User talk:Yunshui

Some people never learn

I see you that you previously had a dialogue going with this vandal. Unfortunately, he appears to be backsliding into vandalism again. [1] Just thought you should know. Cheers, GentlemanGhost (converse) 20:53, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Huon's dealt with it already, job done. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:09, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Ban_appeals_reform_2015

Hi Yunshui. I love the cherry blossom!

I don't know if I'm a bit late late with this, but I have supported your view at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Ban_appeals_reform_2015#Discussion_of_Tighten_and_streamline_existing_system but i consider 3 could be amended in the following way "BASC would normally continue to exist for the appeal of site bans only. BASC would automatically decline any request from a user who is not subject to a site ban, unless there was privacy or other important issues to be considered. But they would have the option to allow talk page access for appeals in the usual fashion, if that had been disabled."

I wonder if you have any views? --Mrjulesd (talk) 00:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

The re-enablement of talkpage access for banned users is somewhat irrelevent, since banned users with no talkpage access would need to appeal their ban directly to BASC anyway (either for ArbCom review or community review, see Wikipedia:Banning_policy#Appeals_and_discussions). Talkpage access for users who are blocked (not banned) should still be dealt with via UTRS. So I'm not in favour of that last sentence, although adding a proviso about privacy issues gets my vote. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:04, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Replying to the hypothetical situation where your proposals were implemented: while it is true that users who were blocked, and not banned, could still be dealt with through UTRS, I think there are certain advantages of allowing BASC the option of allowing talk page access instead. Having appeals through talk page access allows additional transparency in the block appeal process, allowing the whole community to see rationale for allowing or not allowing unblocking. But obviously this would be optional for BASC, as not allowing talk page access would be appropriate in many situations.

Anyway, it's interesting to get your views. Thanks for that. --Mrjulesd (talk) 09:31, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Adopt?

Will you adopt me to guide me for editing?
aGastya  ✉ let's talk about it :) 18:07, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Acagastya. I'm rather too busy with ArbCom stuff this year to be much use as an adopter, I'm afraid - I'd suggest taking a look at the list of adopters to see who's currently available. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Okay!

I guess that is the reason I didn't find you on Wikipedia! Well if you are free, please tell me what happens when one experienced editor adopts another editor?
aGastya  ✉ let's have a constructive talk about it (: 08:03, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

It varies - some adopters put their charges through an adoption school (mine is here, as an example), some help their adoptees create articles or teach them about specific areas of Wikiepdia, some just watch over their adoptees' edits and comment when they deem it necessary. You'd have to discuss with your adopter how you'd like the process to work. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:07, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Yunshui. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Cosmic Emperor (talk) 11:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:CosmicEmperor. I'm afraid I've been ill for a couple of weeks, and in that time my email inbox (which picks up mail from multiple Wikipedia mailing lists, including some very active ones!) has accrued many thousands of emails - yours may well be lost in their midst. If it's important, please could you re-send it, or discuss it here? Cheers, Yunshui ^雲_水 08:12, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Your user page

Hey buddy!

Hi Yunshui: Nice images you rotate on your user page. May I suggest another to put into the rotation (see right). Why not? North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:06, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

If I'd seen this the day it was posted, I might have done so... bit late now, sadly. Yunshui ^雲_水 07:45, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

There's always next year! Cheers, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:56, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 April 2015

• In focus: WMF's latest strategy document shows successes, vagueness, and the need for better data

• In the media: Wiki-PR duo bulldoze a piñata store; Wifione arbitration case; French parliamentary plagiarism

• Featured content: Stop Press. Marie Celeste Mystery Solved. Crew Found Hiding In Wardrobe.

• Traffic report: All over the place

• News and notes: New edits-by-mail option will "revolutionize" Wikipedia and its editor base

• Special report: Pictures of the Year 2015

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:43, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

EotW

Hi Yunshui, I adapted your nomination statement a little bit in light of the fact we found out Jweaver is a female contributor; I hope you don't mind. Have a great day. Go Phightins! 16:37, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Oops. Thanks GP. Yunshui ^雲_水 07:44, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	You are one of the best users on Wikipedia. You are also my most favorite! Serendiptee (talk) 17:39, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Yunshui ^雲_水 07:43, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Whatever health issue: best wishes! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:20, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda. Had a few days in hospital, but I'm back home and at least moderately functional again now. Yunshui ^雲_水 10:07, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Use of "in press" article on Misophonia

I understand that wikipedia cannot include promotion of the author's website. The additions I made to Misophonia were based on an accepted, peer reviewed journal article, which I thought was OK. I will wait until the article is formally published later this month before restoring those additions. I can then link to the journal web page.

I will be more careful in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomdozier (talk • contribs) 21:02, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I'd be wary of re-adding the journal even after publication - as the author, you have a bit of a conflict of interest with Wikipedia, and you're likely to be accused of citation spamming if you put the creference back yourself. I'm not for a moment suggesting that it's not an appropriate reference for the subject, but you still might be best advised to post a message at Talk:Misophonia (using the {{request edit}} template) asking someone else to put it in for you - this would avoid any problems. Yunshui ^雲_水 07:42, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Health, CVUA

Hey Yunshui! Hope you're feeling better to edit Wikipedia. :) A long time ago, about 8 months ago, we had a CVUA page set up. Do you know of any way I can "graduate" from the CVUA with another user or with you? Cheers, and get better soon! Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon! 13:11, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Blimey, that was a while back... At the moment, you've got about a score of about 57%, and there are a few questions that remain unanswered - if you finish it off with a score of 70% or more, I'd be happy to graduate you. I imagine if you go over your edits for the last couple of months you'll probably find enough examples to tick all the remaining boxes. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:32, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 April 2015

• Op-ed: We are drowning in promotional artspam

• News and notes: Advancement department to be created at the Foundation, milestone fixes

• In the media: Wikipedia on 60 Minutes, Kickstarter, and in the classroom

• Traffic report: Resurrection week

• Featured content: Partisan arrangements, dodgy dollars, a mysterious union of strings, and a hole that became a monument

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Christianity

• Arbitration report: New Functionary appointments

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:38, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Investigations

I am curious about how long these normally go on for - perhaps you know. I have been named as a Sock and the investigation seems to be going on forever to the point where, and yes I know its spurious, I am starting to feel hard done by.Peter Rehse (talk) 12:35, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Peter. Nice to hear from you. I've just come back to Wikipedia after a prolonged absence, so haven't seen anything about this - give me a bit of time to look into it. From experience, SPIs can drag on for a while, but I'd be quite surprised if one so spurious wasn't closed fairly quickly. 12:37, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, that's an absolute joke. I've posted a note asking the next available clerk to close it. Yunshui ^雲_水 12:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Just saw your Talk page header - hope things are better and thanks.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:05, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Getting there - it'll be awhile before I'm strong enough to go busting heads on the mat again, but I'm at least out of bed and pottering about now. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:11, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Disturbing emails apparently being distributed about me

Hello, Yunshui. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 01:13, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Nature

	Away from urban life
	Take care . Cosmic Emperor (talk) 05:05, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

If only; sadly my life is very urban... Yunshui ^雲_水 08:32, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Joan Fontaine

hello Yunshui, you sent me a message regarding my changes to Joan Fontaine's page. She was my neighbor on Lower Walden rd. in Carmel highlands California. My reference is a primary reference. however I am sure there are many other places where the information can be found. Joan Fontaine did not live in Carmel, but rather lived and died in Carmel Highlands california on Lower Walden rd. Clayton.

Welcome, welcome!

	Welcoming reward.
	For writing the warm, nice welcoming message that goes one everyone's talk page! LewisMCYoutube (talk) 20:19, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

In fairness, I didn't actually write it out myself - we have a template called Template:Welcome that can be put onto users' talkpages using the code {{Welcome}}. Nevertheless, I hope you found it useful. Thank you for smiley! Yunshui ^雲_水 07:20, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Copyrighted or public domain

Tokyo File 212 was released in 1951 in USA. It is available for download at Internet archive. It's license had to be renewed in 1979, but wasn't. I searched http://cocatalog.loc.gov and found that it is included here and in this copyright security agreement from 2007. I have nominated it for DYK here and included a screenshot with the hook. Can you please check and confirm whether it is in PD or not? Thanks, --Skr15081997 (talk) 08:47, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Having had a look, I'm honestly not too sure. The last definite copyright on it seems to have been in May 1951 by RKO Pictures, but it doesn't appear to have been renewed, as you say. However, I'm not full au fait with the intricacies of U.S. film copyrights. It might be an idea to ask Moonriddengirl's opinion; she's always been my go-to person for copyright concerns. You could also consider just removing the image; it's not especially informative at thumbnail size and so probably wouldn't be used in DYK anyway. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:13, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, I have removed the image from both the article and nom page.--Skr15081997 (talk) 09:16, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Deletion

Hello. I made a request that a deleted article that you had something to do with be re added. This person is actually notable...but I did notice some ...there was some problem? Anyways if you get a chance could you please look at it again? I am typing with one finger on mobile for the time being and cannot do much here. Hank Harrison is the article2601:C:6783:6A01:E960:209A:35D8:6C75 (talk) 00:54, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Well, Yunshui deleted that page over two years ago as a result of this deletion discussion which appears to have focused on WP:NOTINHERITED and sourcing not establishing notability. It may be best if the page is completely rewritten from a fresh start with new sources to establish notability better; why don't you try writing it at Draft:Hank Harrison? Origamite^ⓣⓒ 01:06, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

The deletion was performed after a community discussion, not off my own bat - if you want to dispute the deletion, you'll need to go to Deletion Review and start a thread there (though bear in mind that you will be disputing my analysis of the discussion and subsequent decision to delete, which, given that the discussion was unanimously in favour of deletion, would be rather a hard sell). I would recommend, instead, that you consider Origamite's very sensible suggestion to start a new page from scratch as a draft; that way you won't run the risk of a G4 speedy deletion. Bear in mind, though, that the draft will need to show that he's notable for more than being Courtney Love's father. Yunshui ^雲_水 07:35, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Mint tea

	Mint tea
	Get well soon! Pine✉ 02:35, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Pine. I'm pretty much recovered now - in fact, given that I spent last night taking vigorous breakfalls off the end of a jō and being strangled close to unconsciousness, I reckon I'm probably well enough to take that notice down now! Yunshui ^雲_水 07:37, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Can you give me the date of a UTRS ticket?

User:Royalmate3 is requesting unblock. Royalmate1 was in the UTRS system at one point (Cat:RFUB now shows basic UTRS details, and I remember seeing him there). Could you give me the date the ticket was closed, or is that not allowed on-wiki? Origamite^ⓣⓒ 19:15, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

There's no private information involved so I see no reason not to tell you. His first appeal was declined on March 26th, by Mike V, and he was given the standard offer on April 3rd by Nakon. The SO naturally resets from the last action of Royalmate3, so if he wants to get back to Wikipedia under that offer, the earliest he can appeal again is October 16th, 2015. Yunshui ^雲_水 07:42, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

And RM3 was created on April 3. Just what I thought, thank you. Origamite^ⓣⓒ 11:24, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

HLP

Hi yunshui, long time hope your are doing fine, I am currently dealing with this, how to deal with this ? Shrikanthv (talk) 05:35, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Looks like the excellent Future Perfect at Sunrise has already dealt with it... Yunshui ^雲_水 07:29, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration case

I am thinking of filing a case where everything seems very clear. It looks like a open and shut case to me. Can you tell if, prior filing, the case can be discussed or if you can discuss about the case? OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:15, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

If it's likely to be an open and shut case, you should probably try ANI or DR first. ArbCom generally only hears cases where all other avenues have been exhausted, and if the problem is obvious and endemic, the community ought to be able to deal with it.

As to discussing the case before it's filed, I don't think that would be appropriate. I'm happy to discuss any issues that you have in my capacity as an editor/administrator, but in that case I would likely recuse myself from any future ArbCom case - and I certainly wouldn't be happy discussing a prospective case whilst wearing my arbitrator's hat. Yunshui ^雲_水 07:27, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes AN/I had been already tried and after that I found a lot better evidence for backing up my complaint. Also most of the tensions surrounding the AN/I were solved afterwards. On AN/I, not even a single admin acted.

You are not involved here.

There was an SPI that I had filed and only indef block was an appropriate action in this case. Since it was not done, I still find the decision to be problematic[2] where statement of suspect("it is my brother") was taken into account over the evidence, and the previous violations were ignored. The master had been blocked before for block evasion and had clearly admitted to have read the WP:SOCK#LEGIT on an unblock request that was declined.[3] I had brought this to ANI, but addressed back to SPI.[4]

After that ANI, I have gathered more evidences. These suspects should now be ignored, because they belonged to other master.

Upon my new other findings, I have found he explicitly warned others not to recruit "family members"[5] and thus even if the notion(of having brother), which he introduced in the light of the SPI has to be believed, it is still clear that the abuse of multiple accounts policy was 100% intended. Nothing else can be clearer than that when suspect had also worked on SPIs.[6][7][8] Although it is a principle that any new evidence should overturn the previous decisions, and especially when such decision is not even policy based.

We have got two options here, either the accounts should be blocked per usual standards and norms, or we should propose changes to the multiple accounts policy supporting cases such as this, that would clearly support accounting any statement such as the "suspect belongs to my brother", regardless of any previous multiple accounts violation. Which option should we select? It is a serious concern because this is the first problematic SPI I ever saw and finally every closed SPI is going to serve as an example to other. If any of the SPIs are contradictory to the policy, they are going to conflict.

No admins have tried to clear our this case or explicitly refuted my objection. Now since they cannot show a policy supporting such SPI decision, and Arbcom solely relies on policies, I think that is the only place left. The 6 years of abuse of ILLEGIT is clearly apparent and evidenced. These accounts have been used in multiple AfDs, ban discussions, deletion reviews, page move war, edit wars, critical RFC/UA, etc. Decision seems obvious isn't it? I also know that Arbcomm had banned a really productive editor like Altenmann for violating the multiple accounts policy through a motion. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:56, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm not completely sure I follow your argument here, but let me address a couple of points that may help you move forward with this.

Firstly, you say that "every closed SPI is going to serve as an example to other". Whilst that's partly true, under WP:IAR we generally don't consider previous interpretations of policy on Wikipedia to set a precedent for future interpretations - the outcome of one SPI is not a carte blanche to resolve every similar SPI in the same way; each case is adjudicated independently on its own merits. THe outcome of the Zhanzhao SPI, therefore, indicates no prejudice towards the closing of future SPIs using the "family member" argument in a different way.

Secondly, I think you hit the nail on the head with this statement: "either the accounts should be blocked per usual standards and norms, or we should propose changes to the multiple accounts policy.... The dichotomy you present here shows that this is outside ArbCom's purview - if the accounts should be blocked under the usual processes, then you should present your new evidence in a new SPI (the "usual process") and let the community resolve the issue. If policy needs changing, that is most definitely out-of-scope for ArbCom (we emphatically don't do "policy by fiat") and should be discussed at the policy talkpage.

Unless your new evidence is highly sensative in nature (in which case you should submit it to ArbCom by email), my personal (non-arbitrator) opinion is that SPI or ANI are still the best venues in which to address this. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:19, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

OccultZone tried, and has been warned against it for reasons which I will explain below. Disregarding the fact whether he believed I had a brother or not (even after I sent evidence of our identities to him and another admin), my brother already retired his account which makes it a moot point. What OccultZone failed to mention was that he was:

• blocked twice for edit-warring against people he thought was me,
• raising 2 new (failed) SPIs against those same people in an attempt to link them to me,
• accusing other admins of incompetency when they did not rule to his liking, and got told off for that,
• threatening to action against them in ArbCom [9] (other admins have weighed in to say their sanctions against him were justified),
• admin shopping both on-and-off-wiki without success with his list of so-called "evidence" against me,
• and still trying to pin something, anything against me even then told repeatedly that his behaviour is bordering on bullying/harassment.

Most of which I documented on my userpage but had hoped not to bring up. Maybe he should declare exactly who and how many admins he has already approached with his claims against me, and state their response? He was told repeatedly by many admins to move on (@DoRD:@Worm That Turned:@Callanecc:@Bgwhite:@Salvidrim!:@Ponyo:@Mike V:@Swarm: off the top of my head), and have found no new evidence against me that he had not previously declared. Some admins even explicitly warned him about his behaviour against me. Just because I said I did not want to bring this to ANI because I'm sick and tired of his hounding, I see that he has upped his game from admin shopping to approaching arbitrators directly. And since he brough your attention to this, can I ask if there is any way I can get him to stop hounding me? Zhanzhao (talk) 08:29, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Here is the bigger problem that neither admins are actually interested in solving this matter, they continues to ignore because Zhanzhao' continues to hound everywhere I go with this matter and then he alleges me that I am "hounding" him while canvass everyone in order to show him look all good while he has been a totally.

However, this is just becoming highly unbelieveable that how we can bother such a long term abuser of WP:ILLEGIT anymore around. When I talked about proposing a "change" in policy, I was being sarcastic as it is impossible, we cannot. All we need to do is the take proper action because other venues have comfortably failed to produce a policy based result. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 08:49, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Check your contribution list and mine, how many times have I interacted or mentioned you since the ANI and SPIs which got thrown out? And comparatively how many times have you mentioned me and the SPIs. The reason why I pinged those admins is because they can easily verify who's been hounding whom based on your behaviour the past month. They can judge your conduct. I shall leave it at that. I apologize that you have to see this mess, Yunshui. Zhanzhao (talk) 08:57, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

It is wikihounding when you are checking by my contribution history and participating where you involvement is not even necessary, you don't have to type if you have not socked, but your insecurities speaks louder than you and I have to get rid of it. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:07, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

THis looks very much like a situation where an interaction ban might be appropriate, as nobody is well-served by the two of you arguing and levelling accusations at one another. I would recommend that one of you request community input at ANI; if a discussion there fails to reach a suitable solution, then perhaps arbitration would be the best remedy after all. Yunshui ^雲_水 09:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)