User talk:Razr Nation/2013/5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive
Hahc21's archives
Current discussion
Go to
2012
2013
previous archivenext archive
Go to
2014


Contents

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for addressing my concerns at FLC. If you have time or interest, feel free to take a look at my two lists at FLC: List of awards and nominations received by Fiona Apple and List of songs recorded by Pink Martini. Keep up the great work, and best of luck with FLC! --Another Believer (Talk) 15:44, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

You're very welcome :) — ΛΧΣ21 18:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Project for RfA nominators[edit]

As one of the supporters of the proposal in the 2013 RfC on RfA reform, you are invited to join the new WikiProject for RfA nominators. Please come and help shape this initiative. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 18:51, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

A pleasure to join, indeed. — ΛΧΣ21 17:51, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Doubt[edit]

The "Argentine history" arbitration case was accepted based on one premise: the use of fringe sources that advocate fascist political goals. I built my evidence comment around that. However, Cambalachero and MarshalN20 are avoiding that discussion. MarshalN20 added diffs that has no relation at all with the case ("Lecen and the shapeshifting Alarbus" and "Lecen's behavior and WP:DIVA", etc...). Is that how it's supposed to work? If it is, will I be allowed to answer to those accusations later? --Lecen (talk) 15:51, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

They should talk about the issues originally raised, but they can use their evidence space as they wish, as long as they don't contain: (i) BLP violations, (ii) personal attacks, and (iii) evidence not supported by diffs. As all parties have 1000 words to discuss behaviour and 2000 to discuss sources, I think you could add a response to those accusations on your 1000 words. Notwithstanding, they can also be discussed on the Workshop page, where the proposed findings of fact, principles and remedies are proposed by parties and community members. — ΛΧΣ21 18:08, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
On other matters, please reorganize your comments to separate the 1000 words of behaviour from the 2000 words of source discussion, else I'd have to do it myself, and I don't want to unintentionally remove information you might consider vital. Please do so as fast as you can. — ΛΧΣ21 01:48, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
I did that already. The last section is about the Argentine revisionism. The others above are related to how the two other editors handled the use of Argentine Nationalist sources. I sent a message to one of the Arbitrators more than a week ago telling him that my entire statement is a little less 2,800 words. I asked him to allow me to keep as it is since it has less than the overall 3,000 words allowed. But he never replied. --Lecen (talk) 01:57, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
If my quess is correct, the "Nationalism/Revisionism" part is the only one about the sources, so I've moved it to another section. Not counting that, your statement about behaviour is around 1,500 words long, so I'd recommend to shorten it after the bot comes and calculates the exact number of words. Remember that the allowance was 1000 words for behaviour and 2000 words for sources. Therefore, you cannot use the 2000 words dedicated for sources to add evidence about behaviour. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ21 02:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

This is highly inappropriate. I'm really tired of him stalking me. I'd like to ask you to tell him to leave me alone. --Lecen (talk) 14:56, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Lecen, best would be if you ignored his comment. It is unlikely to influence Manning's actions, so it can safely be ignored. Regards, AGK [•] 17:51, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
I made it to Manning's talk page through the block log. I placed the log on my evidence section and saw that Manning had added new information to it. Maybe I stalked Manning a bit, but I am not stalking Lecen.--MarshalN20 | Talk 03:05, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
And before another "stalking" accusation comes up, I came here to talk to Harold about the sandbox links Lecen was placing in the evidence article. I am surprised that none of you in good faith told him that his stalking accusation was not appropriate.--MarshalN20 | Talk 03:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
My humblest opinion. To Lecen: On my position as a clerk, it will be very inappropriate to perform administrative actions on parties within the open case I'm clerking, given that (i) it is out of the remit of my responsibilities as a clerk, and (ii) it will hazard my position as a neutral entity. Also, I don't hold any power to perform such actions notwithstanding, and that's the Arbitrators decision to perform any of these actions if necessary. To Marshal: I preferred to let an arbitrator to reach my talk and answer Lecen, and well, I was inactive to give him a proper answer about it. My apologies. — ΛΧΣ21 03:15, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Harold, I offer you my sincerest apologies. As a neutral entity, your intention and actions were indeed correct.--MarshalN20 | Talk 03:38, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
No harm done :) — ΛΧΣ21 15:36, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Kirill Lokshin said on his talk page:

  1. "(a) The additional statement may only discuss the historiography of the topic, the sources used (or not used) in articles about it on Wikipedia, and whether those sources represent majority, minority, or fringe views of the topic (cf. WP:WEIGHT and WP:FRINGE)."
  2. "(b) The additional statement must not discuss, reference, or mention any editor or their actions."

Please remind MarshalN20 of that. His statement about sources are either based on his personal opinions about me or about the subject.[1][2][3] His statement is supposed to have sources, and not to touch on my name or whatever I did nor to share his personal opinion of how we should handle sources (and even less mention what his history teacher said). --Lecen (talk) 17:23, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I was still working on the section when you took those diffs. The current version has no mention of editors (or their actions). The current section is all about the sources. My statement is not "supposed to have sources". Kirill wants us to "discuss" the matter, and discussion may (or may not) involve the usage of sources. I am not breaking any of the rules. Lastly, you should probably write this on the talk space of the request. Harold has already expressed his desire to remain as neutral as possible, and we must respect that. Best regards.--MarshalN20 | Talk 17:55, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Sandboxes[edit]

Dear Harold, is it allowed to link the evidence section with sandboxes or sandbox diffs? That is what Lecen apparently plans on doing (see User:Lecen/sandbox).--MarshalN20 | Talk 03:03, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Hey Marshal. All evidence must be typed on the /Evidence page. Submission of evidence via sub-pages in userspace is prohibited, per the Arbitration Committee's procedures policy. I'll take a look as soon a I can to make sure that this is being followed. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ21 03:10, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Harold, thank you so much for the quick response. I was about to start one as well, but now I can spend my time on more positive things (mainly sleeping). Best wishes.--MarshalN20 | Talk 03:34, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 April 2013[edit]

Please fill out our brief Individual Engagement Grant reviewer survey[edit]

Hello, the Wikimedia Foundation would like your feedback on Individual Engagement Grants! We have created a brief survey to help us better understand your experience participating in the IEG program and how we can improve for the future. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you served on the IEG Committee.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback! And we hope to see you in the IdeaLab soon.

Happy editing,

Siko and Jonathan, Grantmaking & Programs, Wikimedia Foundation.

This message was sent via Global message delivery on 01:45, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Userspace subpages in Argentine History evidence[edit]

When you have a moment, could you please remind the parties in the Argentine History case of Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Procedures#Submission_of_evidence, and particularly the prohibition on using userspace subpages to present evidence. Thanks! Kirill [talk] 03:03, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Error in Template:Albumchart[edit]

User:Kww said that you are mostly responsable for this template, so i wanted to tell you that I have found an error:

Chart (2010–2011) Peak
position
Canadian Albums (Billboard)[1] 1
  1. ^ "Bon Jovi – Chart history" Billboard Canadian Albums Chart for Bon Jovi. Retrieved 2013-04-13.

This template is at the moment linking at the chart with the BillboardID 880, but this is the year-end-chart and it correctly has to link at the chart with the ID 309. I do not know how to fix that and I noticed that small changes can cause big problems in such templates, so I better ask you for help. I hope you can help... --Ali1610 (talk) 20:41, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

I see. The issue is that {{BillboardChartNum}} has the same name for several IDs. I will fix this today. Thanks! — ΛΧΣ21 21:44, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
I have already talked with Kww and we are at the moment searching for the correct numbers of the normal charts and the year-end-charts, as you maybe can see when you click "Edit" at the numbers-template... there are at the moment sometimes two chart names for the same number. I have added them, but Kww has to fix the links using his chartbot so that the false duplicates can be deleted. I do not know how long this will take... --Ali1610 (talk) 08:28, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Darius Dhlomo Drive[edit]

Copyright-uncertain.svg Hello. You are invited to join Darius Dhlomo Drive, a project which aims to cleanup and resolve one of the oldest copyright investigations on the sire. We hope that you will join and help to clean what's left of the copyright violations. You are getting this invitation because you have helped out previously, and I am inviting you back to hopefully wrap this up. Wizardman 01:44, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

So what's going on now?[edit]

Now that the other guy won? >_> Erick (talk) 05:34, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

The same as always. More danger, more deaths, more populism, less progress. But like somebody once said: "The people have the government they deserve". — ΛΧΣ21 14:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Since like Ben Franklin's "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither". Oh yeah, and you probably saw, but I updated Arjona's award page. :P Erick (talk) 18:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
I saw. Thans :) — ΛΧΣ21 04:07, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
I hadn't realized that you are from Venezuela until now. Question, what was your opinion of Chávez? Ryan Vesey 04:14, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
He was a charismatic leader, but not the type of leader I'd follow. His political and economical views were a disaster, and although they looked good on paper, they were not plausible on practice. He tried to recreate some sort of disrupted socialism here, and it seems his biggest achievement was to convince 8 million people that it was possible. Now that he's gone, Chavism is starting to die, but there are some ones like Maduro who foolishly believe they can endure forever. — ΛΧΣ21 15:34, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom case[edit]

Three editors posted statements after the time limit. Does it mean that the time limit is not being enforced? Could I rework my statement, then? --Lecen (talk) 19:23, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

I apologize for not noticing this before. I will consult the drafting arbitrators and see if those comments should be moved to the talk page of the Evidence case page. Regards. — ΛΧΣ21 21:05, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Update Kirill told me he has no problem with you editing your own statement while the workshop phase is opened. Tim is fine with leaving the evidence presented by those three users on the evidence case page. Regards. — ΛΧΣ21 23:40, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lady Elliot Island[edit]

Lady Elliot Island SVII.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Lady Elliot Island SVII.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 05:43, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 April 2013[edit]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Do you think this list will make FL?[edit]

This is solid. I hope so.Coal town guy (talk) 19:01, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm not yet sure. I have my doubts regarding if a consensus to promote has yet to be achieved. I'd carefully study the FLC page before promoting, but sadly, I am not available to do that. If I have more time to invest again, I will take a look at it, unless a director has done so before. Regards. — ΛΧΣ21 19:02, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance[edit]

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of the article Article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured list on April 29, 2013. You can view the TFL blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured list/April 29, 2013. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured list directors The Rambling Man (talk · contribs), Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) or Giants2008 (talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. Face-smile.svg Thanks! Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:27, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Pending release of Notifications[edit]

Hey Hahc21/2013 :). I'm dropping you a note because you have signed up for the Notifications, or Echo, newsletter.

If all goes according to plan, we should be launching Echo on en-wiki either tomorrow, or next Tuesday - I'll drop a followup tomorrow when we know what's happening. Should the launch succeed, we'll begin the process of triaging bugs and gathering feedback on what features work, what cause problems, and what we should do next; I hope you'll help us out on these fronts by leaving any comments you might have on the talkpage.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:01, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Favour[edit]

Hi Hahc21, I was wondering if I could ask a big favour of you? In Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/log/March 2013, there are two closed FLRCs which the bot seems to have missed. Would you be able to close them manually for me? Many thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:06, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Of course. I'll do them tonite :) — ΛΧΣ21 15:57, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! The Rambling Man (talk) 06:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 April 2013[edit]

Please comment on Template talk:Sonic games[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Sonic games. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 17:22, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Status of Argentine History evidence page[edit]

Hi, I see you have changed the arb report in the Signpost to indicate that the evidence phase of Argentine History is now closed. Is there an easy way to tell when a phase closes? I see by the page history there have been continued edits to the page after the stated closing date. Whereas in this case the page was protected. Thanks. —Neotarf (talk) 10:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Usually, no more evidence is accepted after the date has passed. What happened with this case request was that because the Signpost reported that the arbs were looking for help from experienced users, evidence that was posted after 12 April because of that reason was to be accepted. Notwithstanding, as the proposed desicion is due today, no more evidence will be accepted. I may ask an arb to protect the page though. Thanks for the notice :) — ΛΧΣ21 15:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
I see, so the dates at the top of the page are pretty much written in stone. For some reason I thought they tended to run behind schedule or be more flexible. Anyhow I appreciate your corrections and your keeping on eye on these details. Perhaps it would be helpful to the readers if the Signpost started including the dates of workshop deadlines as well. —Neotarf (talk) 05:00, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

God of War FAC[edit]

Notifying you that God of War (video game) is up for FAC again. --JDC808 20:38, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Ping. --JDC808 17:23, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
I'll try to tackle the review and this soon. I'm having a busy period :P — ΛΧΣ21 02:53, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Okay, no problem. --JDC808 05:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
As expected, I just pasted my support there. I still think it's ready :) — ΛΧΣ21 16:33, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Just passed, a nice birthday present for me :) --JDC808 20:54, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Wow! Nice! Happy birthday! :D — ΛΧΣ21 02:21, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

TFL for 6th May[edit]

Hey. Would it be possible for you to opine here for a TFL? As a part of centenary celebration of Indian cinema on 3rd May, we would like to have this FL on 6th May for main page appearance. - Vivvt (Talk) 15:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on User talk:Anne Delong/AfcBox[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on User talk:Anne Delong/AfcBox. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 19:18, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

FC report[edit]

Hi, are you still planning to contribute to the FC report? I can finish it if you're too busy. --Pine 18:12, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm incredibly busy, and rains just flooded Caracas. I'll try to do it today, but if I don't report by the next 6 hours, please back me up :( — ΛΧΣ21 19:15, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 April 2013[edit]

This week's FC report[edit]

I'm done with pictures and portals. J Milburn wrote a WikiCup update that I'm planning to include in the introduction. So most of the work is done except for your FA section. I can finish it alone if you're too busy. --Pine 21:50, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm a bit more free this week. I'll try to get it done tomorrow :) And it's okay, nice to have something new on the FC :P — ΛΧΣ21 03:18, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
I have Yes check.svg finished my part :D Please take a look and copyedit a bit if necessary. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ21 16:31, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Notifications box replacement prototypes released[edit]

Hey Hahc21; Kaldari has finished scripting a set of potential replacements available to test and give feedback on. Please go to this thread for more detail on how to enable them. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 15:26, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 April newsletter[edit]

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

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

A rules clarification: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on 29/30 April, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 16:25, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Template:The Hot sex barnstar nominated for deletion[edit]

Whatever your intentions in importing it, this template serves no useful purpose here, so I've nominated it for deletion at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_May_9#May_9. Cheers! --Eloquence* 06:58, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Notifications[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notifications. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 16:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

GA review on YouSendIt[edit]

Hi Hahc21. Numbermaniac did my GA review at YouSendIt, where I am acting in a PR capacity. I thought it was strange that he passed it, because one of the check-list items is WP:LEAD, which the article no longer complies with (another editor made changes that strayed from WP:LEAD and I was expecting the GA reviewer to bring it up). I poked around a bit and noticed he was a relatively new user (500-1k edits or so) and had passed at least one other GA that I noticed in a similar fashion (being generally not as thorough as is the norm I've experienced with other reviewers).

I wasn't really sure how to handle it, especially because of my COI role in this case. I know you're particularly active in article-ranking and would probably know what to do? I'm sure he's just trying to help and is not familiar with how thorough they normally are. Or maybe I underestimate myself and the article really is GA-quality. I don't mean to whine and I don't want to be mean or disrespectful about it either (it's easy to come off that way in my position) ;-) CorporateM (Talk) 01:23, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Metamorfosis World Tour[edit]

This is the second reminder that May 9th will be the end of the grace period for the World Tour article. So to make sure it doesn't get demoted it needs to be at GA status or higher beforehand so Independiente will remain a Good Topic. GamerPro64 01:23, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I will try to do my best to get it ot GA on time. — ΛΧΣ21 02:27, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Update - Grace period is ending in three days. GamerPro64 14:39, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
I just nominated it now. I will try to have it reach GA as soon as possible. — ΛΧΣ21 14:40, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
I've just been told that the article still has another month left before the period ends. Sorry if there any troubles I made. GamerPro64 23:32, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Don't worry :) — ΛΧΣ21 01:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

SheiKra[edit]

Hey there! Just over a month ago I nominated SheiKra for FA status. The review is coming to a stall and since no one opposed or supported it yet, maybe you could be the first to get the review going again by supporting the article (since you did review and pass the article for GA status, and the article remains largely unchanged) at the review page. Thanks!~--Dom497 (talk) 19:31, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 May 2013[edit]

Another favour?[edit]

Hey Harold, I hope things are well with you. If you could possibly help out, there are two FLRCs that the closing 'bot failed to close properly, they're both noted on my talkpage under "FLRC" headings. If you don't mind, could you close them manually? I appreciate this isn't the most scintillating work, but I also know that you do a perfect job of it, that's why asked for "yet another" favour! My best to you, The Rambling Man (talk) 17:42, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Although it was just one FLRC. Seems like GamerPro64 posted twice on your talk page :) — ΛΧΣ21 15:08, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
I particularly blame double clicking on the "Save Page" button for that. :/ GamerPro64 22:54, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:2013 main page redesign proposal/RFC[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:2013 main page redesign proposal/RFC. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. 2A02:EC80:101:0:0:0:2:8 (talk) 00:54, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2013[edit]

Please comment on Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian Roads/RfC:Infobox Road proposal[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian Roads/RfC:Infobox Road proposal. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 10:35, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Latin music editathon[edit]

Hey Harold! Check out the Latin music project talk page! There will be a ediathon dedicated to Latin music in the NYC Public Library in June. They need help coming up with a name. I'm letting everyone know about this. It's so great for the project to gain publicity! =D Erick (talk) 23:47, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

New God of War GAN[edit]

Until a new article is made, this is the last GAN for the God of War articles currently on Wikipedia. I know you said you're busy, so you don't have to tackle this one, but if you choose to, it's Characters of God of War. --JDC808 03:00, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, I've nominated God of War: Betrayal for FAC. --JDC808 18:28, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
I'll try to review it :) — ΛΧΣ21 02:22, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Some cookies for you![edit]

Christmas Cookies Plateful.JPG Here's a plate full of cookies to share!
Hi Razr Nation/2013/5, here are some delicious cookies to help brighten your day! However, there are too many cookies here for one person to eat all at once, so please share these cookies with at least two other editors by copying {{subst:Sharethecookies}} to their talk pages. Enjoy! nerdfighter 20:01, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BLT cocktail[edit]

Hey, thanks for your closure but if it's all the same to you, I'd really rather have a regular closure for this one. In any event, it should be closed as Keep, not Withdrawn -- because at least one editor still commented as Delete, which is also why it does not quality for non-admin-closure. Thanks again for your understanding in this matter, — Cirt (talk) 08:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry. I won't fight over it :) — ΛΧΣ21 15:00, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Okay, thanks very much for your help, no worries, — Cirt (talk) 17:18, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Reasoning for closing AfD[edit]

May I ask, what was the policy and/or guideline reasoning for closing this AfD?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:42, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay, here's my reasoning: First, nobody voted delete, though that's not relevant. I read the whole AfD and I found that most voters did write a sound reasoning as to why the article should be kept, and those comments went mainly unchallenged. I failed to see one compelling reason to delete the article, and a bunch of good reasons to keep it (not under BLP1E, received coverage outside the elections, etc), which is eventually shown in the vote count. — ΛΧΣ21 02:32, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Vote count should not be a reason for keep, but on the strength of the reasoning behind the bolded text. The majority of statements for keep were very short, and did not IMHO dispute BLP1E or POLITICIAN. The strongest reasoning for keeping rather than redirected I saw was an IAR argument.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 16:48, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Obviously vote count is not to be the main reason, but after reading what almost all participants wrote, they achieved consensus to keep the article. I don't have a strong opinion on the article, but I concur with the keep votes that if she meets GNG, there is no reason to delete the article, as GNG supercedes the rest of the guidelines. Also, no one appeared to have strong reasons to cast a delete vote along with a good argument besides the nominator, so closing it as delete wouldn't have been the right close. — ΛΧΣ21 17:01, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
I am not suggesting to close as a deletion, but as a redirect per normal practice of WP:POLOUTCOMES & WP:BLP1E as the majority of the significant coverage the subject of that AfD received was directly related to the subject being a candidate of a failed election attempt, even if those sources give a background of the candidate, the coverage is of the subject as a candidate, and thus why the election is considered a single event. Would WP:DRV be the appropriate recourse?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:04, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
I understand your concerns, but closing it as redirect wouldn't have been a good read of the participant's consensus. Also, DRV would not be the right venue: my recommendation would be to wait one week (or two) and open a new AfD, to see if consensus has changed. — ΛΧΣ21 19:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Actually, WP:DRV would be a fine place to go, if you're looking for another snow close. 190.95.172.218 (talk) 21:19, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Given the common outcome of candidates not being considered notable as seen at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Jost, and the list of other AfDs be User:Bearian, I find the closing as keep as outside of the normal outcome of AfDs for candidate only articles.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:45, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm one of those who detests article about simple candidates. This one is unique: a) first even special election; b) Stephen Colbert's sister; c) rather important individual at one of the most important US colleges; d) darned close race. Combine those together, a bunch of small fractions = "keep" ... as an admin, I would have easily done the keep...although not one that a non-admin should likely have touched because of the reading of WP:POLITICIAN (✉→BWilkins←✎) 23:57, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
I agree with B. Even when it would have been best to leave the close to a local administrator, the outcome would have been the same though. — ΛΧΣ21 04:22, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
I think the close was proper, as a reasonable exception to the general rule. The special election (by-election as it's called in some places) attracted wide attention, due to its historic nature, and that while she lost, Colbert Busch was (or became) independently notable. See, for some other examples, Sharron Angle and Harry Wilson (businessman), both FWIW, Republicans. Angle, Wilson, and Colbert Busch each lost elections, but they are still notable. You can lose yet not be a loser. Bearian (talk) 19:47, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

I need some help here...[edit]

I accidentally created the article in which I need deletion. Maybe you could delete it for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaronlbrink (talkcontribs) 19:02, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Happy Birthday[edit]

Happy Birthday Cake.jpg Happy Birthday!
Happy Birthday :D DivaKnockouts 18:00, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! :D — ΛΧΣ21 00:36, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Happy birthday![edit]

 — Statυs (talk, contribs) 19:24, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks :3 — ΛΧΣ21 00:36, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Happy Birthday![edit]

Erick (talk) 20:44, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Erick :) — ΛΧΣ21 00:36, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I missed this? Happy birthday! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:39, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
    Thanks Crisco :D — ΛΧΣ21 03:14, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Did you know[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 05:17, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Special:UnwatchedPages[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Special:UnwatchedPages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 06:15, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2013[edit]

Good Article RfC[edit]

Ok, so this RfC has gone on for way to long, no one seems to be dropping any opinions any more so I think its time to close it. With that, I'm looking at two big things that should be addressed, the buttons for reviewers to quickly pass/fail/on hold an article and getting this recruitment thing started. I know nothing about code so I can't help with that but would like to see it happen so maybe if someone is up to the challenge they can create a quick script (doesn't have to be advanced or anything). About the recruitment, instead of holding a drive, I was thinking we could create more of a "center". A banner would be placed permanently on the top of the nominations page saying that if a user has never reviewed an article and would like help to get started, go to the recruitment center to find out more. There, there will be a list of volunteers (experienced reviews) who the user asking for help can pick a mentor who will guide them in reviewing an article. (that's a lot of writing!!!) I'll start working up a draft so it makes better sense (we can do a 1 month trial or something to even see if the concept works). Sound good?--Dom497 (talk) 01:37, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I've started the draft here.--Dom497 (talk) 02:17, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Some ideas from me. I will be potentialy out of internet contact in a few weeks so may not be much help.
Have it as another tab on the tabs already on GA pages
Specifically go out to recruit people, either dropping personal notes at talk pages, wikiprojects and the signpost (maybe even a watchlist header if you can swing it)
Advertise it as purely to get inexperienced editors reviewing. Make it clear that there will be help right the way through the process and they can't really make too much of a mess.
See if you can get some regulars who are willing to have their articles reviewed by these new reviewers. That should help alleviate any biting issues. The bonus for the regulars is that they will get there articles reviewed faster.
I would not treat this as a way to clear the backlog, but to get those reviewers who have considered reviewing, but were a little unsure whether they could. This has the added bonus of increaing reviewer numbers (and so reducing the backlog) and making sure the new reviewers devlelop good habits from the start.
End of ramble. AIRcorn (talk) 09:49, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks!--Dom497 (talk) 18:42, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 May 2013[edit]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Reference desk/Refdesk reform RFC[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Reference desk/Refdesk reform RFC. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 18:19, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

CVA request[edit]

Hello, I am Citrusbowler. I am in the Eastern time zone and would like to become your trainee in vandalism. I have seen vandalism a lot and would like to learn more. Citrusbowler (talk) 22:28, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre[edit]

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

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

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

This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 01:28, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Yet another favour![edit]

Hey Harold, hope all is well with you. Could you possibly close down Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/The Flashman Papers/archive1 when you get a chance? Many thanks (as always!). The Rambling Man (talk) 16:41, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done I'm good, although pretty busy IRL. I hope to be more available in the coming months :) — ΛΧΣ21 00:27, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Talk[edit]

Hi!, well I'm writing to you, since very long. For your information Barfi! has passed GA. You weren't able to join me during working on it. Nevethless, its a time for a collaboration. I think we should work together on some articles. Do you have anything in your mind? Reply me on my TP.:)Prashant 12:56, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Razr Nation. You have new messages at Citrusbowler's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Signpost: 05 June 2013[edit]

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre[edit]

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

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

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

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

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

This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 15:08, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 20:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hahc21/2013/5
en.wikipedia.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2016-07
189453
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:6B5OJGJ7XEJZCM6EMSL5ZYONLCT3DGPO
<urn:uuid:38ebeb3a-3469-414f-9b04-85a74fe08e12>
2016-02-06T09:16:57Z
208.80.154.224
sha1:KVPFWNCRHMWZ55T3YBI3KBATLDA26LQD
<urn:uuid:5d6c6705-df32-43fc-a3c2-0d4cc5b821bf>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hahc21/2013/5
response
<urn:uuid:bf7bffd1-8480-40f7-8e61-764840d9a70c>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-236-182-209.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2016-07
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for February 2016
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf