User talk:BradPatrick/Archive 6

Welcome
to Wikinews. Doldrums 20:29, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Photo credits?
You have an image of a crinoid worm growing out of the seafloor associated with your account. It is licensed as Share-alike -- but I was curious if I could get permission to reprint it without the share-alike licensing. My university copy center is not enlightened to Creative Commons licensing and we need permission letters for any image we use. gryphus@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.188.236.56 (talk) 02:48, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Les Balsiger (disambiguation)
Just to let you know that in light of your comments on the need for this page, I have closed the AfD discussion as keep. WjBscribe 22:13, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Admin status
Hi. I note that your account on en.wiki still has its admin bit set. It's my understanding (please correct me if I'm wrong) that this was enabled due to your position at the Foundation. As it appears you're no longer working in that role, it would seem that there's no reason for that bit to continue to be set. Perhaps you'd consider requesting its removal at meta:Requests for permissions; if, however, you feel that you'd like to continue to contribute to en.wiki as an admin, it's probably best that you go through the normal WP:RFA process to affirm that status. It's my understanding that, upon his resignation, Danny did something like that. Thanks. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 12:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)


 * If I may chime in, this was discussed here and here, and I think there was a large, though certainly not total, consensus that such a step was unnecessary. Sirmob 17:06, 21 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks - that'll teach me to read the archives ;) I'll go do something constructive now. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 17:48, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Your email to me
Hello BradPatrick. I noticed you sent me an email four days ago (sorry, I don't check email very often nowadays). You ask me for help with your research with place names in Slovakia before 1918 and 1939/1945. What do you mean exactly? Please respond so we can discuss. MarkBA t/c/@ 15:01, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Ellen Ash Peters
This article seems to be a copy and paste from, with minor changes but entire sentences copied over. The site claims a copyright on it's main page. So um, it would seem to be a copyright violation unless you have permission to release this under the GFDL. I'll wait a while for a reply before taking any action. --W.marsh 16:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Just to be on the safe side, I've replaced this article with the possible copyvio template. We can always reverse this if appropriate. --Butseriouslyfolks 02:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Reworked. No copyvio.  Thanks for checking up on me guys, and not letting our standards slide.--Brad Patrick 16:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

What ever happened to the "shoot the spammers on sight" letter?
Brad, once upon a time, Signpost had a link to a letter you wrote about spam and spammers, and how to deal with them. It was wonderful, and I saved the link, but when I went there recently, I found the link going to a totally different thread. Did your letter vanish after your resignation? Can it be found elsewhere? Thanks!  AK Radecki Speaketh  22:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:OFFICE pages on WP:MFD
Two pages presumably protected under the WP:OFFICE policy have been nominated for deletion here. You have been contacted either as an office contact or as someone involved in the editing or maintenance of the nominated pages. If you with to comment, please see the deletion discussion. Thank you, — xaosflux  Talk  14:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Looks like the situation was resolved.--Brad Patrick 01:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Corporate vanity policy enforcement
Paul, I read with interest your post about corporate vanity, and was wondering if you could make an opinion on this article Railpage. In the scale of things for Wikipedia, it might be a small fish, but in this case these guys seem to have treated Wikipedia as place for self promotion for themselves and their businesses (Interactive Omnimedia Pty Ltd and Digital River Networks Pty Ltd, both are website hosting companies). The content has been in dispute for some time, the subject of the article is commercially owned by Interactive Omnimedia, but in the past couple of days has become more blatant with additional commercial promotion content added. The article has been nominated for deletion on numerous occasions, but always seems to survive, on one occasion support against deletion was drummed up via Google Groups I hope you don't mind me posting here, I just require an independent opinion !!! Thank youTezza1 20:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * By way of background, Tezza1 appears to be waging a lone jihad against the article principally because he is very anti the subject. He has has openly stated he does not believe the article should exist and campaigned for its deletion. Having failed to get it deleted, he has engaged in long-term disruptive editing, POV abuse, repeated reverts, agenda pushing, WP:POINT and listing the article for speedy deletion immediately after it was unprotected after a third failed AfD. Evidence and endorsements are shown in Requests for comment/Tezza1. The Null Device 04:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

This is an active case at WP:COIN. I have placed weeklong semiprotection on both the article and its talk page and filed a request at WP:RFCU. Durova Charge! 05:01, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I asked Paul to provide an independent opinion, nothing else!, and no opinion from other users!!! I believe the organization behind the article is privately commercially operated, and a non community organization. The problem is some believe otherwise. I was only asking an opinion after reading Paul's post about corporate vanity. I didn't intend to bring these users here, Sorry!!Tezza1 09:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Are three view drawings of aircraft PD-ineligable ?
I know you are no longer working as general council - but I thought you might be able to contribute to this discussion at at which appears to be arguing that three view drawings of aircraft are ineligable for copyright and we can thus simply scan them from books and use them in wikimedia projects. Megapixie 23:26, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, not my issue. Contact the new general counsel, a great lawyer, Mike Godwin through the Wikimedia Foundation offices.--Brad Patrick 05:32, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the redirect. Megapixie 07:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Request for input
As an experienced editor, and if you have time for it, please consider commenting on Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. I took the liberty on the related Afd of quoting from your Corporate Vanity Policy Enforcement post. — Athaenara ✉  12:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Trivia
Hi, I hope this isn't canvassing but I was wondering if you would be interested in this WikiProject Trivia and Popular Culture. If not, could you share this link with editors you think may be interested. Thanks Ozmaweezer 13:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello
Hope you have a happy new year Black Reign 56 (talk) 21:56, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Yitong Law Firm
Can you find any coverage of this law firm in the past, for things other than its being shut down yesterday? If the only thing we can say about it is that, then it will have some problems with Recentism. Representing Hu Jia is a decent claim to notability, but if you could bring in any more sources and coverage that would help. Thank you, r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 23:04, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

KC & The Sunshine Band
I removed your images from KC & The Sunshine Band because they contained texts not suitable for Wikipedia articles. If you'd like to repost the images without the text, we could use the images again. Sincerely, Kingturtle (talk) 01:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Corporate vanity policy enforcement
I was made aware of your 'call to arms'.

Corporate 'spam' articles are a big problem within articles for creation. I might try to address the issue, by creating a clear, simple page highlighting the major issues, and pointing submitters there - ie, stop putting in loads of sources that are probably primary/press-releases but hard for reviewers to identify; stick to RS; don't be even remotely promotional in tone; that sort of thing. I will perhaps draft something. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  06:05, 22 March 2010 (UTC)


 * P.S. Not too sure if you are still around, but thought I'd leave the note, on the offchance.  Chzz  ►  06:07, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Yitong Law Firm
Hello, BradPatrick, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you worked on, Yitong Law Firm, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:


 * 1) edit the page
 * 2) remove the text that looks like this:
 * 3) save the page

It helps to explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the Help Desk. Thanks again for contributing! Mt king  (edits)  02:29, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Yitong Law Firm
Hello, BradPatrick, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that some editors are discussing at Articles for deletion/Yitong Law Firm whether the article Yitong Law Firm should be in Wikipedia. I encourage you to comment there if you think the article should be kept in the encyclopedia.

The deletion discussion doesn't mean you did something wrong. In fact, other editors may have useful suggestions on how you can continue editing and improving Yitong Law Firm, which I encourage you to do. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Help Desk.

Thanks again for your contributions! Mt king  (edits)  22:00, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

MSU Interview
Dear BradPatrick,

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk)23:24, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Re:Mesage
How dare you call me ignorant. I have no time for the kind of celebrity driven nonsense that this 'event' represent. This is not something which is breaking new records - it's all been done before. The fact that cheerleaders for a film director resort to name-calling on the Internet speaks volumes. Of course I am not going to change my vote. doktorb wordsdeeds 18:22, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Your admin bit
A few editors, including myself, have come to an agreement that basically results in us asking that you voluntarily relinquish your administrator bit on en.wikipedia for the time being. This is, of course, null if consensus from an RfA is that you should have the bit. Our reasoning starts with the fact that the bit was given to you as a function of your job with the Wikimedia Foundation. That job has since been terminated. Therefore, we feel that the bit should go with the job. Also, if the account were to become compromised, it would be hard to control or take care of quickly. Lastly, since you haven't used the bit for any logged administrator actions since 2007, we've come to the conclusion that you are not in need of the bit anymore for any actions, official or unofficial.

We respectfully request that you voluntarily relinquish your administrator userright, until the point at which a community discussion at Requests for Adminship has been deemed by a bureaucrat to show a consensus of the community that there is a valid need for you to have the bit.

Thanks, gwickwire talk edits 23:32, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I second this. After three years inactivity, administrator status is removed from normal admins anyway and cannot be returned until passing another RfA. There is no reason for you to have admin rights any more, and I agree with gwickwire. Vaca  tion  9  23:43, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I second this second. You were given the administrative bit in connection with your work. Your work has finished, it is only right that your admin bit should be removed. If you would like it back, my opinion is that you should go through an RFA to regain it.  Fish  Barking?  00:02, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Please post diffs of BradPatrick abusing the bit. Oh, there are none? Then why this process wankery nonsense? Do you have nothing better to do with your time? Killer Chihuahua 01:24, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, we do, KillerChihuahua - just like you probably do. So go do it.  Fish  Barking?  02:06, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of List of papabili in the 2013 papal conclave for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of papabili in the 2013 papal conclave is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of papabili in the 2013 papal conclave until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- --JamboQueen (talk) 08:08, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

WP:Missing Wikipedians
Hi, I've added your name there because you haven't edited in three months. &mdash; rybec   19:20, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for noticing. I'm not dead yet! I changed my security settings to not remain logged in, so most of my drive by edits have been by IP. I still use WP daily, evangelize regularly, and remain close friends with the Cabal. --Brad Patrick (talk) 16:29, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Help
Hi BradPatrick. I noticed that you are a lawyer. I am a German citizen, living in England for 2 years. I've heard about this DERIVATIVE RESIDENCE CARD. Many EU citizens are applying this. Do I need to apply this? What are the disadvantages to not apply this? Or it is better to wait to apply the PERMANENT one? It would be helpful if you respond to this.

Thanks. --78.145.22.192 (talk) 14:53, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I only practice in the United States. I am not qualified to discuss UK immigration status. Good luck!--Brad Patrick (talk) 20:05, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Jules and Gedeon Naudet
 * added a link pointing to Showtime


 * The Spymasters
 * added a link pointing to Showtime

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:34, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins
Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers
Hi.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins) .MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news
 * A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
 * Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
 * Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news
 * When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
 * Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
 * The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration
 * The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries
 * JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Username person (talk) 11:19, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Adminship
Hello Brad Patrick. It is with great regret that I will have to ask you to resign your admin bit since it was provided to you as part of your official duties at the Wikimedia Foundation when you were a part of it and without the community's approval at RfA. Thank you for your editor and administrative efforts, but if you want to retain the admin bit then you must pass an RfA otherwise you will need to give up the bit. You can resign at Bureaucrats' noticeboard. Username person (talk) 12:22, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It should be noted that the noticeboard discussion has been marked as resolved. Also, I would consider the source of this "request" - an account that only started editing today after over 11 years of inactivity - before making any sort of decision, if any. Acalamari 12:51, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Brad, even though is stating it like it is a requirement, it isn't.  This user does not speak for the community and the overwhelming response to their posting at WP:AN is that there is no problem here.  They have been told that if they think you should lose the bit they will need to start an RFC on it.  ~ GB fan 13:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 * A good point was raised at WP:AN, an RFC would be closed as there is nothing the community can do. Only ARBCOM can remove the bit unless you voluntarily resign.  If you resign, you can always ask for it back and it should be restored.  ~ GB fan 13:08, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your continued service, Brad. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  18:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

the article "Maryann Keller" Testingblog (talk) 05:22, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Dear BradPatrick, I will very much appreciate that you help address the issues raised by the warning tag in the article "Maryann Keller" here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryann_Keller. I appreciate very much your help.

Proposed deletion of Michael B. Clifford


The article Michael B. Clifford has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Iffy★Chat -- 20:25, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject Genealogy - newsletter No.6
{| style="position: relative; margin-left: 2em; margin-right: 2em; padding: 0.5em 1em; background-color:Cornsilk; border: 2px solid #bddff2; border-color: rgba( 109, 193, 240, 0.75 ); border-radius: 8px; box-shadow: 8px 8px 12px rgba( 0, 0, 0, 0.7 );"
 * Newsletter Nr 6, 2018-12-25, for  WikiProject Genealogy (and Wikimedia genealogy project on Meta)

  Participation:

This is the sixth newsletter sent by mass mail to members in WikiProject Genealogy, to everyone who voted a support for establishing a potential Wikimedia genealogy project on meta, and anyone who during the years showed an interest in genealogy on talk pages and likewise.

(To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please see below)

Now 100 supporters
At 3 December 2018, the list of users who support the potential Wikimedia genealogy project, reached 100!

A demo wiki is up and running!
You can already now try out the demo for a genealogy wiki at https://tools.wmflabs.org/genealogy/wiki/Main_Page and try out the functions. You will find parts of the 18th Pharao dynasty and other records submitted by the 7 first users, and it would be great if you would add some records.

And with those great news we want to wish you a creative New Year 2019!

'''Don't want newsletters? If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page.'''

Cheers from your WikiProject Genealogy coordinator. To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery
 * }

ArbCom 2019 special circular
   

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:32, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)