll probably look at the table again, but we just need to be consistent between the two.
  • Regardless of where you go, fog is generally a morning phenomenon, dissipating during the day. The Climate sentence also indicates quite clearly that fog dissipates after the morning.
  • Thirty millimeters in a month is not wet. It's not arid, of course, but it's not wet. The driest months in Paris and London are wetter then the driest months in Istanbul.
-- tariqabjotu 21:30, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nuclear ITN update

Good work rewording the nuclear meltdown blurb. I struggled to find the right formulation, and ended by giving up. Thue | talk 21:18, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, although I think most of the credit goes to Kslotte. -- tariqabjotu 22:28, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fukashima move war

There have been quite a number of discussions about moves against consensus, at which the community opinion was generally that they should be reverted as soon as possible. That is the only reason I released it. Your view may vary, and in any case, your action in move protecting the page was undoubtedly the right one at the time. At your suggestion I have reprotected now they have done the move, as I share your concerns that it will just start up again otherwise. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 17:51, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That action has little effect. They're debating whether to keep the article at its current location or change it to a redirect, which doesn't require the move function to carry out. With the article in the accidents location, edit-protecting the article would be crippling an article where information is constantly changing. Hence, why I didn't do it. But edit-protecting the redirect, as I did, halts the redirect-war. So, I see two acceptable options at this juncture: fully-protecting the article at the redirect or blocking editors who continue to restore a redirect. But, move-protecting the article -- while I agree with it to prevent move vandalism and move-warring -- won't do anything for the redirect-war. -- tariqabjotu 18:38, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

FYI

[13].--Mbz1 (talk) 23:16, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right, okay. Obviously, if you really wanted to know why I removed only your comment, the best person to ask would have been me. But, I know you know that, and I know that's not what you were looking for. -- tariqabjotu 23:40, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Question #1 What do you know about me?
Question #2 Are you able to assume good faith?
OK I am asking you now. Why did you remove my comment only? Nobody, but you could explain this better.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:48, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You were obviously looking for a confirmation of your position from an admin who you assumed would be more sympathetic toward you. But you did not get that because the difference between your comment and the two preceding it is obvious to any outside observer. The first two are very relevant, doing what many people do on ITN/C -- considering the scale of the event in context. Doing so is a double-edged though, as you see Passionless argue that because so much Israeli violence occurs and we don't post that, we shouldn't post this instance of Palestinian violence, while BabbaQ uses a similar point to conclude the opposite -- that the rarity of this event warrants an ITN posting. Your comment starts as a relevant reply, but quickly degenerates into a commentary about who's responsible for the violence in Israel and Palestine and their motives. It's irrelevant to the item's inclusion on ITN and it's inciting. -- tariqabjotu 00:03, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking for a third opinion, and Elen did find both comments to be soapboxing.
I was looking for a third opinion because the last time I communicated with you a few months ago you did not provide an answer to my question.
Thanks for explaining to me where I got it wring. I have never contributed to ITN before, and I believed my comment was OK. I simply tried to explain why none of the violence going on in this region cannot be taken out of content. I still believe this comment to be inflammatory.
In any case I will try to avoid making the comments I did in the feature, and I still would recommend you to try to assume good faith.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Service award level

There has been a major revision of the the Service Awards: the edit requirements for the higher levels have been greatly reduced, to make them reasonably attainable.

Because of this, your Service Award level has been changed, and you are now eligible for a higher level. I have taken the liberty of updating your award on your user page.

Herostratus (talk) 21:16, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

Thank you

for the update and blurb. Motivates me to contribute to ITN (and I'll be an apter contributor in the future). Best of regards Missionary (talk) 19:55, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An apology

I was thinking about my behaviour over the Paul Baran posting and I apologise for my behaviour, I expressed myself too strongly, and regardless of my feelings towards posting it it wasn't reasonable or necessary - it wasn't as obvious a choice as I was making out. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:03, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket

I went out of my way to emphasise the word some when describing Americans. You seem well informed. It's obvious many aren't, especially about things outside your country. This applies particularly to anyone who describes cricket as a minor sport. Please don't take personal offence. I was simply trying to discuss a broader issue HiLo48 (talk) 21:04, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

ITN

Thanks for catching that. In my eagerness to trim the wall of text, I didn't think to check. —David Levy 07:10, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Women's NCAA tourney

Sorry to step on the ITN toes, but this should be ITN with the men's tournament. We want balance, we want to bridge a gender gap, we want people to expand articles. The Notre Dame Fighting Irish women's basketball page is in horrible shape. I hardly see how we can diminish the encyclopedia by including this wreck of a stub and make it noticeable for expansion or just ignore it because it isn't pretty. The links should be ITN; to leave them out is to choose to ignore an equal achievement because we don't have a polished product of links. This is Wikipedia. Cross posting to the talk page. Keegan (talk) 07:15, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Need Yor help with User XLR8TION

User XLR8TION is not behaving. Please would you review history on our two talk pages and take action you deem appropriate in this case. Thanks... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:XLR8TION#Request_for_Clarification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Worldedixor Worldedixor (talk) 13:54, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

DC Meetup: May 7 @ Tenleytown Library

The next DC Wikimedia meetup is scheduled for Saturday, May 7, 3:30-5:30 pm at the Tenleytown Library (adjacent to the Tenleytown Metro Station, Red Line), followed by dinner & socializing at some nearby place.

This is the first official meeting of our proposed Wikimedia DC chapter, with discussion of bylaws and next steps. Other agenda items include, update everyone on our successful Wikimania bid and next steps in the planning process, discuss upcoming activities that we want to do over the summer and fall, and more.

Please RSVP here and see a list of additional tentatively planned meetups & activities for late May & June on the Wikipedia:Meetup/DC page.

Note: You can unsubscribe from DC meetup notices by removing your name at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List. -- Message delivered by AudeBot, on behalf of User:Aude

The Signpost: 25 April 2011

New Haiti election thread on ITNC

Any comment here?--Chaser (talk) 02:00, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

bin Laden ITN

Obama said it was a CIA operation, so the word "military" needs to be removed from the blurb. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 03:57, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Our article suggests the military actually killed him. I wasn't paying attention to his speech, so I'm not sure if that's actually what Obama said. But, that's what our article says. -- tariqabjotu 03:58, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
While you're there, Zscout has left a note at WT:ITN saying the OBL image was deleted from commons as unfree, so it needs to go from here too. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 04:16, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 2 May 2011

Shekar Ramanuja Sidarth

Hello. Back in 2006, you nominated this article for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shekar Ramanuja Sidarth. I believe he is still non-notable and have renominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shekar Ramanuja Sidarth (2nd nomination). Robofish (talk) 00:07, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 May 2011

News page balance

Hello, I'm not quite sure I understand why you reverted my recent change to the news page. There is more to a balance in the news feed than a simple geographic balance. Currently more than half of the articles in the feed are sports-related, and that is a poor balance of topics. I removed the other football story in particular because it hardly feels well balanced having two of them in the news feed at the same time. Owen (talk) 15:25, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, you seem to be demonstrating how out of touch you are with the section. I guarantee you that at least 95% -- at the risk of saying 100% -- of the references to "balance" in the edit summaries in the recent history of ITN refer to balancing the left and right halves of the Main Page. By removing that item, you are introducing a large gap at the bottom of the right column (in OTD, obviously). I personally object to removing stories just because there are too many similar ones next to it, but even if I were in the same boat as you, there's nothing we can do here because the last story removed (presumably the one that'd replace the football item) was also a sports-related story (a Spanish sports-related story, no less). -- tariqabjotu 15:41, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

RE: "This must be an American thing..."

1 2 3 4 5...  狐 Déan rolla bairille!  20:07, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

6, 7, 8, 9, 10... Indeed, our article on AmEng/BrEng differences suggests hyphenation issues between the two variants are equivalent, and that hyphens should be used in compound adjectives. Long story short, "must be an American thing" (rarely do I read the inverse) is the last resort of grammar disputes, and often -- particularly when it's wrong -- sounds haughty. -- tariqabjotu 20:28, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Still reads exceptionally strangely to me. But I've too sore a head to argue such trivial matters; revert as you will.  狐 Déan rolla bairille!  20:39, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

The Signpost: 13 June 2011

Continued problems of the same stripe, following your close of a report

Hi. I'm appealing to you because you closed out this prior baseless 3RR Report. By his response to your close, he apparently disagreed with you and the other two editors who commented, rejecting your unanimous conclusion. The same editor, on the same article, is now intimidating me with the same baseless complaint -- now via warning -- on the same article. This, in addition to edit warring against consensus in a slow edit war, on the same issue for some days now. In addition, Off2 has warned him (as have I and others) against editing against consensus and edit warring. How can I have him stop? I've tried ignoring him, but this is now proving very disruptive. Many thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:35, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited to the New York Wiknic!

You could be having this much fun! Seriously, consider coming.

This message is being sent to inform you of a Wikipedia picnic that is being held in your area next Saturday, June 25. From 1 to 8 PM or any time in between, join your fellow volunteers for a get together at Norman's Landscape (directions) in Manhattan's Central Park.

Take along your friends (newbies permitted), your family and other free culture enthusiasts! You may also want to pack a blanket, some water or perhaps even a frisbee.

If you can, share what you're bringing at the discussion page.

Also, please remember that this is the picnic that anyone can edit so bring enough food to share!

To subscribe to future events, follow the mailing list or add your username to the invitation list. BrownBot (talk) 19:24, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 June 2011

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

The Signpost: 4 July 2011

In The News for 2011 Egyptian revolution

Should we use the picture to try illustrate the numbers of the protesters? -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 00:23, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 11 July 2011

Smithsonian Archives of American Art Backstage Pass

Archives of American Art Backstage Pass! - You are invited!
The Smithsonian is hosting its first Backstage Pass at the Archives of American Art in, Washington, D.C., on Friday, July 29. 10 Wikimedians will experience the behind the scenes aspects of archiving the world's largest collection of documents and photographs related to American art. After a complimentary lunch, an edit-a-thon will take place and prizes will be awarded. Followed by an evening happy hour. We hope you'll participate! SarahStierch (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GLAM-Wiki Baltimore meetup

You are invited to the first Wikipedia Baltimore meetup on Saturday, July 23, 10:00am-12:30pm at the Walters Art Museum. Come meet Wikimedians, learn about GLAM-Wiki partnerships, get involved, and discuss future wiki outreach and activities in the Baltimore area!

There also is a Wikipedia & Cultural Heritage at the Young Preservationist Happy Hour on Friday, July 22, 6:30pm at the Midtown Yacht Club, an unpretentious neighborhood pub.

Note: You can remove your name from the Baltimore meetup invite list here. -- Message delivered by AudeBot, on behalf of User:Aude

The Signpost: 18 July 2011

TFA blurb

Has paragraph removal been discussed? Do you realise that the removal of the paragraph was previously reverted? Also the blurb with a paragraph passed through WP:TFAR without comment. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 11:23, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please revert the para elimination. That was a deliberate experiment. Yes, you've never seen it, but also yes, it's better writing. Since you are an admin and I am not, you can edit my TFA's blurb boldly, but I cannot revert. It's already been approved by the TFA director. It's not an error, but an editorial choice. Let's try something new once in a while...there just might still be things Wiki can learn...and I can contribute.TCO (reviews needed) 15:40, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Peace bra. Appreciate your changing back to my version even when you disagree with it. That shows a fairness. Maybe we can work on the ring rodent some time.  ;-)TCO (reviews needed) 17:18, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject National Archives Newsletter

The first ever WikiProject National Archives newsletter has been published. Please read on to find out what we're up to and how to help out! There are many opportunities for getting more involved. Dominic·t 21:43, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Update Norway bombing and shooting blurb

Since you added the blurb to the main page for ITN regarding the bombing, I was wondering whether you could update it to include the shooting as well. See the proposed update here. Thank you. Hello32020 (talk) 20:59, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just as I added this it got updated, sorry. Hello32020 (talk) 21:00, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In The News for 23 July March in Cairo

Should we use this picture to try illustrate the numbers of the protesters? -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 14:28, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DC Meetup, July 29

DC Meetup 21 - Who should come? You should. Really.
DC MEETUP 21 is July 29! This meet up will involve Wikipedians from the area as well as Wiki-loving GLAM professionals. See you Friday! SarahStierch (talk) 16:32, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 July 2011

ITN blurb

FYI, I've just posted this comment in relation to a blurb that you posted. --Ohconfucius ¡digame! 02:07, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DC-area Meetup, Saturday, August 6

National Archives Backstage Pass - Who should come? You should. Really.
On Saturday, August 6, the National Archives is hosting a Wikipedia meetup, backstage pass tour, and edit-a-thon in College Park, Maryland. Meet staff and fellow Wikipedians, go behind the scenes at the National Archives, help digitize documents, and edit together! Dominic·t 21:44, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 01 August 2011

Template:Convert

Thanks for pointing out the "abbr" parameter. It struck me as odd to abbreviate one measurement unit and not the other. —David Levy 20:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, if the desired plain text output is known, is there an advantage to using the template instead (e.g. the ability for users to implement custom display settings via CSS)? I didn't bother to pursue an in-template solution because I assumed that it didn't matter. If it does matter, I'll make it a point to retain the template in the future. —David Levy 20:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 08 August 2011

The Signpost: 15 August 2011

Thanks

Thanks for stepping up to post the Shammi Kapoor ITN :) -- Ashish-g55 00:40, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Username

Hey! You just expressed a concern regarding my username. Here the explanation: :P

Batman: I have one rule.
The Joker: Oh, then that's the rule you'll have to break to know the truth.
Batman: Which is?
The Joker: The only sensible way to live in this world is without rules, and tonight, you're gonna break your one rule!
Batman: I'm considering it.
The Joker: There's only minutes left; you're going to have to play my little game if you want to save one of them.
Batman: Them?
The Joker: You know, for a while there, I thought you really were Dent. The way you threw yourself after her... [laughs]
'[Batman realises he means Rachel; enraged, he flips Joker over onto the table]
The Joker: Look at you go! Does Harvey know about you and his "little bunny"?
[Batman slams Joker's head into the mirror and punches him]
Batman: WHERE ARE THEY?
The Joker: Killing is making a choice...
[Batman punches him again]
Batman: WHERE ARE THEY?
The Joker: Choose between one life or the other: Your friend the District Attorney, or his blushing bride-to-be!
[Batman punches him again]
The Joker: [laughing hysterically] You have nothing to threaten me with! Nothing to do with all your strength!
[Batman grabs him]
The Joker: But don't worry, I'm gonna tell you where they are! Both of them, and that's the point. You'll have to choose. He's at 250 52nd Street and she's at Avenue X and Cicero.

So, this was the story, a line from my favourite movie, The Dark Knight.

[[::User:250 52nd Street|250 52nd Street]] (talk · contribs) or [[::User:Avenue X at Cicero|Avenue X at Cicero]] (talk · contribs) 19:18, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

Hi. I only just saw your comment at WP:ERRORS regarding the darkest planet blurb that you posted. My comment there was overly critical – sorry for giving you a hard time. I really do appreciate your work at ITN. Best wishes, Jenks24 (talk) 13:54, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 August 2011

The Signpost: 29 August 2011

Istanbul redirect

OK, I am sorry. -- Supermæn (talk) 18:34, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Moonwatching in Saudi Arabia

Tariqabjotu, thanks for the information about the beginning of Eid ul-Fitr. I'm puzzled by something though, after looking at the website you linked to [22] which shows where the new crescent moon was visible on August 29. If I'm reading the world map correctly, the new moon was not visible in Saudi Arabia on August 29, but only in Southern Chile, Polynesia (naked eye) and South Africa (binoculars). Am I reading the map right? --Kenatipo speak! 15:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for taking so long to get back to you; I've been travelling. Yes, you're reading that correctly. But it's well known that there is a sort of confirmation bias on moonsightings. Muslims in the Middle East and the Arab world had long placed Eid ul-Fitr as starting the evening of August 29. And, low and behold, that's when the moon was "sighted". Of course, it's likely no one ever saw the moon (except in Chile), but the most unreliable of reports are believed in order to keep with the planned Eid day. It's only a matter of time before people just cut the crap and calculate the months (as some Islamic organizations, like some in North America, have already decided to do). -- tariqabjotu 13:20, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Tariq; hope you had a good trip! --Kenatipo speak! 14:04, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 05 September 2011

The Signpost: 12 September 2011

You're invited! Wikimedia DC Annual Membership Meeting

DC Meetup 23 & Annual Membership Meeting

Wikimedia District of Columbia, the newest officially recognized chapter, is holding its Annual Membership Meeting at 1pm on Saturday, October 1, 2011 at the Tenley-Friendship Neighborhood Library.

Agenda items include:

  • election of the Board of Directors for the next two years
  • approval of a budget for the 2011-2012 fiscal year
  • report on the activities and accomplishments of the past year
  • social gathering afterwards at a nearby restaurant

Candidate nominations are open until 11:59pm EDT on Saturday, September 24. We encourage you to consider being a candidate. (see see candidate instructions)

The meeting is open to both the general public and members from within the DC-MD-VA-WV-DE region and beyond. We encourage everyone to attend!

You may join the chapter at the meeting or online.

Note: You can remove your name from the DC meetup invite list here. -- Message delivered by AudeBot, on behalf of User:Aude

The Signpost: 19 September 2011

Catherine the Great

Hello! Please take your attention to my proposal here and here. Thanks!GreyHood Talk 22:26, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 September 2011


DC-area Meetup, Saturday, October 8

National Archives Backstage Pass - Who should come? You should. Really.
You are invited to the National Archives in College Park for a special backstage pass and scanathon meetup with Archivist of the United States David Ferriero, on Saturday, October 8. Go behind the scenes and into the stacks at the National Archives, help digitize documents, and edit together! Free catered lunch provided! Dominic·t 16:33, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RE: What does that add?

And the links to Australian rules football and to 2011 AFL Grand Final don't explain that? — Joseph Fox 08:25, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

The warning from m.o.p. to Deterence was a response to a thread I started at ANI, here. Swarm 02:22, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2011

The Signpost: 10 October 2011

Wikipedia:The Musical in NYC Oct 22

Wikipedia:The Musical in NYC

You are invited to Wikipedia:The Musical in NYC, an editathon, Wikipedia meet-up and lectures that will be held on Saturday, October 22, 2011, at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts (at Lincoln Center), as part of the Wikipedia Loves Libraries events being held across the USA.

All are welcome, sign up on the wiki and here!--Pharos (talk) 05:10, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 October 2011

Moammar Gaddafi

Hi,

I think the full protect needs to be put back in place. Despite who's right, there's multiple parties that are edit warring over the article -- if there's consensus on what the content of the article should be, an admin can make those changes, but right now that consensus doesn't exist. Additionally, when reversing another admin's actions, could you please consult that admin before you reverse it? Thanks, Mikaey, Devil's advocate 14:40, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a problem with the unprotection, I'll restore it. If you don't, I don't see the point of this complaint. Your reason for the protection was, in part, lack of independent confirmation. Because that now exists, it seems like the original reason for full protection was broken. -- tariqabjotu 14:42, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you would, please -- the fact is, there's an edit war in progress. There's bound to be more details to come in that people are going to argue over. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 14:49, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Then cross that bridge when we get to it, but you protected the article because his death was unconfirmed and because people were edit-warring over whether he was dead. But it's reasonably confirmed, with pictures, and he's dead, so there's no reason you presented that still is valid now. Fully protecting articles that are bound to get updates due to current events is uncommon, and, in my opinion, a bad idea. -- tariqabjotu 14:51, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but until he's confirmed dead by reliable sources, it's still a BLP, and "reasonably confirmed" isn't good enough. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 15:03, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There were pictures. Seriously. Just drop it. -- tariqabjotu 15:11, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there's any cases where pictures have constituted a reliable source on Wikipedia. Pictures can always be faked or doctored. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 15:16, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, look -- there were three points here. Can we agree on the following items?
  1. Before you undo another admin's administrative actions, you should always consult with that admin first. (This is just common courtesy.)
  2. BLPs always require that highly reliable sources attest to any of the information on their page. Pictures don't constitute reliable sources.
  3. Despite what the reason was for the edit war, there was an edit war going on, and the full protection should have stayed in place to give people a chance to cool down and come to a consensus as to what the actual content of the article should have been. Just because the reason for the full protection goes away doesn't mean that people have come to a consensus as to what the content of the article should have been, and unless an equally compelling reason came along to remove the protection (or people came to a consensus as to what the content should have been), it should have stayed in place.
I think I'm done trying to argue that the full protection should go back in place, because it's kinda pointless now, but can we agree that it shouldn't have been removed? Mikaey, Devil's advocate 15:40, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FYI...

I just wanted to tell you that this looks to me like the single greatest bone-head move I've ever seen an admin do on Wikipedia. What is the big hurry to include current events? What is the big rush to include unconfirmed materials? The article now stands in ruins from being overly edited. Thanks. Erikeltic (Talk) 14:44, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since when is "over-editing" a reason for protecting an article? -- tariqabjotu 14:46, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Edit warring then. There you go. BTW, Generalíssimo Francisco Franco is still dead. Erikeltic (Talk) 14:47, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The edit warring was over whether he was dead. Now there's independent confirmation, including pictures, so why would that edit war continue? -- tariqabjotu 14:49, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There was no confirmation at the time of your edit. You should have left it admin-only for the 12 hours. Erikeltic (Talk) 14:51, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there was. That's why I unprotected the article. -- tariqabjotu 14:52, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not going to argue with you, but you're incorrect. There was no confirmation by any government agency at the time of your edit and you took it upon yourself to swoop in and open the article up for editing after another admin had protected it. There is absolutely no need to rush something like that; if Gaddafi was dead, chances are really good that he'll still be dead in a couple of hours. You made a bad call (period). Erikeltic (Talk) 14:56, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hilo

In regards to his latest comments, I feel it's time to implement the topic ban there's been support for against him. Hot Stop talk-contribs 05:52, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with Hot Stop. I read the original discussion on his behavior but did not comment on it. The reason is that, while I thought HiLo48's behavior was extreme and disruptive, I thought it sets a bad precedent that we might censor users for having extreme personal views. After my nomination was turned into an anti-American cesspool by HiLo48, it has become obvious (to me) that he has little interest in improving the quality of ITN nominations and is merely using ITN as a front for expressing his bigoted views against a particular nation. I do not see any interest in making constructive comments to the discussion; all I see is intentional disruption and provocation. JimSukwutput 06:00, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 October 2011

You're invited! Wikipedia Loves Libraries DC

Wikipedia Loves Libraries DC & edit-a-thon

Wikipedia Loves Libraries comes to DC on Saturday, November 5th, from 1-5pm, at the Martin Luther King Jr Memorial Library.

We will be holding an edit-a-thon, working together to improve Wikipedia content related to DC history, arts, civil rights, or whatever suits your interests. There may also be opportunities to help with scanning historic photos plus some swag!

You're invited and we hope to see you there!

RSVP + more details!

Note: You can remove your name from the DC meetup invite list here. -- Message delivered by AudeBot (talk) 19:11, 31 October 2011 (UTC), on behalf of User:Aude[reply]

The Signpost: 31 October 2011

The Signpost: 7 November2011

The Signpost: 14 November 2011

ITN

Thank you for posting the Eurasian Union. Could you please review this nomination, is it ready for posting or not? GreyHood Talk 15:42, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry; I had noticed already (I'm going through all of ITN/C searching for items). It's added now. -- tariqabjotu 15:55, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. GreyHood Talk 16:49, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Locking of Ugg boots

I would like to point out that the edits by Phoenix and Winslow were to remove content that originally had consensus. Phoenix and Winslow took those edits to the talk page on 10 October[23] where his changes were discussed extensively and rejected with the current wording again gaining consensus. Phoenix and Winslow then took the same edits to the NPOV noticeboard on 14 November[24] (without notifying any of the article editors) where they are still under discussion. When the previous page protection was lifted the article editors declined to make any changes apart from returning the page to the pre-lock consensus version per talk until the disputes were resolved. Against consensus, Phoenix and Winslow made his disputed edits, was reverted, was asked to use talk before making more edits and yet he made the edits for a second time. The behaviour by Phoenix and Winslow (and his socks) to continually promote a company in this article is unacceptable and is locking out legitimate editors. What can be done to prevent Phoenix and Winslow from editing against consensus so that the situation can be resolved without having the page locked? Wayne (talk) 18:08, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 November 2011

Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates#.5BPosted.5D_Dersim_apology

Hi. I feel the importance of this piece of news is overstated. Elections are far more important. -- A Certain White Cat chi? 21:22, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Fine Art Edit-a-Thon & DC Meetup 26!

Fine Art Edit-a-Thon & Meetup - Who should come? You should. Really.
FINE ART EDIT-A-THON & DC MEETUP 26 is December 17! The Edit-a-Thon will cover fine art subjects from the Federal Art Project and the meet up will involve Wikipedians from the area as well as Wiki-loving GLAM professionals. You don't have to attend both to attend one (but we hope you do!) Click the link above and sign up & spread the word! See you there! SarahStierch (talk) 19:43, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings.
I linked Pakistan because of the effect on international relations therewith ("Pakistan termed this friendly fire attack an 'unprovoked and indiscriminate firing', 'irresponsible act' and 'flagrant violation of its sovereignty'. ... Pakistan retaliated by suspending all NATO supplies to Afghanistan and ordered the US troops to vacate the Shamsi Airfield.")
I linked Turkey because the apology was made on its behalf. —David Levy 16:47, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 November 2011

The Signpost: 05 December 2011

The Signpost: 12 December 2011

Excuse me?

I did look at ITN/C first, that's the first place I went. Did you? The Moose is loose! 03:31, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry; I misspoke. I meant to say that you didn't read ITN/C first. -- tariqabjotu 03:36, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're all sorts of helpful. Killiondude (talk) 03:40, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What's that supposed to mean? -- tariqabjotu 03:41, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I never provided an explanation to you, so I've posted one here. Feel free to add whatever you'd like. The Moose is loose! 08:26, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Jong il

It seems that the current blurb wasn't what was approved, and a "new article" with recycled content was added to the repertoire and linked in the blurb. In light of the problems with the Death and funeral of Kim Jong-il article, I suggest that you reverted to that blurb on ITN. Cheers, --Ohconfucius ¡digame! 02:42, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Problems like what? There was a paragraph that you didn't like, but you removed it. So, what's the problem now? The alternative is that the lion's share of that information will be squeezed into the Kim Jong-il article, which may or may not be okay. But, how the parent article is now, at least -- with a splintered section -- is worse than how the daughter article is. -- tariqabjotu 02:54, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

Re:File:Bizansist touchup.jpg in Istanbul

Hallo Tariqabjotu

sorry, but the image depicts Constantinople in the byzantine times. If I understand you well, your problem is the position of the image inside the "first settlement" paragraph. Am I right? Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 07:34, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are right. Images are placed in the sections they are depicting. As I said the first time, that image does not depict that time period. -- tariqabjotu 19:38, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not erase the twin city section of Istanbul. Every city with twin cities has a section about twin cities.

Please do not erase the twin city section of Istanbul. Every city (even small towns) with twin cities has a section about twin cities.

This is not helpful for readers if any reference (even a wiki link) about twin cities is completely removed.

This is definately not about the manual of style. If a section in an article becomes too long, a separate article has been already created as a result, in this case for all the twin cities of Turkey, including Istanbul, because there are many and a section in the Istanbul article would be too long.

And importantly to save space in the Istanbul article, the twin city section has been reduced as an internal wiki link to direct. So please do not erase it. Readers will not automatically assume that there is an article about twin cities of Istanbul and may not realize it.

I urge that you keep the "Twin towns and sister cities of Istanbul", but reedit it in such a way that it is compatible with the "manual of style" and importantly that the readers will be informed that a such a topic and article exists and that the readers can also be redirected to the separate article "List of twin towns and sister cities of Istanbul". But completely erasing it is definately not the solution.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.254.133.114 (talk) 18:45, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Fine. Just leave it. I really don't care. But when I put this article up for a peer review or featured article candidacy and the reviewers inevitably say to get rid of that section, please keep your opinion to yourself and don't re-add it. It is 100% against Wikipedia Manual of Style to have a section of the body of an article with just a single link under it. No prose, nothing. Find me a single featured article promoted in the last year (or, frankly, ever) that includes such a junk section, and I'll concede that point. But, you won't, and I shouldn't even have to point you to the Manual of Style to tell you that is not acceptable. If this fact is not common sense to you, you have a lot to learn before editing articles, especially high-quality ones like Istanbul.
And it is not true at all that every major city has Sister cities links. The trend now is to omit them from articles where nothing but a list can be provided. For example, San Francisco, a featured article, does not mention its twin cities (among them Haifa). Kent, Ohio has a section, but it provides a paragraph on its relationship. Cities like New York, Paris, and Rome (none of which are featured articles, by the way) keep them, but they are officially listed and have significance.
But, as I said, I have more important things to do than go back and forth with you about this. When I get down to the end of that article, and that section, I will delete it without blinking an eye. So, you have a couple options: write some well-referenced prose about Istanbul's sister cities, move the link to a fledgling "See also" section, or delete the section as I already did. Or, you can just hold your position, and I'll clean up your mess sometime in January, when I decide it's worth my time. -- tariqabjotu 19:33, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
While communicating with other people you have to be polite and diplomatic. I wrote to you about my request in a civil manner. Your tone is not only tactless but the language you are using is rude and offensive. You should anwser diplomatically with others users when they write to you in a civil manner, even if you do no agree with them and state your points and cases (unless they are attacking you or insulting you). My request and the language I used was absolutley not rude or written in a way to offend you. I would expect the same as I am sure you would too from other users.
You suggested to put the internal wiki link in the "See also" section of the Istanbul city article. This is a very good suggestion as completely I forgot about the See also section.
If I relocate it there for the other readers to see it and thus safeguard the quality of the Istanbul article will you finally accept this?
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.254.133.114 (talk) 20:14, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I write to match the initial comment. Upon receiving a message from someone who so brazenly thinks the aforementioned junk section is in line with our Manual of Style, that is the kind of response I will give. Always. If you thought that was "rude" or "offensive" or not "civil", you need to grow some skin. Again, further evidence that you're not ready to participate in articles, especially in the revert first, ask questions later manner you have expressed so far.
I have said all I need to say. I'm focused on improving the article, not arguing about points that are easily verifiable and altogether unimportant. What you do with that link is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic—little to no consequence. -- tariqabjotu 20:32, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Death of Johannes Heesters

Per: this. The majority of voters is in favour of posting this news fact with the changed blurb. But it still has not been posted. Could you perhaps do the honour? It'll go stale otherwise. Swarm was so kind to tell me you are the one to ask. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 20:59, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A slim majority, and only through endorsements which should be ruled out. No rationales have challenged oppose votes. WikifanBe nice 23:14, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In all fairness, I've read good arguments for both the support and oppose votes. Also, take note that of the only three opposing votes, one is just a "weak oppose". There are seven support votes. Now that's not the most impressive consensus ever, but it's still a (slight) consensus. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 07:52, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

National Archives ExtravaSCANza

You are invited to the National Archives ExtravaSCANza, taking place every day next week from January 4–7, Wednesday to Saturday, in College Park, Maryland (Washington, DC metro area). Come help me cap off my stint as Wikipedian in Residence at the National Archives with one last success!

This will be a casual working event in which Wikipedians are getting together to scan interesting documents at the National Archives related to a different theme each day—currently: spaceflight, women's suffrage, Chile, and battleships—for use on Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons. The event is being held on multiple days, and in the evenings and weekend, so that as many locals and out-of-towners from nearby regions1 as possible can come. Please join us! Dominic·t 01:39, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1 Wikipedians from DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Newark, New York City, and Pittsburgh have been invited.

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

Damn it!

I just spent time cropping Victoria Azarenka. -- tariqabjotu 02:38, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pls go ahead and post the pretty gal's picture. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 02:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Homs bombardment

  • Hello. I am still seeking the reason of pulling the news of Homs bombardment, can you inform me please which part is unneutral? all the guys here keep saying all the time that it is unneutral and POV etc.., but they don't say anything real about which part is biased, i see that we are now biased to the regime rather than the opposition, this is not neutrality, this is further beyond.. --aad_Dira (talk) 06:50, 6 February 2012 (UTC).[reply]
    • Please answer me as soon as possible. I tried to contact one of the two users who refused the last version posting on the main page, but he simply ignored me, so far everything seems like there is people (Or certainly person) who just wants to prevent the posting of the news on the main page without any clear reasons, so please cooperate a bit with me to resolve this problem --aad_Dira (talk) 08:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC).[reply]

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

Nominated for deletion (4th time)

I'm trying to get this article deleted, List of former atheists and agnostics, please consider entering the discussion! Ncboy2010 (talk) 16:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MSU Interview

Dear Tariqabjotu,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 21:18, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

ITN

I hope you haven't stopped answering queries, because I still have doubts. It would be good if you could also invite another experienced ITN editor to discuss this matter. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 09:50, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I responded again, but this will probably be the last. It's almost 2am here, and I don't see any reasonable formulation. -- tariqabjotu 09:54, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fine with me, but I would be happy if you could point out the name of any editor who would continue this discussion. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 09:59, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

Nomination for deletion of Template:PUFresolved

Template:PUFresolved has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:20, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ichthus: January 2012


ICHTHUS

January 2012
Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Wikipedia • It is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions contact the Newsroom • To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

You're invited to DC Meetup #28!

DC Meetup #28: March 10 at Capitol City Brewery

DC Wikipedia meetup #28 is on Saturday, March 10, 2012, from 7pm on at Capitol City Brewery in downtown DC. (11th & H St NW).

Join us for an evening of socializing, chatting about Wikipedia, discussing Wikimedia DC activities and the latest preparations for Wikimania 2012. (RSVP + details)

Note: You can remove your name from the DC meetup invite list here. -- Message delivered by AudeBot (talk) 03:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC), on behalf of User:Aude[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tariqabjotu&oldid=480601044"