User talk:A. B./2011

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

 * Thanks for the invitation. I will have to decline for now, due to other commitments. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:43, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

"wikimedia" hides abuse by administrators
meta.wikimedia has blocked me for no valid reason. Culprits all are administrators. I list them below at the end of this message.

You are an administrator there too. But I am blocked, and cannot write to yuo there.

I am forced to appeal to you here.

There was a discussion of bad actions of administrators of meta.wikimedia.

It briefly took place on my personal talk page: Sukčių vaikytojas

In short: they saw the abuse. But they removed the article about it. Rather than prosecute the abusers.

The few administrators did not start any discussion. They simply called me names, and proclaimed my writing an aggression.

Now they keep posting nonsense to my personal talk page. Because they know I can't reply to that. They entirely blocked me even from my personal page. Compare the time of their edit to the time of blocking me.

They do not want me to reply, because I easily prove them to be bad.

They removed, hid some of my last replies there. Examine the history of that page.

What they write there is nonsense. They conceded that they broke the rule of consensus. Then they subverted the rule: substituted the term of " consensus by all editors " with a " consensus by administrators ".

Another nonsense is an opposition to the word "corrupt". God gave us a language in order to express things as they are. Should we ban the entire dictionary? Should I call a bad deed as good? Why should I complain about a good deed?

They banned discussion on corruption. Now we can't talk about it on wikipedia.

The reasons for blocking me are a complete lie:

vandalism blanking pages, Removing content from pages being unkind/rude

It anything, it is them, who were unkind. Consider this my report to an administrator "Nemo_bis": http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nemo_bis#.22Nemo_bis.22_hides_abuse_by_administrators

I duly warned him of the discussion of his abuse.

Another administrator simply threatened me. But gave no reason. On the other hand they complain that I threaten them. I did not. But even if I did... Threats are allowed, because they commit them themselves.

Let that "discussion" not deceive you. The discussion on my personal page is not a substitute for the absence of discussion on the original article: http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Proposals_for_closing_projects/Lithuanian_Wikipedia_and_Wikibooks_are_corrupt&oldid=2267554 I give you a permanent link ("oldid"), because the older versions are stolen (blanked, moved to "RFC", redirected), and vandalised (reverted, discarded my last changes).

That discussion has never happened.

What happened on my personal page was an attempt to discuss the actions of administrators of meta.wikimedia. It is a pseudo discussion. They shut my mouth... Then argued.

They simply stole the article, and stowed it away in something they call an RFC. This way they try to prevent the public (all editors of wikipedia) from voting on this article. This way the administrators assume the right to control editors. While it should be vice versa: they must implement consensus. When there's no consensus, a vote by all must take place. - Not just by administrators. They did not even vote. A tiny group made a decision in secret. They usurped the consensus.

The article is a pending request for closing a Lithuanian project of wikipedia (lt.wikipedia, lt.wikibooks). I did not yet submit it for voting, because I want a thorough discussion to take place first. Editors and administrators of Wikipedia never saw this kind before. It would set a novel thinking, and a new policy.

They refuse to understand it. They panic. Why?.. I made my alligations there. I think it is not a mere stupidity. I think it is deliberate. They are protecting the culprits. They expect reciprocity from those "beneficiaries", when their own day of judgement comes.

I request of you as of administrator of meta.wikimedia: Please unblock me there. Unlock all the pages. They are locked. <li>Block the mentioned culprits - 3 administrators, lest they reek more havoc. Namely: "Wutsje", "Dferg", and "Barras".</li> <li>Block administrator Nemo bis, and any others, who might have locked the pages, or me (by name or IP).</li></ul>


 * I decline to get involved since I cannot read Lithuanian. Any intervention on my part would just complicate matters. I suggest you find an administrator who reads Lithuanian. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:32, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Expert review
Hello there,

given the interest you expressed in strategy:Proposal:Expert review, I wanted to bring Expert review to your attention. At this point, it captures the current efforts in this area. There are some obvious ways in which you could help:

1) There's an existing proof-of-concept JavaScript displaying expert reviews for articles for which they are available. That script could be significantly improved, and potentially be promoted to gadget status.

2) We need to develop the product specifications for what expert review in Wikipedia should look like (starting with the simplest implementation that makes sense). The Meta page has some initial draft notes, but mock-ups, thoughts and additional documentation would be much appreciated.

3) We should think about what the most effective and scalable ways are to mobilize large groups of experts to participate in review processes, and to validate their credentials. There is an opportunity right now with the APS, which has just launched a Wikipedia initiative, and is willing to ask its 20,000 members to help with expert assessments. But we should think about the longer term as well.

Your participation in these and other areas would be much appreciated. Hope to see you on Meta,--Eloquence* 01:40, 12 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Eloquence, thanks for informing me. I'll look into this. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:34, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

International Delphic Council et al.
Hi, A.B.! As I see, you've cranked a great job putting together a lot of stuff concerning International Delphic Council and related articles.
 * 1) I'm the applicant of Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive664, so feel yourself free to ask me for further details concerning more precise identification of a user who set recently again AfD procedures from under a cover of an open proxy. Evidences proven, this fact might be re-charged as a classical case of Long-term abuse of User X.
 * 2) Meanwhile I've prepared formal motivated objections against AfD of this article. There I argue that applicants' claims appealing to GNG and Verifability find no grounds ( list of examples follows ). In these objections I also insist that, on contrary, all the facts are verifiable ( another list of examples ) and notable ( another list of examples ).

However I've just found that the entire AfD thread has changed dramatically since my last visit. Should I treat this so that the problem of AfD has been resolved? Or my motivated objections basing upon formal regulations of Wikipedia still preserve value and importance → their publishing ( then, where? ) may be helpful to put the final dot in a protracted dispute about the importance of IDC? Cherurbino (talk) 00:04, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't think you have to do anything for now. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Vandal
Is it possible to warn this anonymous user?

IP: 85.159.49.253 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starprizm (talk • contribs) 10:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, you can warn this anonymous user, but since they haven't edited since May 2010, it may not be worth your time. IP addresses can often be reassigned by Internet service providers so the next time that IP address is used, it may be by a different person. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:28, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi
Hi, I'm new to editing here. I was wondering how I could possibly upload a new image to an article, since it seems the only option I have regarding images is to embed a previously uploaded file. I'm an active user at Wikia, so I understand the importance of licensing the images, and I'd see it through to do so correctly, once I familiarize myself with the licensing templates. SSDGFCTCT9 (talk) 02:16, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Start at this page:
 * Help:Contents/Images and media


 * You can either upload your file to "Commons", which makes it available to all versions of Wikipedia (English, French, etc.) or just to this Wikipedia (English). For your first time, I'd just stick with the English Wikipedia -- it looks a little simpler. On the other hand, if you want use the same image on a Wikia project, you may find it easier to use Commons; I think Wikia projects can reference Commons files but I'm not sure.


 * As you can see, I'm not an expert on file uploads but I hope this gets you started. If you have more questions, check with the help desk here: Help desk or the one on Commons: commons:Commons:Help desk.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:28, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Alright, that's wonderful! Thanks for the help. And for the record, I referred to you since you were the first one on the list of admins. SSDGFCTCT9 (talk) 20:53, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again, but could you please delete for me? The copyrighting is confusing for me, and I'd like to delete any wrongly uploaded files before I get familiar with the copyrighting. Thanks in advance. SSDGFCTCT9 (talk) 21:06, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

cross wiki vandalism
Hi A.B., just came across and deleted pam:Fick, if you need help deleting vandalism please let me know. Regards a x p de  Hello!  12:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Demand From Japan
I push for harsh punishment for <Vigorous action> who is an Administrator of Japanese Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JPWikiUser (talk • contribs) 03:53, 3 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Whatever reasons, good or bad, that you might have for demanding this action, you are complaining on the wrong Wikipedia to get anything done. You will need to address your concerns on the Japanese Wikipedia, not the English Wikipedia. The various Wikipedias are autonomous in their administration. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 04:44, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Informal dispute mediation request
Hi, I am not too familiar with wikipedia yet and I was wondering if you could assist in a dispute on this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming I have tried to open an informal mediation but I can not edit the page to input the necessary dispute information. In essence, the dispute is between user: Jeannmb and Snowded around the term "controversial" appearing in the opening paragraph of the above article.

Many thanks in advance. User:Jeannmb 02:33 6 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeannmb (talk • contribs)

Discussion at Talk:Ingles#company's website is blacklisted
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Ingles. 67.101.5.25 (talk) 03:27, 30 March 2011 (UTC) (Using )


 * Hi. See my response at Talk:Ingles. Thanks for your work on this article and I'm sorry to make things complicated for you. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:58, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I saw and appreciated your response. I did as you suggested, and posted about the problem at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist.  There has been some follow-on discussion there, but that's as far as it's gotten so far.  67.101.7.12 (talk) 09:19, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Just to close this topic, this problem has been fixed, see Talk:Ingles (this version) for the details. 67.101.6.37 (talk) 21:00, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

spam category
Are you still using Category talk:User talk pages with Uw-spam4im notices? Gerardw (talk) 12:27, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * It has now been nominated for deletion. - Fayenatic (talk) 13:40, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

WP Spam in the Signpost
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Spam for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Other editors will also have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 19:25, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Strelow
Please unprotect Talk:Strelow! The reason: Strelow already exists. --84.62.201.164 (talk) 18:40, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

SBL removal
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is vbs.tv. Thank you. —- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:15, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Sandbox 20
Hi A.B, Since you've been inactive recently, I took the liberty to move your comprehensive evidence about "German reference desk troll" (aka "redirect vandal"), User:A. B./Sandbox20 to Long-term abuse/German reference desk troll, (WP:RDTROLL), so to raise the overall awareness about the guy. I hope you don't mind, and that I didn't break any incoming links (is permalink really permanent after a page is moved?). Thanks. No such user (talk) 09:42, 2 August 2011 (UTC)