User talk:Andrevan/Archives/46

Survey Request
Dear Andrevan, I am a student researcher at Carnegie Mellon University working in the Social Computing lab. Our group has done significant past research on Wikipedia (i.e., see http://kittur.org/research.html and http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~kraut/ RKraut.site.files/pubs/articles.html#OnlineCommunities) and we are currently interested in learning how to help newcomers contribute to this amazing community. To do this we would like to understand more about how experienced Wikipedia editors make sense of articles when editing them for the first time. Based on the past work you have done as an admin and your involvement in the Newcomer Committee, we would really like to ask you some quick questions about your participation in Wikipedia and the processes you use when you edit and improve Wikipedia. If you are interested please go to http://cmu.qualtrics.com/SE?SID=SV_3r7S9zg3OMw7eMk&SVID=Prod. We would really appreciate your help. All the best, Jaclyn Dolphin887654 (talk) 02:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi,

This part is just a survey over the internet and doesn't involve anything else. However, if you are interested, we may have some paid follow up activities for experienced Wikipedia editors that you can be involved in later in the semester or next year. Dolphin887654 (talk) 16:49, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Mediation request - Most Holy Family Monastery
Hello, I was trying to submit a mediation request here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=Wikipedia%3ARequests+for+mediation%2FTop%2FSample&editintro=Wikipedia%3ARequests+for+mediation%2FInstructions&summary=&minor=&title=Most+Holy+Family+Monastery&create=Click+here+to+file+Request

But the instructions on top was confusing.

If you look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Most_Holy_Family_Monastery the user Binkersternet has been coming up with various pretexts to delete a theory he happens to disagree with, and recently deleted a whole section that is very important to the article, as you can see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Most_Holy_Family_Monastery&action=historysubmit&diff=344740105&oldid=344739434

Ourshelp (talk) 03:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Data Crystal
Me and my mate were wondering if there is any way of taking over (becoming a bureaucrat) on this wiki: Data crystal, we are asking you because it has been inactive for a long time, and we were hoping to try and take over to help fix it up. I have tried asking people on this wiki but no one is ever on besides me, the only other contributions are random IP addresses that spam the articles (even more then they already are). If you could please reply on my talk page it would be highly appreciated, thanks (This message has been sent to most bureaucrat's). --MỸŠŦЄЯỸЊӘҒҒ (talk) 13:47, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

You're invited!
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, look at our approval by the Chapters Committee, develop ideas for chapter projects at museums and libraries throughout our region, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the November meeting's minutes and the December mini-meetup's minutes).

We'll make preparations for our exciting museum photography Wikipedia Loves Art! February bonanza (on Flickr, on Facebook) with Shelley from the Brooklyn Museum and Alex from the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

We'll also be collecting folks to join our little Wikipedia Takes the Subway adventure which will be held the day after the meeting.

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at 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) 01:36, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Possibility of Wikipedia Loves Art in Pittsburgh
I'd like to invite you to possibly become our Wikimedia contact for the Wikipedia Loves Art project at a museum in Pittsburgh. We're in talks with them now, and it's not certain yet, but it would be great for them to know they have a local person to work with, which could really increase the likelihood of this going forward. Please e-mail me soon, because this is starting in February. Thanks!--Pharos (talk) 04:03, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Mediation Request
Hello, On behalf of the concerned parties in the mediation case of The Man Who Would Be Queen. I know that none of you have to accept our case. I felt that asking all of you would be the best first approach. If you have any interest in mediating for us, or not, please indicate this on the talk page of the mediation case. If you are outright interested, want to mediate this case, and need no other convincing then please indicate that as well and we can get the ball rolling. If not we will not bother you anymore. Thankyou. --Hfarmer (talk) 08:12, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * If I may add to what Hfarmer wrote above, we very much need your help. As a group, we have had an enormous number of disputes on a set of related pages, and parts of this dispute have even put WP in The New York Times.  The pages themselves remain an embarrassment to WP, and I hope you can help us solve our long-standing impasse for our own good as well as for WP's.
 * I can’t imagine what you or any other mediator uses in deciding which cases to take. I can’t say that the specific issues we need help addressing are novel (COI, incivility, etc.); however, I do have some confidence that most people would find the subject matter rather engaging. Such issues include the nature of transsexuality, the controversies between how (some) scientists describes transsexuality versus how (some) transsexual activists describe transsexuality, a book on the topic that immediately became wildly controversial, and the individual activists and scientists involved (some of whom participate here), all of which became quite ugly. The most complete (yet brief) description of where we now stand (in my opinion) is here.

Thank you for your attention, and I hope you can help us to resolve this wide-ranging problem.
 * — James Cantor (talk) 14:11, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

"Soapboxing account"
I was wondering what you meant by this in your block of User:Spinnaker gybe. I am not familiar with that as a valid blocking reason and I am unclear as to how this user was being disruptive. I am not going to unblock without consulting with you, but my current feeling is that this user should be unblocked. Please let me know. Andre (talk) 01:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I noticed a few other examples of this block reason in your recent contribution history. It seems that in several instances you have blocked users who have only ever edited talk pages. How this is disruptive I fail to understand, and certainly an indefinite block with no warnings is a gross abuse of admin powers and an example of newbie biting. Andre (talk) 01:41, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Cross posted to Administrators' noticeboard. Andre (talk) 01:50, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You can see the comments right above on this page and also my posts to   and WT:MHCOORD following a request for people to look at the WWI article.  YellowMonkey   ( click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model! ) 00:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

yeah they told me to change my user because of some beltway sniper attack thing i had no idea about        AcesUpMaSleeve (talk) 02:13, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi
Thanks for restoring the ED talk page history, but unforutnately, you did not restore the right article page history. You (probably accidentally) restored the "Encyclopedia Dramatica" history instead of the "æ" version. The non-æ edits from 2005 and 2006 were simply redirect-related. Egebwc (talk) 06:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

WWEYANKS52
Regarding WWEYANKS52's inquiry, I've looked into it, but cannot figure out what happened. The CHU went through, but the two accounts remain separated. Any ideas? Sincerely, Kingturtle (talk) 14:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Changing_username/SUL
If I understood correctly you want me to confirm to rename Nepentessss to Nepenthes - which I herewith would like to do. Thanks for ur help! --Nepenthes (talk) 19:03, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

NYC Meetup: You're invited!
Join us the evenings of Friday February 6 and Saturday February 7 around Wikipedia Loves Art! museum photography events at the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Brooklyn Museum.

There will also be a special business meeting on Saturday dedicated to discussing Wikimedia New York City issues with guests from the Wikimedia Foundation.

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

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list. This has been automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:03, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

You do realize...
that your post to WT:RFA is crying out for somebody to write Support/Endorse ;-)--- Balloonman  PoppaBalloon 06:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course, but the clued in (that agree) won't. And I just wanted to say bravo, Andre. If anyone really thought RfA needed fixing and wanted to they would slog through all the RfA feedback and make some sense of that. No one seems to be lining up for that task though. - Taxman Talk 12:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Help
I am only asking for help with this one here because you supposedly performed the initial username change, but it doesn't seem to have worked. It was approved and supposedly done here:. His posts kept showing up as DCsniper207, however, so he asked for the same username change at WP:CHU again, but it was denied because now the new name is showing up as taken. So he had to request a third username but only because he thinks that someone changed it back on him:. Any idea why the first move didn't take? Can you help him?-- 2008 Olym pian chit chat 04:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Apology
I've posted a general apology in my withdrawal statement at the Oversight election page, but I felt that as a contributor you deserve an individual apology too.

It was not my intention to let the election begin without a statement, but an IT gremlin "ate" my first attempt at posting there some hours before the election was to begin and then unforseeable RL issues prevented me from getting back to it until too late. Thank you for your consideration and sincere regrets for wasting your time. --Dweller (talk) 10:25, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi
So will you help me? Syjytg (talk) 12:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

I've written a java program which searches yahoo and then reads the sites returned for college basketball player information.

Anyway, a large number of the sites that are returned are wikipedia pages, but recently, these pages have been returning no information. I'm wondering if wikipedia has blocked my "bot".

Please let me know if there is anything that I need to do like joining the bot group.

Thanks

-Zack

Fair use rationale for File:Jotto.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Jotto.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 14:18, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Mediation committee question that needs to be addressed
Your input regarding a question for the mediation committee is requested. Please see Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_mediation. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 14:30, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
MuZemike 21:58, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Mediation
Hi fellow editor, I need mediation in the following topic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism_in_Sikhism. I feel like I am getting involved in a edit war with user Khalsaburg on many topics. I am concerned about the deletion of references with isbn numbers and replacement with blog sites and spurious religious text from wwwsikhiwiki.org and www.info-sikh.org. Can you help me start mediation? --Sikh-history (talk) 13:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protection for The Coon
Do you think you could enable semi-protection for The Coon (unless someone already did that when I wasn't looking)? It's getting large amounts of vandalism from anonymous users and getting rid of it is getting annoying. --Evice (talk) 02:57, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Please help
Dear Sir or Madam,

Unfortunately, I have made a rather major blunder in an edit that I made to this user's talk page. My edit on the page was a breach of Privacy law, and reflects a serious lack of judgement on my behalf. Because of the urgency of this, I have not been able to contact User:Steve Stefan directly, so at this stage he is unaware of what is going on. Futher, due to the urgency, I have also posted this onto several SysOp and Bureaucrat's talk pages.

The people whose privacy I violated through this edit desire that my edit be removed completely from Wikipedia (including from the history, otherwise I would simply revert the edit myself), which is fair enough, considering what I have posted. Therefore, could you please delete the user's talk page and return the article to the state that it was in prior to my edit. I have a back-up of this page at User:Hunterd/123; the version stored here was a backup of the page as of 15:42 March 20, 2009 (WP time), without the comment that I posted.

If this is not possible, could you please refer me to a person that is capable of doing this.

I would greatly appreciate any help that you can provide.

Kind regards,

The Duke of Andrevan 05:23, 20 March 2009 (UTC) PS: Could you please reply to this message on my own talk page? Thanks.

You're invited!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:58, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Dong
You've got mail. --Dweller (talk) 09:52, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Geez
One day in a year is too much? Sigh. J.delanoy :  Chat 02:23, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Request for arbitration - Unjustified ban of users
I have filed a request for arbitration regarding recent bans of user accounts from which no activities could be found that dispupt Wikipedia. The arbitration request can be found here: Requests for arbitration You are not mentioned as an involved party, I send you this message as a courtesy for your information, and I hope that your opinion there can contribute to solve the issue. Thank you! doxTxob \ talk 23:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Tassedthe and Toon05
You just closed both these requests two hours early. The same thing happened with Rlevse and Avraham's RfB earlier today. I expect you saw that the two were marked pink on the SoxBot report and thought they were overtime? I think RfXs are marked pink when they are within 6 hours of closure. I might contact X! and ask him to ramify this. Best, &mdash; Anonymous Dissident  Talk 12:05, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Make me an Administrator!
Please make me as a administrator!! I'm new Here!!!! Elmopedia89 (talk) 23:29, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: FPS
Pretty sure everything is properly sourced. Specifics? It went through a successful GA Review recently so it's all been checked. bridies (talk) 01:32, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * By "specifics", I mean the exact sentence/claim/wording. "Doom etc" and "Maze War etc" is no use. bridies (talk) 01:54, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Andre
I noticed this.

Regardless of the rights or wrongs, I think your tone with a fellow Crat is a little harsh. I'll leave it with you. --Dweller (talk) 09:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Just to say, I didn't take offence at your remark. It just seemed to me that renaming for so flippant a reason was not for the best. The user requested a rename because they've gone from one book to another; they're complicating logs for absolutely no reason. It strikes me that username changes and, indeed, usernames in general are not intended as anything more than a handle to edit with. Either way, I respect your decision and what's done is done. But I certainly didn't intend to "slow down" the process, and I don't think there's any rush. &mdash; Anonymous Dissident  Talk 09:55, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Andre. I assumed your intentions were good - and I still do. Just sometimes things come across harsher in the toneless world of text than can be intended. Nonetheless, I see AD didn't have a problem with it, so there's no issue. I hope you didn't mind my note - I hate discord and am prone to step in and try to ensure there's no conflict. --Dweller (talk) 09:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Admin Coaching
I saw that you were listed in the Coaches for reconfirmation section of the admin coaching status page. Could you please update your status, and if you are still interested, drop me a note on my talk page? Thanks,  Genius 101 Guestbook  13:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

An article you !voted on in an AfD is up for deletion a second time
Please see: Articles for deletion/BVE Trainsim (2nd nomination) Ikip (talk) 00:55, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Move from user talk ikip:
 * Re Canvassing

Contacting all the people who voted on a previous AFD in an attempt to balance the outcome to that prior outcome is canvassing and should be avoided. Andre (talk) 01:18, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * thanks for the message. Ikip (talk) 01:20, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

You're invited...
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, establish a membership process for the chapter, review the upcoming Wiki-Conference New York 2009 (planned for ~100 people at NYU this summer) and future projects like Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the March meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at 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) 21:38, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

TreoBoy680
"Not even slightly promotional" - other than the fact it clearly promotes a type of PDA. But whatever. And "Please assume good faith and give users the benefit of the doubt." is fine if you wish to address me directly. Having used one Canadian-based acronym to edit with a conflict of interest, I wanted to double-check. All I'm saying is it seems a little crude to "argue" in public. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:49, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. Not to worry, I'm going to focus on editing articles from now on.  Cheers, good luck.  The Rambling Man (talk) 19:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No offence, I was probably feeling oversensitive anyway. Keep up your good work.  The Rambling Man (talk) 19:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Andre, it was generally my practice when I disagreed with the decision of another crat to talk to them about it and suggest they reconsider it rather than just overturning them. If we couldn't agree, I'd suggest opening up the difference of opinion to to wider discussion. It's a little impolitic to describe someone's reasoning as "dubious" or "spurious". Just dropping by so pay me whatever you heed you think appropriate, but your approach here does seems uncharacteristically blunt. WJBscribe (talk) 00:33, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I pop my head in from time to time. An RfA and a thread on the crat noticeboard caught my eye this evening.
 * I didn't mean to suggest that the rename decisions should be political, just that bureaucrats are a small group and that good working relations are important. TRM seems to have taken your remark on the chin, as apparently has AD in an early thread, but were I still a bureaucrat I think we'd fall out if you just reversed my decisions without talking it over with me.
 * Renames are a judgment call, and so it will happen that crats validly come to different conclusions on the outcome. For instance, prior to SUL it was clear that there were some crats who would rename users to non-latin names (other than the user's own name) or symbols and others who would reject such requests. I always saw a crat tagging a request as "not done" the equivalent of an admin closing an AfD as "keep" - while not a use of tools, it is the making of a decision the community has appointed that person to make. I don't think you'd reverse a rename you disagreed with without discussion, and I think you should give a little more though to overruling "not done" requests. WJBscribe (talk) 01:00, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Apparently we see things rather differently then and I confess that I think the way your going about this is problematic. I'm not going to prolong this discussion as I presently don't intend to return to being active but I think you should canvass wider opinion on how casually "not done" requests should be overturned. Incidentally, now that I gather local username hiding is possible, I think that would be a more appropriate way of dealing with users who just want their names to no longer be registered here but aren't planning to continue editing with the same account (as that doesn't leave the public log entry that renaming does). WJBscribe (talk) 15:03, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

RFC: socionics
Cause I get the sense you are kinda familiar with the crap they pull around here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Socionics Tcaudilllg (talk) 21:21, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Wiki-Conference New York Update: 3 weeks to go
For those of you who signed up early, Wiki-Conference New York has been confirmed for the weekend of July 25-26 at New York University, and we have Jimmy Wales signed on as a keynote speaker.

There's still plenty of time to join a panel, or to propose a lightning talk or an open space session. Register for the Wiki-Conference here. And sign up here for on-wiki notification. All are invited! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Changing username
Please cahnge my username because I want to have a unified account. Kaan 321 (talk) 07:25, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Nester and sister.jpg)
 Thanks for uploading File:Nester and sister.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. TTN (talk) 20:59, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Friendly chat
Andre, just dropping by to see how you're doing since Ihaven't heard from you in sometime. Tony the Marine (talk) 04:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Requests for mediation/Republic of China 2
Hello Andrevan. Just wondered if anything is happening with the above request for mediation? It seems to have been inactive for some time and I was wondering whether or not I could close it?  Ryan Postlethwaite See the mess I've created or let's have banter 20:20, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

You're invited...
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wiki-Conference New York, plan for the next stages of projects like Wikipedia Takes Manhattan and Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the May meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at 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) 01:39, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Unified login
hi,i'm Kuailong from zhwiki. when i tried to create a Unified login, i found out that there is a user under the same name in enwiki, and this account has no edit history. can you help me change the user's name so that i can have that username here?--124.240.134.232 (talk) 13:51, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Nintendo task force membership update
It's that time again to update membership status with the Nintendo task force, which we try to do every 3-4 months to keep our membership up-to-date.

All participants have been placed on an "Inactive participants" list. To confirm that you're still a member of the Nintendo task force, simply go to WikiProject Video games/Nintendo and move your name from the "Inactive participants" list to the bottom of the "Active participants" list. If you are no longer an active member in the task force, you may simply remove your name altogether. After 1 month, on October 1, all entries under the "Inactive participants" list will be removed. Hopefully you can stay with us and continue to work on Nintendo-related articles. Regards, MuZemike 17:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Information nazi
Wikipedia is a collection of information primarily, not of all you may understand. But please stop this arbitary campain to delete articles from wikipedia simply becuase you havnt heard of them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.107.89.193 (talk) 22:12, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Human image
Hey Andre! I figure you're quite busy these days, but if you have a few free minutes, I'm curious about what you'd think of my allegation that the lead image of Human violates policy, and is otherwise inappropriate in its placement there. I've laid out my basic case at Talk:Human/FAQdraft, but a critique if I've misinterpreted policy, or support if you agree, would be hugely appreciated. And you're perfect because I like you, but haven't the slightest expectation that you'll hold back if you disagree with me. :) -Silence (talk) 20:17, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Super smash bros
I am trying to improve the SSB artical to FA and i could use some help, could you help me. --Pedro J. the rookie 20:51, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Gestapo
I second this...

"...[P]lease stop this arbitary campain to delete articles from wikipedia simply becuase you hav[e]n[']t heard of them."

Your conduct on the Ben Croshaw page, and numerous others, is absolutely unbecoming of a Wikipedia editor.

67.60.35.181 (talk) 03:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I realize that such a role is the very definition of a wikipedia editor, on paper, yet simply looking at that deletion log is evidence in itself that you are anything but impartial. I brought up Mr. Croshaw merely as an example.

67.60.35.181 (talk) 04:47, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

And thus, I would argue that such an attitude, specifically the quote "I don't need to be impartial," is completely the wrong attitude to have for anybody involved in an academic endeavor, which Wikipedia clearly is. To say that an editor is free to fling their biases around unrestrained just brings down the quality and image of the entire encyclopedia as a whole.

Please update your status with WP:VG
Dear WikiProject Video games member,

You are receiving this message because you have either Category:WikiProject Video games members or User WPVG somewhere in your userspace and you have edited Wikipedia in the recent months.

The Video games project has created a member list to provide a clearer picture of its active membership.

All members have currently been placed in the "Inactive" section by default. Please remove your username from the "Inactive" listing and place it under the "Active" listing if you plan on regularly:
 * Editing video game-related pages in the Article namespace
 * Participating in video game-related discussions in the Project namespace (WT:VG, WP:AfD, WP:GAN, etc.)

Ideally, members are encouraged to do both, but either one meets our criteria of inclusion. Members still listed inactive at the beginning of November 2009 may be removed. You may re-add yourself to the active list at any time. Thank you for your help, and we look forward to working with you.
 * —WikiProject Video games (delivery by xenobot  03:18, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Hawthorne (Series)
I am requesting your help with this Wikipedia page, because one editor of the site refuses to allow changes to the page. His personal hatred and bias towards this television program is obvious, and his control of content on the page is unlike anything I have ever come across in all my searches on Wikipedia. I have added relevant information that would be of interest to viewers of the program, such as the day of the week and the time the program is airing, as well as the names of the production companies, only to see the information repeatedly taken down. One other person added a positive review, only to have it blocked. I am hoping that information I have added in the past regarding this television program could be restored, or that I and others be allowed to make changes to the site. One of two areas of contention is that this editor has selectively posted a long list of negative reviews without allowing any balance with positive reviews. Additionally, it would appear on many other television pages that there is no "Critical Reception" section at all, and editing or removing the section on this page is unfairly determined to be "vandalism." The second issue is that this editor has complained of copyright violations with the Plot Summary, even though countless pages for television programs, such as "The Mentalist" (CBS) and "Raising the Bar" (TNT,) and numerous movies pages have taken plot information and cited back to the official sites. Numerous shows with Wikipedia pages use the networks' plot descriptions for the Episode Descriptions, and cite back to them. If there is a standard, then it would apply to all the entertainment sites. If no information or sentences can be cited from official sites or press releases, then at least I and others should be permitted to make the necessary changes to make the page in compliance with Wikipedia rules. Thank you very much for any help with this. - 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Kind request for advice
I created an article that I believed was well-sourced and WP:PROF conditions were met. This article was deleted in an AfD where the closing admin stated it was "too long to consider keep arguments." When I nominated the same for Deletion Review, the decision was endorsed. Neither AfD nor DelRev had a clear consensus, in my opinion, and my view of notability applicability was not really disproved. In addition, article subject's ideology proposes strict regulations for translators, yet at least 3 editors who voted on AfD and the DelRev including the DelRev closing admin are translators (who would not meet article subject's proposed strict regulations for translators). This is a legitimate claim for COI. My question to you is, would I request official mediation in this case? I know Mediation Committee deals with content only, which I would address, but can there be an outcome of restoring a deleted article if I am able to prove my claim? If not, what other avenue of recourse might I pursue, if any? Thank you in advance for your response,Turqoise127 (talk) 21:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
User Talk:Turqoise127Turqoise127 (talk) 14:44, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Redirect
Why did you redirect the vetting process to editor review? I can't say I support it myself, but you had absolutely no consensus to do so.  ceran  thor 23:56, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've reverted it due to no consensus. → ROUX   ₪  23:57, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I have also restored the original redirect.  Majorly  talk  23:59, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * (e/c) As I stated, Roux. Andre, I'm a bit surprised to be perfectly frank, this was not a case of boldness, rather an odd move by a community-respected user. The project is still developing, if it doesn't last, it can be marked as historical accordingly. But it seems fine ATM, so let it be.  ceran  thor 00:02, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I will admit that in IRC I "gave it a week"... Ched can attest to that. :p  ceran  thor 00:09, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * There's no functioning process to support at the moment; more at the talk page of WP:VETTING. - Dank (push to talk) 02:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Vetting changes.
Could you explain why you've made all the changes to Admin Vetting that you did? You used a tag stating you wanted to start a merge discussion, but then said nothing about it. You also haven't explained the other edits. Irbisgreif (talk) 00:20, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikis Take Manhattan
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:38, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Nicklas Nygren article
I'm sorry if I came off a bit brusque earlier. I was quite taken aback by what appeared to me to be such an ill-considered prod. With a single Google-search I was able to come up with a plethora of articles that covered the subject of the article to an extent that I considered perfectly in-keeping with Wikipedia standards, and my reaction to the prod was more a concern that you hadn't even bothered to do a search yourself. This was an assumption I made and as such it only has a basis in my own suspicious nature. I retract my suggestion that the prod was "patently ridiculous," I have stricken it from my earlier comment, and again I apologize if you took offense to this.

I have tried to answer your concerns at the talk page, and I would urge you to reconsider your position. I hope you will evaluate my arguments dispassionately and that you won't hold my earlier outburst against me. Thanks for understanding, -Thibbs (talk) 17:02, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

A topic about you at WT:VG
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games. Just thought you should know. Nifboy (talk) 03:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Secret Maryo Chronicles
Just a courtesy notice on Secret Maryo Chronicles. An IP editor asked to have the article restored and sent to a new AfD, which I have done. Discussion is at Articles for deletion/Secret Maryo Chronicles (2nd nomination). Cheers! -- Fabrictramp |  talk to me  16:42, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Secret Maryo Chronicles
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Secret Maryo Chronicles. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Fabrictramp |  talk to me  20:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Spiral Universe
I have nominated Spiral Universe, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Spiral Universe. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Oscarthecat (talk) 21:43, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Kww 3 - Bureaucrat discussion

 * Requests for adminship/Kww 3/Bureaucrat discussion

I've opened a bureaucrat chat in relation to this RfA as I don't think the outcome is particularly clear cut. If you have a moment, I'd appreciate your input. WJBscribe (talk) 20:10, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

re the RFA discussion...
even though I don't support him, it's nice to see someone finally cutting through the c**p and attempting to force a decisive judgment. Leaky Caldron  20:32, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

HoTU
Hi Andre, I've been thinking about what you said about Home of the Underdogs at the Gate88 AfD. As there are a few articles that cite HoTU, I've decided to query it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources. If we all agree that it is unreliable, then I can go ahead and remove those citations. Your input appreciated. Thanks, Marasmusine (talk) 12:16, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Need Help with Our Company Listing at Wikipedia
Andrew:

We need to update our company listing at Wikipedia, and we want to make sure we are in compliance with all Wiki guidelines. Can you assist us? For a modest fee for your time, of course.

Alec

Please respond to alecs@att.net. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.57.182.178 (talk) 18:57, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

You're invited!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:12, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Secret
Further to our email conversation, I have raised the question of your restoration of sysop rights to Secret at the bureaucrat noticeboard. WJBscribe (talk) 02:22, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

My page deleted by you
Hi, I have created a Wiki page which you have deleted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Output_display_data_unit

i think that page was useful, though i agree some part is duplicated and available in other pages but this page was focussed to particular situation and i think it was useful for the readers or people facing similar problems.

Regards, Adil —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adil mujeeb (talk • contribs) 07:55, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Rfa Update
FYI, regarding RfA updates, the Rfarow template accepts a display name for the closer. I put that in because I noticed a couple of 'crats use a display name that isn't identical to their user name. (I've already made the change.)  Frank  |  talk  23:48, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Spiral Universe logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Spiral Universe logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 03:49, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Smbspecial.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:Smbspecial.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Ja Ga talk 04:02, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Mentorship
The Revision History of Mentorship records your participation the article's development; and for this reason, I am reaching out to you.

Please consider reviewing my edit at Wikipedia:Mentorship#Unintended consequences. In the search for a mentor deemed acceptable by ArbCom, I plan to cite this as a useful context for discussing what I have in mind. --Tenmei (talk) 21:10, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Mediation in page deletion process
Hi, I would be very grateful if you could take a look at an issue that has arisen with the pages of BeLight Software. An editor has brought the deletion process up but, as far as I can tell, this person is not at all an expert in the Macintosh community and has unwarranted notions about the credibility of sources like MacWorld, MacUser, TopTenReviews, and others. It would be great if you could neutrally look at this and decide whether intervention here is necessary. Thanks a lot!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/BeLight_Software

RayJazz21 (talk) 13:15, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * This is one of a several messages left on various user talk pages. has a WP:COI and is the creator 9 of the 10 articles up for deletion. He also is one account in a larger spam campaign for BeLight Software, see Spam Case. RayJazz21 has been Warned about his COI and yet continues to be excessively active in the discussion and would appear other participants feel they are being badgered by RayJazz21(See edit summary). Would also note there has been an instance of editing the content of others comments during the debate, which is wholey inapropriate. Thanks for your time.--Hu12 (talk) 22:00, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a mediation request. Yes, of course I am active in the discussion. I have not edited the content of others' comments. I did revert one comment that included false information and left an explanation. You yourself changed the phrasing after I pointed this out. RayJazz21 (talk) 10:46, 21 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Re: RayJazz21's comment, "You yourself changed the phrasing after I pointed this out."
 * The phrasing changed from
 * "Article was created by an WP:SPA account(User:RayJazz21)"
 * to
 * "Multiple articles created by an WP:SPA account(User:RayJazz21)"
 * So it became more critical of RayJazz21, not less as he or she implies. See diff comparing the page before RayJazz21's reversion to the current page. --Colfer2 (talk) 14:31, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Epistemology
It may have been you who placed a very studied and good entry in the talk page of Epistemology at point 15, entitled: "Epistemological Theories and Irrationalism", requesting an up-to-date page. I have added my voice to that in some later entries. However, the page appears not to have changed in all that time!

Can you help?

MacOfJesus (talk) 00:49, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Seems Bernard was a little confused. See User_talk:OlEnglish for background clarification of how you got involved in this. -- &oelig; &trade; 22:41, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Secret Maryo Chronicles (3 nomination)
Since you participated in the DRV for Secret Maryo Chronicles, you may be interested in Articles for deletion/Secret Maryo Chronicles (3 nomination). Tim Song (talk) 07:39, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Bureaucrat discussion for Juliancolton RfB
A bureaucrat discussion has been opened in order to determine the consensus in this request for adminship. Please come participate. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe 02:02, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Constant harassment against me by a small group of editors
Can you please do something about this? There are a small group of editors that keep harassing me by constantly insulting me and then requesting that I be banned. It has gotten well out of hand and I feel that the bureaucrats as a whole need to step and tell them to stop it. Here is an attempt by them to get me banned Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. I am 100% confident that there must be some kind of site policy that is against trying to wrongly get people banned and doing it simply out of some sort of hatred or personal issues. I don't know what exactly to do about this other than to report it directly to a general group of people. That is why I am telling you and all the others directly about it. Because reporting it on the noticeboard is not working and does not work. As long as only a small group of people are involved they are able to harass you and get away with it. Please kindly tell these editors to stop harassing me and to not bring any false abuse reports against me again and please tell them to not attempt to wrongly ban me again. I thank you very, very much if you will help me with this. Thank you sincerely for any help as it will be greatly appreciated.Wiki Greek Basketball (talk) 09:46, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your advice. But I have tried it as best as possible and they still want me to be banned. I just don't understand anymore.Wiki Greek Basketball (talk) 13:58, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello
Hello Andrevan, can you rename me account into User:Sanga? But I know that it will cause the local user to be detached from the global one :) BRUTE (talk) 13:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I want to rename from User:BRUTE into User:Sanga :) BRUTE (talk) 08:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Mediation help
Hello Andrevan. Would you be able to help solve this dispute? The user keeps on reverting constructive edits without a valid reason, violating 3RR. Looking forward in ending this. Thanks and regards. Rehman(+) 12:13, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Can I please be an admin? I will use it responsibly. Wikihelper500 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikihelper500 (talk • contribs) 02:14, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day NYC
You are invited to celebrate Wikipedia Day and the 9th anniversary (!) of the founding of the site at Wikipedia Day NYC on Sunday January 24, 2010 at New York University; sign up for Wikipedia Day NYC here. Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

please review this
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AWJBscribe&action=historysubmit&diff=338861226&oldid=338857145

You are the next bureacrat in alphabetical order. Mr. Scribe vouched for an administrator candidate who had a previous secret username by reviewing the edits then Mr. Scribe also closed the RFA as pass. Mr. Scribe was acting as an advocate in the edit review then acting on the RFA, which is a conflict of interest. This only harms the new administrator by robbing him/her of legitimacy.

Since the RFA only closed within the past 24 hours, do something positive! Review the RFA and confirm that you would have passed it, too. Otherwise, a cloud may permanently cover that new admin's head. If you do it, then the new admin can happily be respected by all!

Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 00:32, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Andrevan! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 13:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Howard Phillips (Nintendo) -
 * 2) Minoru Arakawa -

NPOV needed
Hi I am editing on what is now Tree shaping article. I am one of the practitioners (Pooktre) mentioned in the article. Understanding that there was a potential for a COI I have always endeavoured to edit from a NPOV. My only agenda if there is one is not to have our work branded with someone else's methods of shaping trees.(Arborsculpture which has a method linked to it.)

This article had been settle down since may 2009 until 19th January 2010. When editor 208.59.93.238 come and made a minor change. I undid the changes and stated why on the talk page. This editer overreacted generally threw different accusations around while also claiming I had a COI. I replied to the COI and modified the changed sentence.

The editor 208.59.93.238 Come in change the sentence back apologised to me, while also accusing me of not following Wikipedia policies and that I should back off.

After 208.59.93.238 stating about the COI, the editer Slowart (Created the word Arborsculpture) basically agreed with 208.59.93.238 about the COI with added emphasis. Then commented "Hopefully someone with a Wikipedia:NPOV will rethink and rewrite the whole page."

I replied to both and change the sentence while giving my reasons.

Some back history This page originally was called Aborsculpture, but was changed (by other editors) to Tree shaping. link Part of the change was adding Pooktre to the newly named page. Pooktre had been an AFD, on the AFD I made my case for Pooktre once. One of the editors relpied why it was not suitable, I relised they were right that a this time Pooktre doesn't meet the criteria of being article on wikipedia. So I asked a speedy delete, during that process the other editors came to consensus that Pooktre could be merged with Arborsculputre creating a new article Tree shaping. The wording was chosen as it is neutral, generic and descriptive. From the time the article was changed Slowart (is Reames) protested and had been asked by various editors involved in the name change, and third opinion try and work with others or don't edit (my approximation of what was said).

After Slowart comment, about rewite the editor 208.59.93.238 Come in added Conflict of Interest Tag, put up a COI on the COI/noticeboard I belive they are claiming COI to force me to not contribute, and so that they don't feel they have to justify or discuss the changes to the article. Made a range of changes that changed the dynamics of the article, including putting the word Arborsculpture in the lead paragraph, giving it undue weight.

At some point during this process I contacted three different editors who were involved in the changeover or the third opinion, including one who had criticised me. I just asked for them to come and give their opinion, I didn't lay out any of the issues.

I replied that I didn't see that I had a conflict of interest. Gave some examples of my Editing style. Then went on read COI. I then comment that "now the page has been change from Arborscuplture to a neutral, generic, and descriptive name we now may come into COI." I also added that keeping this in mind and that I'd always endeavoured to work with other editors that I would continue to edit.

I started a new section Reaching a Consensus. Laid out how I was planning to change the edits and why I did so. I didn't change all the changes in one go. (I also tried to modify instead of undo) At this stage there was only 208.59.93.238. after my first changes and my comments to 208.59.93.238. A new editor 96.233.40.199 came in and stated I had a COI and didn't discuss any changes and changed things back to 208.59.93.238 version. I have modify some of the changes, listed that ones that are not that big a deal. Gave reasons for my changes asked them not to revert and to discuss it on the talk page.

What I need is some help. Am I going through the right process to reach a consensus. With the content that I am changing is it improving the article page? If not how could I change it so that it is? Will you please read the history, check some of my earlier edits and the edits that I did on related articles. I will certainly appreciate any help you will offer. Blackash (talk) 15:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * NPOV needed indeed. Please see comments at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. --96.233.40.199 (talk) 10:10, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

MHP mediation
Hi - Just curious what the status is of Requests for mediation/Monty Hall problem. Sounds like you've accepted it "provided the parties agree". Is there some formal agreement that has to happen as the next step? I thought we might be making some progress, but I am currently thinking several of the involved parties have more or less disengaged pending mediation. I suspect this will be a lengthy process due to both the number of parties involved and the length of time the conflict has festered - but the sooner we start the sooner we'll finish. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:37, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I tried to engineer a "consensus discussion" not long ago (that didn't really go anywhere - if you read the archives it will become obvious why). The equivalent of "opening statements" are archived here. -- Rick Block (talk) 06:03, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * But Rick, you were helpful in creating a clear consensus. It just happened not to be your POV. Glkanter (talk) 17:49, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

BN post
Was mostly reasonable up until The growing furor about the courtesy resysoppings is concerning to me and I want to ensure that this process is not disrupted, to be frank. Directly and knowledgeably violating the community's wishes is considered disruptive. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 04:45, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You're right in that there's no consensus to wait 24 hours as of yet, but there's clear uncertainty. Controversial resysop requests have become more frequent as of late, so while I don't think anybody particularly objects to resysopping the user in question, requests of this nature might need to be scrutinized more closely. I mostly agree with your opinion on the issue, but I think there are more graceful and seamless ways of expressing it than simply taking action amidst an ongoing discussion. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 04:58, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * "I have never been recognized for grace, my friend. I value the confidence and independence that allows one to break through groupthink and be bold." - Interestingly the opposite of what would would consider a bureaucrat's traits. Perhaps you are in the wrong line of work, there are quite few areas where such a POV would be more valuable. Most of the areas I work in, probably. Prodego  talk  05:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Rename my user name
I want my username User:Tomreves to be renamed User:Snooker. Thank you. Tomreves (talk) 13:59, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

MHP
This is my first Formal Mediation. Is this stuff normal? Glkanter —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glkanter (talk • contribs) 17:11, 14 February 2010

UC Berkeley Undergrad needs assistance regarding Wikipedia Research project
I am an undergraduate student at UC Berkeley conducting a research project dealing with bureaucratic justice. I was hoping someone at Wikimedia/Wikipedia/Wikipedia Foundation could give me some QUICK guidance that would greatly help me in my search for a viable case study.

I am looking for a large organization, like Wikipedia, that regularly receives claims of harm or injustice against it, then analyze the way in which it responds to such claims (i.e. programs, mechanisms for dealing with those claims) and finally discover how well that organization has done in reducing the number of such claims over time.

While Wikipedia provides much of its mediation/arbitration/dispute-settlement information online, I would still need an actual contact within Wiki's formal dispute resolution apparatus who could provide me some personalized context. Would it be possible to obtain your email address for this purpose? I am an inexperienced wiki user an I do not know how to get your email address off your user page, if it is even listed there. Thank you PS150Researcher1 (talk) 05:00, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

User:Anthony Winward; User:Tony Winward
I am puzzled by the following actions by the above user(s).

The background is that he requested a change of name from Tony Winward to Anthony Winward here, on 21:36, 20 October 2009, with the rename being performed by you at 02:37, 6 December 2009.

Anthony Winward has been working on User:Riverside and then at 18:17 today, he moved User:Anthony Winward to User:Riverside

The "Tony Winward" account appears to still be being used, and at 18:21, he moved User:Tony Winward to User:Columbo.

has no SUL record although the name exists on a few WMF projects, with "unknown" for creation date on enwiki

likewise has no SUL record although again the name exists on a few WMF projects, with "unknown" for creation date on enwiki

has no Winward SUL record and no other accounts (and a registration date of 12:13, 15 September 2009)

has no SUL record, and obviously no registration date, as it is now Anthony Winward.

I just thought the actions on these accounts seemed strange, and I wasn't sure who I should notify, but as you renamed the original user, I thought you were the best person!

Regards, -- Phantom Steve /talk &#124;contribs \ 19:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Incidently, I've just noticed that there's an open SPI open here -- <font color="#307D7E">Phantom <font color="#55CAFA">Steve /<font color="#008000">talk &#124;<font color="#000080">contribs \ 20:20, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The Tony Winward account is spelled with the first letter of his last name in lower case: . Jarkeld (talk) 20:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

MHP mediation?
Hi - I assume something in real life came up, but if you could check in at Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Monty Hall problem that'd be great. You said a week and a half ago: Give me a day or two to come up with content for everyone's section. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:42, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Nintendo task force membership update
Hello,

It's that time again to update membership status with the Nintendo task force, which we try to do every 3-4 months (though it's been actually 6 months since the last one) to keep our membership up-to-date.

All participants have been placed on an "Inactive participants" list. To confirm that you're still a member of the Nintendo task force, simply go to WikiProject Video games/Nintendo and move your name from the "Inactive participants" list to the bottom of the "Active participants" list. If you are no longer an active member in the task force, you may simply remove your name altogether. After 1 month, on 1 April 2010, all entries under the "Inactive participants" list will be removed. Hopefully you can stay with us and continue to work on Nintendo-related articles. Regards, –MuZemike 17:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Hm?
Why'd you revert me? I was only removing spam. - Zhang He (talk) 17:06, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

NYC Wikipedia Meetup Sunday, March 21
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wikipedia Day NYC, plan for the next stages of projects like Wikipedia at the Library and Lights Camera Wiki, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects, for example User:ScienceApologist will present on "climate change, alternative medicine, UFOs and Transcendental Meditation" (see the November meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back. And if the weather is good, we'll have a star party with the telescopes on the roof of Pupin Hall!

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at 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) 15:03, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Admin Coaching: Reconfirmation
I was looking through the coaches at Admin_coaching/Status and saw that there are a lot under "reconfirmation".

Could you let me know if you are still interesting in being involved with Admin Coaching, or if you would prefer to have your name removed from the "reconfirmation" list and placed on the "retired" list. If you want to be involved, could you please move your entry from "Reconfirmation" to "Active" and indicate how many students you would be willing to have (obviously, if you are actively coaching at the moment, then please indicate this!)

If I do not hear from you within a week, I will assume that you would like to have your name removed from the list of coaches and moved to the retired list.

Regards, -- <font color="#307D7E">Phantom <font color="#55CAFA">Steve /<font color="#008000">talk &#124;<font color="#000080">contribs \ 16:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Monty Hall problem
Hi Andrevan. Hope you're well. What's the status on this mediation? Is progress still being made (if at a near-glatial pace as of this month ;)), or does the case need kick-started/closed? If you need some assistance or want somebody else to take over, do speak up. Best, AGK 13:18, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Monty Hall problem
 * Thanks for your reply. Back at you, on my talk page. AGK   20:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, so the discussion on my talk page turned out to be not very productive at all. There was just too much noise to wade through. What do you want to do about this case? Are you okay persevering with it, or would you like to place it on hold and ask for somebody to else to take your place or join you as a co-mediator? Let me know how the rest of the committee can support you and I'll do my best to help you out. AGK   11:42, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi - I'm not sure if you're paying attention to the talk page, but things have heated up starting about at Talk:Monty Hall problem. I've asked a question for you at Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Monty Hall problem which may shift the discussion there.  Wherever the discussion ends up, I think a mediating influence would be helpful, for example you might want to talk to Glkanter about this.  Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 19:09, 10 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Can you say something to Glkanter about unhelpful edits like this (and perhaps the previous one in the same thread)? I would, but I highly doubt he'd accept any feedback from me. -- Rick Block (talk) 16:32, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


 * But you have no problem with Nijdam's threat? That strikes me as intellectually dishonest, especially from a senior admin like yourself, Rick.   Glkanter

Any suggestions or comments you might have regarding the current flurry of activity on the talk page would be greatly appreciated. Martin and I each seem to think we're willing to compromise, but that the other isn't - which would seem to indicate we're not communicating very well. This seems like just the sort of thing a mediator could help with. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:13, 20 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I was talking specifically about this thread. The primary conversation, and conflict, seems to be between me and Martin Hogbin, not Glkanter. -- Rick Block (talk) 13:18, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Alex Poltorak.JPG
Hi, could you add the author and evidence of permission? The date seems wrong, too, compared with the metadata. Regards Hekerui (talk) 12:53, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

NYC Wikipedia Meetup Saturday, May 22
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wikimedia Chapters Meeting 2010, plan for the next stages of projects like Wiki-Conference NYC and Wikipedia Cultural Embassy, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the March meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at 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) 20:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

New flurry of activity at Monty Hall problem
Hi - Martin made a change (the exact change we've been talking about and have not reached a resolution), I reverted this change, and he reverted back. I WILL NOT edit war, however since we're in mediation and have not resolved anything this change seems entirely premature. There are threads about this both at talk:Monty Hall problem and Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Monty Hall problem with a variety of insults being hurled around. It would be REALLY helpful if you could say something here. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 15:31, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I would very much appreciate at least some sort of acknowledgment that you've seen this message. I've sent email as well.  I can't tell if you're stymied, otherwise busy IRL, or have been run over by a truck.  -- Rick Block (talk) 18:24, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Monty Hall problem (again)
Hi Andrevan. Any progression on your re-evaluation of the Monty Hall problem RFM? One of the parties has expressed frustration at the lack of activity on the case page. I explained that the case is on-hold for now, for the reasons we discussed a few weeks ago; but I also said that I would suggest that another mediator join you on the case, if you'd agree. Thoughts? Hope you're well, AGK   21:12, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Martin and I have distilled the various arguments down to about 2 or 3 easily digested, black & white statements. I'm not saying anyone agrees with our viewpoints, just that a mediator would readily be able to understand the conflicts, and contribute to the discussion in the traditional manner of a Wikipedia mediator. Glkanter (talk) 02:06, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Revision to Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire and Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri articles
I noticed that you have revised either Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri or Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire.

I intend to revise those articles following the WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines. There are more details on the discussion pages of those articles. I'd be interested in any comments you have. It would be best if your comments were on the discussion pages of the two articles.

Thank you.

Vyeh (talk) 03:25, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

You are already aware if this but, for your information, this is the message that I gave sent to the other mediators:

As a member of the Mediation Committee, I wonder if you would mind giving some attention to this subject , which I posted on the policy discussion page some time ago. Please note that I am no longer involved in any mediation process. Martin Hogbin (talk) 10:58, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

please help
hello! I am member of the Georgian Wikipedia. I have a Global Account in the name of David1010 but I can not combine it with other accounts. I do not remember my password or e-mail. Maybe you can help me to join the english account with other accounts. User:David1010--94.137.169.234 (talk) 11:33, 25 July 2010 (UTC)