User talk:Calmer Waters/Archive 4

Samantha Smith
I notice that you deleted File:Journey to the Soviet Union.png per this because the image did not have a fair-use rationale. The image was used in the FA Samantha Smith and I would have been surprised if the image has been included without a rationale in an FA and the more recent 2008 FAR. Can you check the file history to see if some edit, since the FAR, removed or broke the rationale? I can certainly refine the FUR assuming it was not up to scratch if you restore it. Drop me a TB when you respond. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 21:04, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

revdelete
This edit to my talk page qualifies as RD3: Purely disruptive material. Just remove the content, not the username. Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) T or M/Sign mine 16:37, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Honestly, in this particular case, I would just rollback and move on. It would be different if they had left some really bad nastiness in the edit summary or something, but they had left no summary and rev/deleting a vandal telling an editor to "shut it" does not fall within the RD3 criteria. Working against vandalism, you will unfortunately probably see much worst at times. Hope you understand. Kindly  Calmer   Waters  16:52, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Unprotected image on DYK
See Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know and User talk:Snowmanradio. BarkingMoon (talk) 22:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

See Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know It seems that you accidentally gave the small image that is going to be shown on the main page for the DYK the same name as the file in the infobox of the Yellow-crowned Bishop. This has the effect of showing the small image in the infobox (somehow the en wiki version takes preference over the commons version) and this looks silly. I and another user put a large image in the infobox from commons (with a different name) to look better - it is the image that the DYK image originates from, so this is satisfactory for DYK requirements. It really needs an administrator to fix, because the files are protected. Snowman (talk) 00:25, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * File:Euplectes afer -Lake Baringo, Kenya -male-8 CROP.jpg - miniature version of the cropped image on commons
 * Commons:File:Euplectes afer -Lake Baringo, Kenya -male-8 CROP.jpg - cropped large image on commons
 * Commons:File:Euplectes afer -Lake Baringo, Kenya -male-8.jpg - uncropped large image on commons Snowman (talk) 00:25, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply on my talk page. Snowman (talk) 12:34, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * A bot has added a DYK tag to a page on en wiki with the same name as the Commons file, File:Euplectes afer -Lake Baringo, Kenya -male-8 CROP.jpg. I guess that since the licences are to be found only on commons, another en wiki bot has said that the image does not have a licence, which is wrong. I think that something needs fixing here. Snowman (talk) 12:33, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Odd. Must have been an error with the bot, if happens to other prior DYK images, I'll file a bug report. Kindly Calmer   Waters  17:07, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK notices
Thanks for fixing the delayed DYK update. Please don't forget the article and user talk page notices.BarkingMoon (talk) 19:00, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks like great minds think alike, hehe. BarkingMoon (talk) 19:01, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Too funny. Would have edit conflicted, were our messages on the same page :) Calmer   Waters  19:20, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * At the risk of bugging you too much, the article talk pages are still missing their DYK tags. Thanks for taking this on.BarkingMoon (talk) 19:17, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Its OK. I'm working on it, admittedly not as fast as the bot. ;)  Calmer   Waters  19:20, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hehe. In at least the bird article, on the article talk page, you made the "check views" link go to 2010, not 2011. I fixed the bird article one. BarkingMoon (talk) 20:19, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Was using a template from last year that includes the hook as it appeared. Never got around to updating the year as the bot is pretty reliable, I'll go ahead and update the others. Thanks again. Kindly Calmer   Waters  20:23, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Karin Ahlbäck in 2010.jpg
No notification was given me, the uploader, that this file was up for deletion, and I'd like to know why. This gets so old...--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:33, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * (I) The file has been up for deletion since March 17th, you wrote on the image on March 28th that you contacted the uploader, but haven't been able to reach them. (II) As you yourself admitted, you or anyone else can not release permissions on their behalf, and without said permission, it defaults that we assume they wish to retain either some or all their copyright protection. (III) The tag was never removed and this issue has remained since the file was restored. (IV) Unless I'm mistaken, user:KallistiMan was the uploader of the file. That is why it has been deleted. Kindly Calmer   Waters  19:41, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Kidney trade in Iran
Hello! Your submission of Kidney trade in Iran at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Soman (talk) 19:34, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

File:1989 NHL Draft logo.png
I need help with the liscensing. Can you help me out? Thank you. -- Puckingham  TALK  02:45, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll take a look Calmer   Waters  03:57, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I replaced the information template with a template. If you have any specific questions in regards to how best to find the appropriate templates or licenses in the future, or anything else, please feel free to ask. Kindly  Calmer   Waters  04:17, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Is there some sort of system where users can adopt and help out other users? Because I need some help with stuff. -- Puckingham  TALK  19:23, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There is the Adoption page where you can request a specific mentor or place a general request. I would also be happy to assist if you wished. If it is a specific question, there is the help desk, then there is the always the different site, project, and page policy and help pages. It can possibly seem like quite alot of information to digest; however, it does get easier with time. Also, it is helpful just to look in from time to time at places like the help desk at others' questions and answers, as sometimes you may pick a how-to or too. Also, as you become more familiar with other editors and the community; you will have a greater number of editors that you can bounce ideas or questions off of. Kindly Calmer   Waters  22:23, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to be the hockey whiz at Wikipedia. Is there any other big hockey editors at Wikipedia? -- Puckingham  TALK  00:12, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There is Ottawa4ever and the WikiProject Ice Hockey and its list of participates. From there you can link and view current hockey-related articles, see how examples of how FA and GA class articles are organized, written, and sourced. The project's discussion page is a also a good place to post specific questions related to hockey type material. Kindly Calmer   Waters  20:42, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Did I do something wrong?
I was attempting to update The Roslin Institute's page and my edits appear to have been removed by you. Did I do something wrong? This is the first time I've tried to edit a page and thought that as the Institute moved to its new building in March of this year the page should be updated to reflect this.

Damon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Damonq2 (talk • contribs) 07:24, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You were completely in the right. I had undid my change, as I had misinterpreted the school name, and noticed my error. Please feel free to continue making what ever changes you feel appropriate. My apologies Calmer   Waters  07:33, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

That's ok. Think I've done for the time being. Damonq2 (talk) 08:05, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
ww2censor (talk) 05:19, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Again ww2censor (talk) 06:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I've done a few! ww2censor (talk) 15:10, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * More than a few I see. Think its time for me to start thinking of some material also. Calmer   Waters  22:21, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Kidney trade in Iran
The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Since 6.18.2011
Got it. Thanks for the info. Fixed a few grammar errors in your comment here. Sent from my iPod Touch. A comment by a person who has been editing Wikipedia since June 18, 2011. (talk) 05:23, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

talkback
TALKBACK= to here. Thanks! A comment by a person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 01:18, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

List of Euphonium Players
Thanks for the clean-up. It is absolutely amazing how a relatively unknown instrument (owing to its concert-band only usage) can manage to attract so much vandalism and self-promotion. That list as well as a list of instructors were both excised from the main article on the instrument to try and at least keep that looking respectable - and those of us who did it have been a bit lazy about cleaning up the mess now that it's off to the side. Thanks again.--Rwberndt (talk) 11:39, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. I had the opportunity to be introduced to the instrument. The performer that was stated to be a beast with the euphonium is what really caught my attention. :) I think it's too much to expect anyone to have to babysit their articles. Most vandalism is usually found quite quickly and eventually anyhow. Kindly Calmer   Waters  17:30, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Peace Treaty of Wiener Neustadt
Thanks for the heads up! Now I feel like it did worth the efforts. Cheers.  Lajbi  Holla @ me  •  CP  18:16, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Job well done :) Calmer   Waters  04:57, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Time on your signature
On User talk:174.61.200.195 you just left a block dated June 7. While I'm not really sure what would cause that, you may want to look into it. Monty 845  04:07, 28 June 2011 (UTC
 * That is odd. My other HG block had done the same thing with the same time on the date stamp; however, the warning I've issued appear correct. Will file a bug report. Thanks for the heads up. Kindly Calmer   Waters  04:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Found the issue, just not sure how to fix it. Calmer   Waters  04:55, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

List of Total Drama characters
The I.P that you recently blocked seems to be back under the 31 hours. He seems to have a registered account and continues to do the same vandalism to my articles. Can you please block him again? I also think he is now acting as a sockpuppet since he is using his IP to prevent getting his registered user blocked. Giggett (talk) 20:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There is a small overlap in the edit history of the to accounts. slight but enough to raise some doubt. I don't have check user permissions at this time and therefore am not able to either confirm or deny a block evasion here. I have left a message on the editor's talk page explaining the concerns with their edits and notice to start collaborating positively in the immediate future. I will keep an eye on the user and will act accordingly depending on the editor's future editing patterns. Please let me know if you see this continuing also. Kindly Calmer   Waters  01:51, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Recent edit warning
I never made the change in that Japanese show episode list of something from "catnip wire" to "penis".. I don't know how I received this message. previous unsigned comment by 67.162.33.212
 * The warning was left because of the previous edits made from the IP address you used to visit the website. You can always consider registering an account of your own to alleviate any warnings in the future directed to users utilizing the same IP address. Calmer   Waters  04:56, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 June newsletter
We are half way through 2011, and entering the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; the semi-finals are upon us! Points scored in the interim (29/30 June) may be counted towards next round, but please do not update your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. 16 contestants remain, and all have shown dedication to the project to reach this far. Our round leader was who, among other things, successfully passed three articles through featured article candidates and claimed an impressive 29 articles at Did You Know, scoring 555 points. Casliber led pool D. Pool A was led by, claiming points for a featured article, a featured list and seven good article reviews, while pool C was led by , who claimed for two good articles, ten articles at Did You Know and four good article reviews. They scored 154 and 118 respectively. Pool B was by far our most competitive pool; six of the eight competitors made it through to round 4, with all of them scoring over 100 points. The pool was led by, who claimed for, among other things, three featured articles and five good articles. In addition to the four pool leaders, 12 others (the four second places, and the 8 next highest overall) make up our final 16. The lowest scorer who reached round 4 scored 76 points; a significant increase on the 41 needed to reach round 3. Eight of our semi-finalists scored at least twice as much as this.

No points were awarded this round for featured pictures, good topics or In the News, and no points have been awarded in the whole competition for featured topics, featured portals or featured sounds. Instead, the highest percentage of points has come from good articles. Featured articles, despite their high point cost, are low in number, and so, overall, share a comparable number of points with Did You Know, which are high in number but low in cost. A comparatively small but still considerable number of points come from featured lists and good article reviews, rounding out this round's overall scores.

We would again like to thank and  for invaluable background work, as well as all of those helping to provide reviews for the articles listed on WikiCup/Reviews. Please do keep using it, and please do help by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup.

Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here, for those interested, though it appears that neither are completely accurate at this time. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:27, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hi CW!! I wanted to thank you for the nice post you left on my Talk Page about "my" [sic] article on Basaloid squamous cell lung carcinoma being in today's DYK!

Of course, I IMMEDIATELY went to my User Page and bragged about myself to myself, which made me feel better (twice)! LOL! Have a nice day! :-)~

Best regards: Cliff (a/k/a &quot;Uploadvirus&quot;) (talk) 12:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I liked the article and trying to make an interesting hook for a disease process is not always so easy, so double kudos for that. I remember attempting to write Plexopathy while trying to incorporate something "hooky" without just adding something for the sake of it. Anyhow, If you ever get bored or want a challenge, I have been working for sometime offline on reworking the anemia article per JFW's suggestion. To think that a top importance Medical article that receives somewhere around 200,000 views a month is nowhere near GA status is somewhat odd. Calmer   Waters  05:30, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Unknown
Oh, I see. Did I hurt you by insulting Twinkle? Did that have to do with you in any way? Go ahead and ban me, see what it does for the good of the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.250.192.119 (talk) 22:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You know very well why it was changed back. You appear to know your way around the site, maybe you can put that ingenuity towards something a little more constructive. Calmer   Waters  22:53, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 June newsletter
We're half way through 2010, and the end of the WikiCup is in sight! Round 3 is over, and we're down to our final 16. Our pool winners were (A),  (B, and the round's overall leader),  (C)  and  (D, joint), but, with the scores reset, everything is to play for in our last pooled round. The pools will be up before midnight tonight, and have been selected randomly by J Milburn. This will be the toughest round yet, and so, as ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Though unaffiliated with the WikiCup, July sees the third Great Wikipedia Dramaout- a project with not dissimilar goals to the WikiCup. Everyone is welcome to take part and do their bit to contribute to the encyclopedia itself.

If you're interested in the scores for the last round of the Cup, please take a look at WikiCup/History/2010/Round 3 and WikiCup/History/2010/Full/Round 3. Our thanks go to for compiling these. As was predicted, Group C ended up the "Group of Death", with 670 points required for second place, and, therefore, automatic promotion. This round will probably be even tougher- again, the top two from each of the two groups will make it through, while the twelve remaining participants will compete for four wildcard places- good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17

reply:concerns
Exactly which article(s) were you referring to?  A  user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010.  06:00, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello. Sorry for getting mad at you, but you have 1060th place in most edits (33013). Nice! Probably changed by the time you read this. Here:  A   user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010.  22:44, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
... disco spinster   talk  13:16, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Discussion at ANI
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding It doesn't appear that the block is warranted. The thread is Block of User:Since 10.28.2010.The discussion is about the topic User:Since 10.28.2010. Thank you. — Mlpearc  powwow  17:27, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
... disco spinster   talk  19:16, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 23:18, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 00:32, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Since 10.28.2010
Are you doing a RFC/U? I have supported the editor for a long time, but his inability to cooperate has gotten ridiculous. Please notify me when/if you create it. Ryan Vesey contribs  00:51, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You and others have been very patient and helpful in helping this editor. As you are familiar with the user's editing pattern, it will take some time to manage through the vast rapid fire edits made to find the appropriate ones in the removed history of the user's talk page and extended length history pages of others. All applicable parties will be notified including yourself and Since 10.28.2010. I really wished it would not come to this as I really do not enjoy spending my time with such negatively related things such as this, but I really see no other alternative. Calmer   Waters  01:04, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, I noticed that he is finally seeking adoption. Do you believe a RFC/U should still be created?  I really don't care either way, but I thought you might like to know. Ryan Vesey  contribs  01:08, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * He doesn't need adoption. Adoption is where an editor looks for someone who provides occasional help with general questions and guidance. A very informal relationship that can be implemented and severed at any time. He requires a mentor. A mentor is someone who not only provides guidance, but is a formal role with the primary responsibility being the representation of Wikipedia. They are in a way in change of the the protégé, and can enact a set of conditions agreed upon before hand, when issues that lead to the relationship prove unsuccessful. I do not yet see any indication that the user would abide by such a relationship voluntarily. Calmer   Waters  01:20, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I do see that as a problem; however, if you look at Worm's adoption program, you will notice that he goes much farther than that. Ryan Vesey contribs  01:30, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Including the unilateral blocking of the adoptee if warranted? The instruction provided and learning possibilities would be absolutely wonderful, but mentors much also be willing to take such responsibility along with others if necessary. If both are willing, or any other experienced editor is, then that would serve the plausible outcome of any RFC/U started, with the editor having more room to discuss the conditions of the arrangement than the former would. Calmer   Waters  01:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I am unsure and Worm would need to be asked personally if he would do that. He is a fairly new admin and I really can't speak for him. I do think that his adoption program would address some of the issues that the user has been having. Whether this will change the behavior of the editor, I really don't know. He did specifically state that "I posted my opinion on mentorship because it might harm the mentor person, and cause a disruption." Worm has had some experience with problem users though. Mikeymand was blocked yet Worm was able to keep a very objective view of the issue. While I earlier said I didn't care either way, I think that if Worm is willing to take the case an RFC/U can be put off. If, during the adoption process, problems persist, an RFC/U could be started. Ryan Vesey contribs  01:47, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * If problems persist during the adoption process, an RFC/U probably wouldn't be of any use. I think a block should be the only course of action. Ryan Vesey  contribs  01:48, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Your a good man Ryan. Consider any action by me halted while we see if this option bears any fruit. Calmer   Waters  01:51, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi both. I haven't had an awful lot of time to look at this, but it does seem like one of my "specialities" ;) I've worked with a few users who's issues have a similar root cause. I've had a little chat with Ryan by email about the user's potential and I do think he's worth adopting. If he engages with my mentoring, then I'm sure he'll be a good editor. If not, we'll have to look into other options. Please do feel free to email me with any suggestions of areas I should be focussing on, though I'll aim to cover any issues I've seen so far. WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Worm. Your adoption course has been recognized by many as very helpful and you even more so. As you have decided to do this, I don't want to inadvertently hamper it, by going into detail as to why it has gotten to this point, as you have stated that you are starting from a clean slate with him. It also helps that I understand that you wouldn't walk into this without taking the time before hand to familiarize yourself with the situation. If you need any details I can surely provide as needed per above, but also don't wish to be "a backseat driver" :-). Best of wishes and if you ever need anything please feel free ask or ping me. Kindly Calmer   Waters  04:13, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Ping
You've got mail. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 07:26, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Mike Tyson: Main Event
Hi. Thanks for the page protection. I had put in a request at WP:RPP, because Mike Tyson's facebook page is currently featuring the game. As such I'm wondering if it requires protection for longer than the next couple of days. Steamroller Assault (talk) 20:29, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Was wondering what was happening. I hate to have to protect a new article creation at all, but it will be easy enough to extend the protection longer if needed. Calmer   Waters  20:34, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Modified comment
Hello! Recently another user of one of your comments. While I do realize that this was done in good faith, I'm not sure that you actually meant "Bollocks", given that you wrote "Bullocks". Do you accept the wiki-linking? Otherwise I'll revert it. Thanks in advance, Hey  Mid  (contribs) 10:43, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * (The other user) I didn't know the word, and liked both explanation and stress, smile, see also a comment I received, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:15, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It's perfectly fine. I don't mind. I saw later on that I had misspelled it, but thought it was close enough to not have changed it myself. Wasn't aware its meaning was also the word testicles however. I do hope it was received for the figurative effect I felt in regards to the situation, as in "a load of old bollocks" like the wiki-link refers to. :) Kindly Calmer   Waters  04:43, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, :) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:18, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Personal note: I came to site from the DYK queues, happy that BarkingMoon had moved my (much debated) Bach cantata to prep, mentioning in the hook "brotherly devotion", - as the last move before saying "Good riddance and goodbye". Brotherly devotion!!! You named the load of sorrows perfectly! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:01, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

My RfA
Hi. Is this more like what you're looking for? I'm not sure that I have anything better than that. - Richard Cavell (talk) 00:53, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I just felt that if your answer pointed out some of your understanding of the BLP policies along with examples, using the time to address some of the points brought up during the last one, it may be beneficial. This question IMO is a crucial one that should be very thought out an not as brief as originally answered. I do see you have expanded your answer. I do wish you the best during this time. Kindly Calmer   Waters  17:32, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Wtf Imaculate conception ???
Wow now that was fast :) Yes I know it's "unconstructive", but that's the whole point: to "disconstruct" these moronic ideeas which are the religious dogmas. The fact of the matter is, Roman-catholic doctrines, and generally all religious doctrines, are fundamentally retarded. You will say this a subjective opinion and others may have other opinions. But those people are obviously brainwashed and/or mentally challenged and therefore their opinions are worthless. Wikipedia should not favor mentally chalenged people, or their so called "world views", by stating them as if they were "normal", don't you agree ? And this "neutrality" BS is really annoing. The catholics and their church burned people on the stake for not believing in their "proclaimed doctrines", and we can't even call them, that is the doctrines, retarded ?! Why ? Because it's not constructive. And neutral. But their doctrines are very constructive, and neutral, aren't they ??

Oh, and if you're a catholic, don't even bother to respond. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.137.138.118 (talk) 16:56, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * As you stated, adding the word retarded was simply nonconstructive. I'm not really sure what your wanting to hear as a response. If it's to vent, then ok you've vented, but there are other sites that would be more tailored and suited for that other than Wikipedia. Kindly  Calmer   Waters  17:26, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

You really don't get it, do you ? That whole article is about presenting, in thorough and outmost detail, a catholic doctrine which no one except the catholics give a damn about. And from the way in which it is presented it is most likely the work of a fellow catholic. Why does wikipedia has to be polutted with their non-sense retarded doctrines ?? If I wanted to know what the "imaculate conception" means, I would consult the source, i.e. a catholic priest/encyclopedia/whatever. Wikipedia should not by any means contribute to the spread of their moronic doctrines, by repeating, word by word and with no criticism what so ever, exactly what the catholics (or any other religious sect) are preaching (seriously, I felt like I was attending church reading that article).

And "retarded" is the only word to describe what they are preaching. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.137.138.118 (talk) 22:23, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Again, how many people were imprisoned, tortured and burned at the stake for not accepting their "proclaimed doctrines", including the "imaculate conception" ? Why on earth would any sane person ever want to hear about them, or their retarded doctrines, again ? In an ideal world, not ruled by ipocricy and democratic propagation of imbecility (most people who vote are religious morons, that's why politicians don't even dare to say anything critical about religion), religion should be banned and but to the corner of shame ! But since we don't live in an ideal world we can start by not letting these religious morons spread their "proclaimed doctrines" on this site, or in any public space what so ever. I'm not talking about restricting their freedom of speech, altough they fully deserve it, but by shouting: "We don't like your proclaimed doctrines! We think they are retarded; now go and do something usefull, like, say, jump off a cliff, and see if Jesus saves you; then come back and teach us about the Imaculate Conception, Original Sin, and whatever you want to teach us!" on every possible oportunity. So maybe, just maybe, the next time they will feel embarassed and think twice about saying them in public.


 * Well if you can find reliable tertiary sources that support what you want to add to the article to a criticism section, then that is acceptable as long as it is a fair representation and balanced. It is worth noting that this site strives to be neutral and represent an article in a neutral way (key word is striving). This discussion would be better addressed at the articles talk page, as you would reach those who are interested in editing the article. Not all parties will be happy with all points of view, but if you continue presenting your opinions in such non-tactful ways (such as retarded), you will find them falling on deaf ears and soon no ears (ie. block) I only removed the edit because it was inflammatory, as I have no wish to debate the finer points of dogma vs. religious tenets here. If you have specific questions related to editing that is fine; however, please don't use my talk page further to express your dissatisfaction for this faith. Kindly Calmer   Waters  22:40, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

"Not all parties will be happy with all points of view, but if you continue presenting your opinions in such non-tactful ways (such as retarded), you will find them falling on deaf ears and soon no ears (ie. block)"

Hmm, let's see, "non-tactful ways" versus "burning at the stake". That's how debates were won by catholics until a few centuries ago ! You're right, I'm too gentle. But I frankly prefer calling them retards instead of burning them alive.

"I only removed the edit because it was inflammatory, as I have no wish to debate the finer points of dogma vs. religious tenets here."

Actually their religion is the inflammatory one, there are numerous recorded cases of it setting people on fire. Literally ! So could you please remove their religion alltogether from this site ? Or, if you can't do that, leave my edit alone ? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.137.138.118 (talk) 23:02, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

RE: WP:AIV
No problem -- I was just trying to get all of the IPs / Accts for that user. I'll be a bit more careful to look for recent contribs in the future. --Ender The Xenocide | ( Talk | Contribs) 19:24, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sockpuppets are a little different, as long as its stated that it's a suspected sock that is not currently editing, then it should probably be brought to the admin who blocked the original account/other suspected socks. AIV is intended for account that blatantly need immediate addressing. A very quick paced noticeboard. Again thank you for your help. It is very appreciated. Kindly Calmer   Waters  19:32, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your work.
Thank you for your prompt response to the user who resorted to vandalism and sock puppetry. My fellow editors, forumers and colleagues were very frustrated to say the least due to his behavior and we thank you.(This person also created much havoc on another forum for many months. It was later revealed that the user had been rejected from the school, which in turn motivated him to do such things.) Despite being blocked numerous times, this user seems to 'pop up' again and again. This person also seems to be using a public facility to do these deeds at a university/library. What are the possible solutions to this problem? Luckily, you dealt with the problem this time but is there any way we can prevent this from happening again? Also, would it be okay if I let you know if this problem were to emerge once more? I'm also not a very experienced user so I hope I can learn from you as well. Thank you! --Petersonsboard (talk) 19:25, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, remember mediating a similar incident about a year and a half ago, only to find out that many the editors arguing were abusing socks. Very frustrating indeed. Sorry it has lead to page protection (IMO one of the worst case scenarios). A check-user can find out what IPs the editors are performing the edits from and block account creation from those for a longer period if the IP is found to be excessively being used for sock-puppetry. If you find any others start in, please feel free to report them either here or at AIV. Take care. Kindly Calmer   Waters  19:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

hello
Hi. I am notifying all users in the section that I am deleting this unless you object or dispute it by 06:00 GMT/UTC. I have noticed you “HATE” it when I delete sections, so I am notifying you, if you are still in the discussion. It has been a full week since any comment but mine and it takes up space. Thank you.  An  editor since 10.28.2010.  05:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I have no objection. Thank you for the note. It was very courteous of you. Kindly Calmer   Waters  05:43, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * to you as well. Having quite a plesant day today (hence my un-pissed off-person-form). Having my flight just landed (from my WikiBreak), I feel quite refreshed. Thanks again,  An  editor since 10.28.2010.  05:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

hello, again
Thank you very much!  An  editor since 10.28.2010.  19:23, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks 10,28,2010. Kindly Calmer   Waters  19:33, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't want to brag, but you might want to see this.  An  editor since 10.28.2010.  04:23, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter
We are half way through the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; there is less than a month to go before we have our final 8. Our pool leaders are (Pool A, 189 points) and  (Pool B, 165 points). The number of points required to reach the next round is not clear at this time; there are some users who still do not have any recorded points. Please remember to update your submissions' pages promptly. In addition, congratulations to PresN, who scored the first featured topic points in the competition for his work on Thatgamecompany related articles. Most points this round generally have, so far, come from good articles, with only one featured article (White-bellied Sea Eagle, from ) and two featured lists (Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story, from PresN and Grammy Award for Best Native American Music Album, from ). Points for Did You Know and good article reviews round out the scoring. No points have been awarded for In the News, good topics or featured pictures this round, and no points for featured sounds or portals have been awarded in the entire competition. On an unrelated note, preparation will be beginning soon for next year's WikiCup- watch this space!

There is little else to be said beyond the usual. Please list anything you need reviewing on WikiCup/Reviews, so others following the WikiCup can help, and please do help if you can by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup- points are, of course, offered for reviews at GAC. Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 11:23, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

David Allan Coe and Johnny Rebel
I'm not sure exactly how to go about this, but as you blocked one of the IPs I'm concerned with I'm asking you. I'm looking for a solution to a series of unconstructive edits from a series of IPs apparently by one editor. I became involved while trying to resolve an external link issue with the article David Allan Coe. After investigating I discovered that the official site is http://www.officialdavidallancoe.com while 'Editor X' was trying to add an unofficial site http://www.davidallencoe.com (note name spelling). The fan site clearly states that it has no affiliation with David Allan Coe, but it also sells other merchandise including records by Johnny Rebel.

So I started by reverting the additions of the fan site and restoring the official site, accompanied by appropriate warnings to various IPs. When it became apparent that adding the fan site wasn't going to succeed, 'Editor X' started a new strategy, which involved just removing the external links both the official site and the AllMusic template, generally using the edit summary "removing race hate link". Coincidently, it is IMO the fan site which sells the Johnny Rebel merchandise that should be described as race hate. I reverted these removals when a third strategy by Editor X arrived, adding the official David Allen Coe site to the Johnny Rebel article and proclaiming it was a place to buy KKK CDs. I then began reverting those edits. Currently the Johnny Rebel page is protected while page protection expired on David Allan Coe yesterday and almost immediately the official site was removed.

I am concerned that repeated editions of the official David Allan Coe site to the Johnny Rebel article might result in it getting blacklisted which might be Editor X's strategy. Below are a lists of the IPs involved (probably not complete):
 * 67.142.130.11
 * 67.142.130.27
 * 67.142.130.29
 * 67.142.130.36
 * 67.142.130.38
 * 67.142.130.41
 * 67.142.130.42
 * 67.142.130.45 (currently blocked expires August 11)Special:Contributions/72.171.0.139
 * 72.171.0.138
 * 72.171.0.139
 * 72.171.0.142
 * 72.171.0.149 (currently blocked expires August 10)
 * 166.205.13.51

I'm not a believer in extended page protection, just looking for a solution to end this. Thanks, GcSwRhIc (talk) 18:54, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * A range block is in order, but let me do some research on the number of IPs this range will effect to help determine the length ( looks to be only about 1100 I was way off) Unfortunately, I'm having a little difficulty pinging their service provider. It looks like both or running off Hughes and the 67. is coming out of Michigan, while the 72. is coming out of Maryland. Then there is always the option of using the abuse filter. Calmer   Waters  22:57, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Two more edits today to David Allan Coe. You can add 67.142.130.15 to the range. GcSwRhIc (talk) 19:39, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * IP blocked. I left a note for Tnxman307 for his insight as I haven't yet performed a range block, and would feel better if I consulted with someone who has done quite a few before. Calmer   Waters  21:04, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, it looks like we were able to leave the article unprotected for two whole days before having to go back to semi-protection. Guess some just have to spoil the dinner for everyone. Calmer   Waters  21:50, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I guess extended page protection is going to be the best solution for the present. GcSwRhIc (talk) 18:41, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Editor is back on the Johnny Rebel page here, here and here within hours of page protection expiring. GcSwRhIc (talk) 15:26, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

inre User:MichaelQSchmidt/Newcomer's guide to guidelines
You are cordially invited to User:MichaelQSchmidt/Newcomer's guide to guidelines as I feel its going live is imminent and I value additional eyes and input.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 01:02, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

IP user
Hello there CW, I reverted this edit because the user had already been warned, so sorry about that. Atomician (talk) 05:27, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you Atomician. Usually Huggle would stop the duplicate warning from being left, but nah. Looks like a block is forthcoming for this address. Kindly Calmer   Waters  05:33, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
I think I've fixed the problems. Nathan2055talk-review 16:35, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Let's try a new hook... Nathan2055talk-review 17:20, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I gave it a tick and added a couple of refs (hoped to find stronger ones, but is what it is :). Maybe the IP got the deployment info from a unit handbook or something, or maybe in the unit and just knows IDK. Anyhow, thanks for your patience with the back and forth on this nom. Kindly Calmer   Waters  05:32, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

 * Thank you for the cupcake :). I hope you did not take that note as a problem with how you write articles in general. I just thought you deserved to know why I redirected that particular article. It may very well eventually be able to stand on its own; and as a redirect, the edit history along with the previous version is still there if you later decide to expand it or work on it in your user space. If you ever have any questions on anything, please feel free to ask. Take care and thanks again. Kindly Calmer   Waters  04:06, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination for Ibn Thabit
Hi, your observation has been addressed. Any thing else? Let me know please. AshLin (talk) 09:14, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I wrote a explanation of why I returned it in more detail at the nomination. I hope you understand. I thought about letting it slide, but already had my trouting for the week, should someone else had later came to the same conclusion. I do like the article and think the circumstances around the artist are quite interesting. Calmer   Waters  18:58, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

thanks
Thank you. I will work on it. Very helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EzzetYou (talk • contribs) 13:56, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * your welcome Calmer   Waters  18:59, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Dorival Caymmi image
Hi Calmer Waters, thanks for switching out the image in Dorival Caymmi. Just out of curiosity, what was wrong with the image that was there? It's the same image used in the corresponding articles on de.wiki, es.wiki, fi.wiki, he.wiki, ja.wiki, pt.wiki, and ru.wiki, and it had been here on en.wiki since April 15, 2010. What's more, the says that the photo is on the Commons, which I understood to mean that use was okay. I have very little experience with image copyright issues, so I'd like to learn a little bit about this one. Thanks, Armadillopteryxtalk 03:29, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The file on commons experienced link rot and for a moment, the image was no longer able to be verified by the source to be outside the 70 year copyright window for Brazil. Later, an internet archive site was able to be used to show what the original linked page looked like. Commons images are OK for DYK; however, when an administrator was validating whether the image was truly free (by checking the linked address in the source info box), this issue presented. It was really just to be on the safe side. I probably should have done before and after cropped images to ensure the same thing doesn't happen to the one I uploaded also. Calmer   Waters  02:52, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, I understand. Thanks for explaining. I didn't know about the link rot. Armadillopteryxtalk 20:22, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Mark Midei
Hello Calmer, I made this edit because of the concerns you raised at WT:DYK. Don't you think it's possible though, that reliable sources towards Midei have been 2/3 "negative"? If so, the article would be neutral, right? Jesanj (talk) 02:37, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No. just as if I source an article with 100% reliable sources with negative focused material, that does not make it neutral, it just means I used 100% sources that related to negative material. Right now it could be agreed that for that much focus to be on lawsuits and such, that it should be demonstrated that as much material couldn't be found on his achievements and early life. Casliber put it in better words than I have. It is not that the article is 2/3rds negative, but rather approximately 2/3rds of the article currently focuses on issues and aspects that may easily be seen in a negative light by readers in regards to the subject. The main issue is that by DYK placing this on the main page with such balance, we are possibly placing undo added exposure on this living person in an unbalanced fashion. I felt we should side on caution. The information was adequately sourced and the quarry was only in regards to main page exposure, not encyclopedic value as it is still (hopefully) a work in progress and will balance out in due time. Calmer   Waters  02:50, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I want to discuss it with Casliber too. They insinuated the positive (in my opinion) hook could do harm to Midei. I find that to be ridiculous. To put Midei's life in context, he already lost his license and is now suing the hospital and is being sued by over 80 patients. Casliber's idea makes 0% sense to me. The odds of a neutral/positive hook doing anything negative in real life are so astronomical they should be dismissed outright, in my opinion. The DYK rules state "Articles and hooks that focus unduly on negative aspects of living individuals or promote one side of an ongoing dispute should be avoided". I hope it is your opinion that we should make sure the article is not POV before it goes on the main page. Otherwise, I don't see how one can be on the side of caution if there is no established guideline to be on the side of. As I told Cbl62, "DYK isn't disallowed for subject who has been the subject of critical press. I feel like I'm being disallowed from DYK simply for tackling a complex topic." Thanks for listening to my concerns, and moving the article back out for discussion at t:tdyk. =) Jesanj (talk) 14:51, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't believe anyone was referring to the hook as being negative or that the hook itself could cause undo harm to the person, but instead the article. The purpose of the hook (as in hooking them in) is to bring attention to the bold article link in hopes that someone will click it, read it, learn something, and possibly expanded and improve it. The project has a duty to take responsibility for what it allows on the main page of its section. I was reviewing the prep in order to promote the set to the queues when I read the article. I didn't feel comfortable in promoting the nomination for the reasons I gave, and rather than pull the nomination, I asked for further feedback. Please don't think that your are being disallowed because of the complex subject matter, but rather the current balance of the article. Possibly, another way of looking at the balance would be as if this article was changed to describe the incidence rather than the subject and titled as such, it would not be unbalanced towards the new subject (the incidence), but again negative incidences that revolve around a living person are still not allowed under DYK. ITN for example is different in regards to the focus of negative material of BLPs on the main page (even the burb) depending on how news worthy it is; however, they also have a far larger number of contributors that vet the pro vs. cons of doing so and have different different project goals and rules for inclusion. Kindly Calmer   Waters  21:31, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Would it be better stated as a common practice instead of a rule? I quoted what I think is the relevant rule, and I don't see how that would disqualify the article, as I don't see how (and no one else has explained) how the article is POV. Thanks. Jesanj (talk) 21:38, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * My concern and reason for feedback is in regards to DYK rule 4. Within policy – Articles for DYK should conform to the core policies of Verifiability, Living Person Biographies and Copyright. pertaining to the BLP policy in regards to Care must be taken with article structure to ensure the overall presentation and section headings are broadly neutral. with emphasis on article structure and balancing on the amount of material in regards to the lawsuit and disbarment and general material on the subject. You may also notice that no one stated that this was POV, but rather that the balancing was heavy in one direction at this time. Kindly  Calmer   Waters  22:09, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I took a stab at fixing what may have concerned you. Do you think this edit was helpful in making the structure/presentation be broadly neutral? Jesanj (talk) 22:15, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice. It conveys what the section is about without the negative connotation that may be associated with disbarment. Calmer   Waters  23:20, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Rick Perry by Gage Skidmore 3.jpg
Saw a red cast on this image, so I tweeked it and uploaded it to commons. Just leaving a message so you can update the version on wikipedia. Reub2000 (talk) 14:17, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It looks like the hook has already appeared, but the commons file will still be better off with the change. Calmer   Waters  22:12, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
ww2censor (talk) 15:36, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK nominations reviews
Hi,

I see that your an active reviewer of DYKs, would you mind taking a look at the two below. It would be much appreciated, not to worry if you can't. Thank you.


 * Template:Did you know nominations/The Longford Trust‎
 * Template:Did you know nominations/Edward Fitzgerald (barrister)

Kind regards, -- Ratio: Scripta  · [ Talk ] 20:19, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry I missed this note or I would have stopped by and given those a look over. I haven't been as active as DYK as I had been in the past. I try not to review nominations if I know there is a chance I may not be able to edit for a couple of days, as it is only fair to be around to address concerns and feedback in a reasonable amount of time. I'll keep an eye on the nomination page and hopefully be able to review one of your future submissions. Kindly Calmer   Waters  01:52, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you Luke and sorry for edit conflicting your reverts :) Looks like there is never a shortage of those that want to add their love for pie here. Keep up the the great work also. Kindly Calmer   Waters  01:44, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I cannot agree more. --    Luke      (Talk)   01:52, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Smallman12q (talk) 20:26, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter
The finals are upon us; we're down to the last few. One of the eight remaining contestants will be this year's WikiCup champion! 150 was the score needed to progress to the final; just under double the 76 required to reach round 4, and more than triple the 41 required to reach round 3. Our eight finalists are:


 * , Pool A's winner. Casliber has the highest total score in the competition, with 1528, the bulk of which is made up of 8 featured articles. He has the highest number of total featured articles (8, 1 of which was eligible for double points) and total did you knows (72) of any finalist. Casliber writes mostly on biology, including ornithology, botany and mycology.
 * , Pool B's winner and the highest scorer this round. PresN is the only finalist who has scored featured topic points, and he has gathered an impressive 330, but most of his points come from his 4 featured articles, one of which scored double. PresN writes mostly on video games and the Hugo Awards.
 * , Pool A's runner-up. Hurricanehink's points are mostly from his 30 good articles, more than any other finalist, and he is also the only finalist to score good topic points. Hurricanehink, as his name suggests, writes mostly on meteorology.
 * , Pool B's runner-up. Wizardman has completed 86 good article reviews, more than any other finalist, but most of his points come from his 2 featured articles. Wizardman writes mostly on American sport, especially baseball.
 * , the "fastest loser" (Pool A). Miyagawa has written 3 featured lists, one of which was awarded double points, more than any other finalist, but he was awarded points mostly for his 68 did you knows. Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, including dogs, military history and sport.
 * , the second "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Resolute's points come from his 9 good articles. He writes mostly on Canadian topics, including ice hockey.
 * , who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool A). Most of Evan's points come from his 10 good articles, and he writes mostly on meteorology.
 * , who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Phil's points come from his 9 good articles, 4 of which (more than any other finalist) were eligible for double points. He writes mostly on aeronautics.

We say goodbye to our seven other semi-finalists,, , , , , and. Everyone still in the competition at this stage has done fantastically well, and contributed greatly to Wikipedia. We're on the home straight now, and we will know our winner in two months.

In other news, preparations for next year's competition have begun with a brainstorming thread. Please, feel free to drop by and share any thoughts you have about how the competition should work next year. Sign ups are not yet open, but will be opened in due course. Watch this space. Further, there has been a discussion about the rule whereby those in the WikiCup must delcare their participation when nominating articles at featured article candidates. This has resulted in a bot being created by new featured article delegate. The bot will leave a message on FAC pages if the nominator is a participant in the WikiCup.

A reminder of the rules: any points scored after August 29 may be claimed for the final round, and please remember to update submission pages promptly. If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:53, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Frenchman's Tower
I admire your editing skill.

I examined all of your edits to Frenchman's Tower and learned a lot. I have been troubled by my inability to tell the difference between stating the obvious and original research. I am glad you reviewed the article.

In a short time, you understood the article, found sources, and improved the article.

Thanks. Wikfr (talk) 19:23, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The credit goes to you for this interesting find. When I looked back at the first submission and the one I reviewed, I was the one impressed. You took what little feedback was provided and addressed those issues well. Regarding original research and the obvious; it sometimes comes down to the prose used to state the facts from the provided source. I just reworded a few things is all. It gets easier the more you write here, getting familiar with the various guidelines and policies, and from looking and reading others' work. If you ever have any questions, please feel free to ask anytime. Either myself or any of the other helpful people here. Take care. Kindly Calmer   Waters  04:41, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
MJ94 (talk) 03:24, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * Thanks MJ. Next ones on me. Calmer   Waters  03:49, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Blocked user
Hi, I've seen that someone was recently blocked because of huggle, please if anything like that happen again, do the following: if it's again the problem with WL, tell them to download latest patch (2.1.15) it's available on huggle download, this is big issue since it cause people being blocked for that, instead of blocking them, you can also disable their huggle (Open huggle.css and change enable:false), also you can contact me, bugfix which will be deployed over all wikis is coming asap. Petrb (talk) 06:39, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm glad I saw this; I'll download the patch tomorrow. MJ94 (talk) 04:40, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Did not think to try that or I would certainly have tried. Thanks for the information. By the way, do you know how prevalent this particular bug was?

WikiCup 2011 September newsletter
We are on this year's home straight, with less than a month to go until the winner of the 2011 WikiCup will be decided. The fight for first place is currently being contested by, and , all of whom have over 200 points. This round has already seen multiple featured articles (1991 Atlantic hurricane season from Hurricanehink and Northrop YF-23 from Sp33dyphil) and a double-scoring featured list (Miyagawa's 1948 Summer Olympics medal table). The scores will likely increase far further before the end of the round on October 31 as everyone ups their pace. There is not much more to say- thoughts about next year's competition are welcome on the WikiCup talk page or the scoring talk page, and signups will open once a few things have been sorted out.

If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 12:29, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

ELs and related issues
Please take note of a discussion ("Wikipedia and its relationship to the outside world") about medical ELs and related issues. You may want to follow the links provided to learn more if you are so inclined. Thank you in advance. I'm not looking for more comments, as there have been many already, but you're welcome to add yours if you want to. Presto54 (talk) 03:55, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello
I just came to Wikipedia and noticed your message to this IP address. I have a dynamic IP, and it is interesting to see what other people have done using your IP before you were assigned it... Heh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.166.66.159 (talk) 11:01, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Survey for new page patrollers
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 12:04, 25 October 2011 (UTC).

WikiCup 2011 October newsletter
The 2011 WikiCup is now over, and our new champion is, who joins the exclusive club of the previous winners: (2007),  (2008),  (2009) and  (2010). The final standings were as follows:



Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.


 * The Featured Article Award:, for his performance in round 2. matched the score, but Casliber won the tiebreaker.
 * The Good Article Award:, for his performance in round 4.
 * The Featured List Award:, for his performance in round 4. matched the score, but Miyagawa won the tiebreaker.
 * The Recognised Topic Award (for good and featured topics):, for his performance in round 3.
 * The Did You Know Award:, for his performance in round 1.
 * The In the News Award:, for his performance in round 1.
 * The Reviewer Award (for good article reviews):, for his performance in round 3.

No prize was awarded for featured pictures, sounds or portals, as none were claimed throughout the competition. The awards will be handed out over the next few days. Congratulations to all our participants, and especially our winners; we've all had fun, and Wikipedia has benefitted massively from our content work.

Preparation for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Interested parties are invited to sign up and participate in our straw polls. It's been a pleasure to work with you all this year, and, whoever's taking part in and running the competition in 2012, we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn and The ed17 00:33, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

this should not deleted this palace is very famous in or area...unfortunate — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.73.43.100 (talk) 14:09, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
I appreciate your help here. I will never claim to be super-proficient at wikimarkup; I wish Twinkle could do a lot more of it for me!--~TPW 01:48, 28 November 2011 (UTC
 * lol, honestly, it took me about four attempts with preview to remember what it was. Subst templates make my head hurt. I remember trying to update one of the protected medical infobox templates that have Subst templates in-bedded into one another. After a few days of trying off and on, I passed the choir off to someone in the project, where they fixed it in a matter of minutes. Practice makes perfect and all that :) Nice to see your name come across my watchlist. Hope all's well. Calmer   Waters  01:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I took an extended on-again-off-again wikibreak, but once I stuck my toe back in the water I found myself editing far more than I expected to.  What is it about this site?--~TPW 02:02, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I know what you mean. I am trying my hand at my own break, but still finding the need to bugger around the site from time to time. "just a website" they say. Maybe it's something they put in the coffee. Calmer   Waters  02:11, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, how's that going for ya?--~TPW 02:16, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Today
... is a good day ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:57, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, and how have you been lately. Been meaning to drop by and say hi. Calmer   Waters  15:38, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * See my user, "Break forth into joy" (restored today), quite a change to He was despised, where we met. The design was done by Alarbus, btw, who also was despised but is back as Br'er Rabbit, ever sooo helpful! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I see that, many name changes of late (Rob, Jack, Alarbus, PS, to name a few). Hopefully everyone has found their own good mix of time away and time spent here. Perspective and all :) Calmer   Waters  16:13, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Jack=Alarbus, 1 less ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:33, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Electriccatfish2 (talk) 20:20, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 June newsletter
Apologies for the lateness of this letter; our usual bot wasn't working. We are now entering round 4, our semi-finals, and have our final 16. A score of 243 was required to reach this round; significantly more than 2011's 76 points, and only a little behind 2010's 250 points. By comparison, last year, 150 points in round 4 secured a place in the final; in 2010, 430 were needed. Commiserations to Pool A's, who scored 242 points, missing out on a place in the round by a whisker. However, congratulations to Pool B's, whose television articles have brought him another round victory. Pool A's came second overall, with an impressive list of biological did you knows, good articles and featured articles. Third overall was Pool D's, with a long list of contibutions, mostly relating to baseball. Of course, with the points resetting every round, the playing field has been levelled. The most successful Pool was Pool D, which saw seven into the final round. Pool B saw four, C saw three and Pool A saw only the two round leaders.

A quick note about other competitions taking place on Wikipedia which may be of interest. There are 13 days remaining in the June-July GAN backlog elimination drive, but it is not too late to take part. August will also see the return of The Core Contest- a one month long competition first run in 2007. While the WikiCup awards points for audited content on any subject, The Core Contest about is raw article improvement, focussing heavily on the most important articles on Wikipedia. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 10:47, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, just a request regarding Adjkasi's use of rollback (through Huggle), which you granted (hence why I'm talking to you). There have been a number of "please explain your revert" (most of which don't seem to have been good reverts). Rather than do this formally (through AN/I for example) I'm hoping that you would be able to leave him/her a message encouraging a more appropriate use of rollback. As well, encouraging him/her to reply to the messages soon after being posted rather than waiting or not replying at all (which as I'm sure you know will just lead to frustration). If this request to you is inappropriate, please let me know what I should have done. Thanks Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:32, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Did you notice that Calmer Waters retired? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:36, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
 * You are right. He should, at the very least, respond to these requests for clarification or acknowledge them. I'll leave a message and hopefully we can sort this out. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Calmer   Waters  17:10, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, (assuming you hadn't retired) was this the right place to bring this up? Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:33, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry to bug you about this again however Adjkasi hasn't responded to your comment, but has continued to make mistakes with his/her reverting (see the messages on User talk:Adjkasi). Unfortunately I think a removal of rollback may be needed (or perhaps futther santions given the incorrect CSD warnings which have started to appear), however this is, of course, completely up to you. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:15, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, unfortunate. Rollback removed. Maybe just needs someone to help show him/her the ropes around here. The editor seems to not have a problem using the help template thru. If he wishes to start communicating better, maybe someone can kind of mentor him. I check back in a bit to see if he at least responds to the latest message I left. As far as coming here with your concerns, I think it was fine (I did sign off on giving him the rights). I was pretty much retired for about 8 months; maybe more, but should be editing more consistently now. Calmer   Waters  16:20, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Not sure if you're still watching, but (previously User:Adjkasi) has asked (again) when he should get rollback again - I thought you may want to answer. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 10:34, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, might be worth seeing his/her wikibreak message on the user page. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated.
 * Yeah. Unless this editor shows some attempt at communicating beyond asking for his MMORPG toy back Rollback, I really only see it a matter of time till he either gives up or gets blocked. At this point, unless something changes, I'm calling it a day with them. Calmer   Waters  03:01, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, thanks a lot with your help with this :). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 11:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Unblock request from RonnnieRadke
Hi Calmer Waters, UTRS received an unblock request from which indicates he wants to contribute positively to band articles. I do notice that though it's about 50/50, his last three edits were indeed positive contributions. How would you look at an unblock? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 17:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, hold that thought for a moment please. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 17:41, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't be against it. It looks like they started contributing constructively towards the end, and it was the edit right before that and the ones leading up to the warning that lead me to block. OHIOISONFIRE looks as much if not more responsible for inciting the user. Fortunately, they ceased editing before a warning was placed and would have been blocked also. If you say the editor has addressed the issue, then I see no reason to not let them have access again. Calmer   Waters  18:10, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * There might be some other stuff under the hood, which I requested CU for. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:33, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Follow-up
Hey, I hope you are doing well. In response to an older thread, would you be willing to propose that list for display on the main page? ---My Core Competency is Competency (talk) 18:02, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I proposed it to Today's featured list/submissions shortly after you responded to me; however, it was removed due to never having been reviewed . It appears that there was either not enough interest from the those who vet the submissions, or it was too complicated to review (the list is kind of a beast of citations :)). I thought such a highly viewed, important, and probably one of the most complete lists available on the subject matter would have been a sure thing. I can ask The Rambling Man if I could resubmit it to allow for possible vetting. I am just not sure how to get an appropriate editor who is able to and can adequately access the article without canvassing. Calmer   Waters  18:24, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If you can get The Rambling Man to look at it that would be great.  I really appreciate your help.  Anecdotal evidence that the list is of good quality is suggested by the feature list status and high ratings at the bottom of the page. ---My Core Competency is Competency (talk) 18:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok. I will jot down some things and statics about the list and see about how best to present it so it might be allowed to be featured on the main page and then I'll bring it up with the one of the project's coordinators. I'm still weary if we can find reviewers from that project thru, but it can't hurt asking :). Calmer   Waters  03:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

User: Ekren
Hi! You told him to stay away from rollback and semi-automated tools, but he requested rollback at WP: PERM. Armbrust told me that as a clerk at WP: PERM, I am allowed to requests at WP: PERM as a non-admin if they are obviously not going to be accepted. I put the (non-admin closure) template there, just to make it clear that I am not an admin (I hope to take a shot at it in January). In the (unlikely) case that you want to give it to him, feel free to reverse my closure. Regards, Electriccatfish2 (talk) 21:20, 6 July 2012 (UTC).
 * Well done. looks good. Hopefully he takes the help you offered on his talk page, because he is just a few edits away from having his twinkle access pulled also. Calmer   Waters  21:49, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * JohnCD blocked him for 24 hours for not stopping to use Twinkle. I think that he wants rollback back really badly, but he has many messages on his talk page about misuse of Twinkle. Best, Electriccatfish2 (talk) 11:28, 8 July 2012 (UTC).
 * Actually, after looking into it, the twinkle blacklist has been removed, so the next step would be as James and John said, an indef and a watch for possible new accounts made by the user showing the same pattern. Calmer   Waters  22:45, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

User: Tell the truth brits
Just to inform you, the UAA report was successful and he has been indeffed because of his username. See you again at AIV! Electriccatfish2 (talk) 21:57, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep up the good work :) Calmer   Waters  05:30, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

User:Manojcsl and all that surrounds him
Hi, while the issue with User:Manojcsl doesn't seem to be vandalism, it does seem very strongly like WP:COI editing with promotion-only intentions. Some of the deletion contests look like meatpuppets at least, and I do find it likely that the main IP is the same user. I've sent the IP a message trying to get things sorted out, but I feel a little out of my depth. Could you help out, or should I ask the admin who originally declined/commented? Nczempin (talk) 19:27, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking a look (and doing much more). Nczempin (talk) 20:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * (e.c. lol) Looking into it. COI and peacock are all over both the company's article and his own. Combing thru the references; however, almost all of them do not contain the information to back up the claims, such as owning the college that this company runs. Will take some looking into; however, if he removes the tag again, he's gone. Calmer   Waters  20:16, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Reply
Hey, I made one tiny mistake to the Chris Brown discography article while using the rollback feature. I thought it would revert back to my last edits but it didn't. Does this mean my rollback rights will be revoked? It was my first time using it and I can assure you it won't happen again. Oz  talk  03:19, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Nah. Mistakes happen, you fixed it, all is good in the world. :-) Cheers Calmer   Waters  03:38, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks! :) Oz   talk  04:58, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Msg from Babu
Dear Calmer, Thank you for accepting my request and granting me Roll back rights. I'll go through all related literature regarding it and use it by the standard usage. Thanks for giving me this opportunity to fight vandals. --BabuOnWiki (talk) 05:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm sure you'll do great. Let me know if you have any questions. Kindly Calmer   Waters  16:39, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Prince Aly Khan Edit
Hello,

I am sorry about not using the sandbox. I have had trouble with Wikipedia using Firefox. I just found the title a bit offensive and thought it needed to be changed so I was just pointing it out.

Sincerely,

AAA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.7.17.20 (talk) 16:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you know of a different wording that might convey the same information and can try using that or you can start a tread at the talk page --> Talk:Prince Aly Khan and convey your concerns, as this would have been where your edit would best be served. Kindly Calmer   Waters  16:51, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 19:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions

 * Thank you :) Calmer   Waters  02:20, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Help please?
Is it possible for you to check out the Talk:Peta Wilson page? There is an edit war going on, I've debated my side fairly and with clear wiki guidelines and the other guy just won't listen. I dont know what else to do? Lady Lotus (talk) 02:09, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * WOW. I am completely surprised no one has blocked the both of you yet over this, let alone warn you both. It looks to me like it is becoming more of a battle between you two, which does not appear to be going forward. First, both of you need to immediately stop changing the "height" and "known for" fields. I would need to look into what the current consensus is in regards to the info box information when adding the height can be verified (I know it is removed, when it can't be verified or challenged). I highly suggest dispute resolution or even a request for comment on the talk page, so others can share some insight, or alternative views. Maybe ask at the WP:BLPNB, as many of the regular editors there may have encountered a similar situation. I'll look over the rationales tonight; however, stop edit warring. Nobody wins and editors start getting blocks. Calmer   Waters  02:44, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The page was on my watchlist before my talkpage, so I first reverted the n-th unilateral edit by Lady Lotus, then saw your post. In any case, I am surprised at an editor coming here to complain about an edit was, when he himself is a party to it, not to say the least, that he is insisting on his unilateral, contested and presently under discussion edits. I am just reverting to the consensus version, while in the mean time trying to show him in the editsummaries and (in a later stage) on the talkpage, that he is doing something he shouldn't be doing. I posted a warning on his talkpage 2 days ago already! Debresser (talk) 07:33, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Commented there. Kindly Calmer   Waters  02:29, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
You're probably already aware of this, but.... they've made an unblock request. Is there such a thing as "speedy decline"?  Theopolisme TALK 07:23, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Their we're all fired up about something yesterday, huh. I have yet to see one like that approved, so in a sense, yeah :-) Calmer   Waters  01:59, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

sorry man, a bunch of different people use this computer. I'll find out who did it and make sure it doesn't happen again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.71.66.249 (talk) 05:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Vincent Liu (something to say?) 08:30, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar
Much appreciated especially coming from you! Jim1138 (talk) 17:53, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Your welcome. Your hard work is appreciated Jim. Calmer   Waters  23:33, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

123.2.8.191
Thanks for reporting this IP -- it looks like it may be a school from the nature of the kiddie vandalism it generates.

I've blocked it for a month; it doesn't look like we're getting much useful from there. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:06, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, This STiki thingy reported a good one this time. Last time it reported on one that last edited like 2 months ago. I miss being able to use Huggle, for many reasons, but can't seem to get it to work on my Mac, without turning it into a backdoor PC :(. Thanks for taking care of that. Calmer   Waters  01:11, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I came here to confirm your receipt of the below barnstar and was a little concerned by this message. STiki should not issue a warning or an AIV report unless the edit under inspection occurred in the past 24 hours (for an IP). If you could dig up that AIV report and the evidence still confirms what you've suggested, post it over at WP:STiki and we'll take a look at it in terms of bug checking. Thanks, West.andrew.g (talk) 05:20, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Your right. My apologies Andrew. I looked thru my AIV reports and came across the one that I was reminded of . It was a final warning that was from 2 weeks prior that was reported and then a level 1 from the day before, typically something we decline at AIV as stale (as was done in this case). In striked that portion of my message above out. I suppose I was being grandiose and trying to be witty with A.B., so you have my sincere apologies Andrew. Calmer   Waters  16:41, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 July newsletter
We're approaching the beginning of 2012's final round. Pool A sees as the leader, with 300 points being awarded for the featured article Bivalvia, and Pool B sees  in the lead, with 10 good articles, and over 35 articles eligible for good topic points. Pool A sees in second place with a number of articles relating to baseball, while Pool B's  follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film Pride & Prejudice. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals.

Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 22:19, 31 July 2012 (UTC)