User talk:Charmlet/Archive 1

A belated welcome!
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Charmlet. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on, consult Questions, or place helpme on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Shirt58 (talk) 08:20, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Dianna has given you an attack kitten! Attack kittens spread wiki-love and help guard your talk page. Hopefully this one has made your day better! Best wishes and happy editing,

Dianna (talk) 14:44, 7 June 2013 (UTC) 

I saw that
Thank you so much. Very grateful. I left you a message there too but not sure if I left the reply properly. I used your formatting but inserted my user name. Hope that was correct. I am so confused because this doesn't look right either. (talk)  Ț ♥ ttØØd Ẅ ♥ itre§   17:04, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

The Chairman of Councils of State and of Ministers of Romania award!

 * Actually the Ceaușescu regime got along famously with the United States, the former seeking an independent course from the USSR and the latter seeking to break up the Warsaw Pact by fostering such independence. Not saying that either analogy to Wikipedians is within twenty miles of rationality, mind you, just fact-checking your history... Carrite (talk) 23:59, 8 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks Tim! That certainly puts a different perspective on it. It's very useful to have feedback from someone like yourself, who lived through these events as an obsessive researcher at the time, as opposed to living through the events as, at best, a mildly interested schoolboy at the time. I do still maintain that Nixon's and Ceaușescu's ideologies were dramatically different, and of course I retain the right to engage in a bitter ideological feud with Charmlet as and when he and I have time for such things.


 * (I hope you don't object to "obsessive researcher". Once upon a time I told an arb that you were "likely to be one of those sorts of people whose house is filled to bursting with old political pamphlets and other such junk", and the arb in question duly rebuked me, "well, you don't really have any evidence for that". I have a keen sense for such things, you see. I must also admit I'm quite pleased by your detailing my WP contributions at That Naughty Website; it is at least a little flattering to have one's researches researched by one of Wikipedia's foremost researchers.)


 * Oh yeah, you had that exactly right. Actually, I've got about 2/3 of my stuff in a separate location so the house is navigable. I think the library sits right around 12,000 volumes, something like that, with a good part of that pamphlets. "Obsessive," as any historian knows, is in the eye of the beholder. "Intense" and "focused" are better phrasings — although Romanian-American relations in the 1970s wasn't exactly the object of inquiry. Photo of our boys attached, courtesy of our close friends at Wikimedia Commons. Rotation and color correction needs work... Carrite (talk) 03:39, 9 June 2013 (UTC)


 * (Joy - I'm an historian, but not of that period of history. I do indeed know about the historical background of this fellow... but in careless moments I confuse the Romanian regime with the much more fascinating Albanian regime with its bunkers. As for whether Charmlet had heard of Ceaușescu before yesterday, I have absolutely no idea, but he now has. And that's part of the point.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:49, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Section created
Hi there!

I am a professional writer addressing this note to Charmlet.

I wrote a Word Doc and merely want to post it to Wikipedia. However, when I cut and paste it, some pertinent things are removed - superscripts, footnotes, etc.

I write for a living; however, I am swamped and do not know a thing about Wikipedia. Is it possible to have someone post it for me if I furnish them the document? Is that ever done? Thank you in advance for your help! Patricia Mora — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatriciaAnnMora (talk • contribs) 03:24, 11 June 2013 (UTC)


 * You can always join our live help channel by clicking connect here -> - That should help a lot. Otherwise, reading WP:REFB and WP:YFA should help for the time being :) Charmlet (talk) 03:32, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Rights
Done. Nyttend (talk) 20:05, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I dimly remember seeing some sort of controversy at the drama boards regarding you, but I've not seen anything that suggests you'll misuse these rights, and anyway WP:CLOUD only really applies to admin rights and other "advanced" packages. In the absence of solid evidence of problems, it would be disingenuous if I refused to grant you the rights that you freely gave up.  Nyttend (talk) 20:12, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure you don't want to think again? Spartaz Humbug! 20:26, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi
Please don't falsely accuse me of making so called "unconstructive edits"...k thanx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.173.68.216 (talk) 22:58, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Almost every single edit of yours, if not every edit, has been completely unconstructive. Charmlet (talk) 23:03, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

IRC help
Sorry, I'm not a huge fan of IRC; also neither images nor AfC are areas I consider myself particularly knowledgeable about (or of particular interest). I'm more of a generalist, partly from creating WP:EIW, and partly from inclination. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 03:17, 16 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, it's no problem :) I was just wondering if you wanted to help out. It gets pretty crazy sometimes :) Charmlet (talk) 03:23, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Potentially misleading advice on the help desk.
Please see my reply to your comment at Help desk. WP:BLP policy is absolutely clear that court records and similar primary sources must not be used as sources for statements regarding living persons. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:52, 17 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I've stricken it. I had a hunch I was remembering it wrong, as it seemed odd to me. Thanks for the correction. Charmlet (talk) 00:54, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Re the db-banned
Thanks for the input! Actually I didn't see this as the kind of situation that you describe, as I'm not planning on paying attention to it; my view is that the situation you describe applies to articles that have the substantial problems, e.g. something written by a serial copyright infringer, which of course wouldn't be safe to keep unless it got taken under someone's belt. Basically, my approach is to ask what would happen to the article if it had been created by anyone else; if it would be seen as beneficial, I'll decline it on IAR grounds, while if there are problems, I'll delete it unless I feel like fixing it. As I see it, G5 is permission to get rid of content, not a requirement. Nyttend (talk) 18:17, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Need your help in preventing a page from deletion
I don't know how to use talk pages. This is the closest section I could find.

I am trying to delete or tame biased sections from pages related to topic I wrote a term paper on a few years ago. According to Neutral Point of View, "Generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all, except perhaps in a "see also" to an article about those specific views." Yet I still got a warning for a possible ban when I followed this. Yes, I deleted a large part of the Banality of Evil, but really it is only a small part when you consider that the page could just as easily redirect to Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. I followed the same Neutral PoV method mentioned above for Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil without a problem. What do I do for the Banality of Evil page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aetherist (talk • contribs) 03:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


 * What you need to do is go to the talkpages of the articles and discuss. You can't just go around making a lot of unilateral deletions of things. I've redirected the Banality page, but please, in the future, discuss on the talkpage of the article first to avoid this. Charmlet (talk) 03:13, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

A Flower For You!
Dear User:Charmlet, You allowed me to write on your talk page to request help with Fran_Hauser page which has been marked for deletion. Can you please look again, and guide me through a little. We didn't mean to make this page promotional, or, use it for marketing. We used with caution all references published in either Wikipedia, or, on the Internet. Fran's biography should be treated with special care as she's a high-profile public person. Through her involvement with charities and non-profits she helps many projects: Haitian children find safe homes, create pediatric services in remote areas of Argentina, provide clean water to people in Kenya, help South African babies and kids, empower girls rescued from sex slavery, and hundreds of projects that GlobalGiving organization helps create. They raised almost $100MM for those purposes, and Fran is Board Chair. This is certainly notable. Should we include more detailed information on her Wikipedia article to reflect all this? Please help me to keep the page from deletion. Thank you so much!

--agringaus 23:46, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Eichmann
Hi Charmlet! The text in the criticism section of the former article Banality of evil appears to have been lifted verbatim from this site. It was added in 2011. Please remember to watch for copy vio in your travels. One way to spot it is prose that seems a little or a lot more polished than the rest of the article, especially material that was added in one large chunk, like this one was. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 03:20, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for catching that, I was a little more engrossed in trying to figure out why there were two different pages, why this was being massively removed, etc. than that at the time. Now Banality of Evil redirects to the book's article, and anything further can be done with that :) Charmlet (talk) 03:25, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Charmlet, the text in the criticism section was not lifted verbatim from the above URL. I know this because I wrote that section. The "essay" on studymode is rather an outright plagiarism of my contribution. If you look at the dates, you will notice that the studymode essay was published in October 2012, a full year after I wrote the Criticism section. If you go back to the 2 October 2011 revision, you will see that I created this section by paraphrasing (and properly citing) the work from an article in The Psychologist magazine. In fact, a cursory investigation of any edition on the Banality of Evil page in the past year will demonstrate that the author of the studymode essay plagiarized a number of contributors, since the entire essay is a copy-paste job of the entire Wikipage and not just my contribution -- a fact I plan on reporting to studymode at my earliest convenience. I am not invested in anyway in the fate of the Banality of Evil page or my contributions to it, but I do take accusations of copyright violation seriously. Please verify the dates of publication before making such accusations. 64.231.52.87 (talk) 21:38, 26 July 2013 (UTC)Wpam
 * We actually all discussed that afterwords, it was quite complex. Sorry for the confusion :) ~ Charmlet -talk- 23:14, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi 64.231.52.87. Both Charmlet and I thought we saw a date of 2008 on the Studymode page when we viewed it on 1 July. However, when we looked again the next day, it turns out we were both mistaken. I am at a loss as to how we both made this error. Here is a link to our 2 July discussion on my talk page. My apologies for this error. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:47, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I appreciate both of your apologies. Would it be possible to retract the comment about copyright violation in the page history? Some of my friends know I wrote that section and I don't want them to think I stole it when I didn't. Thanks in advance! Wpam (talk) 05:32, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but the edit summary in question does not qualify for revision deletion under the criterion listed here. -- Diannaa (talk) 09:25, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I see. So how do I restore my reputation on Wikipedia? As it stands, I look like a copyright violator on the page history, and with all due respect, I think that's unfair considering that I have proven otherwise. I highly doubt users will actually take the time to consult this talk page, and I don't want to simply repost my contribution lest I appear to be a tendentious editor. How would you suggest I fix my reputation? Your help in this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Wpam (talk) 04:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!!
I was wondering where to discuss controversial edits. Will take note. Thanks.

Aetherist (talk) 03:24, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


 * It's no problem at all :) Happy editing! Charmlet (talk) 03:25, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!
Hi Charmlet,

Thank you so much for your help! I really appreciate you taking the time to answer my questions - Especially since I wasn't sure of where to post them as I didn't yet know about the Teahouse. I'm very grateful and your response was tremendously helpful. It's sometimes hard to find answers in the pages upon pages about Wikipedia rules/help/how tos, but you were very clear. I fixed the redirect page and feel well informed!

Thanks again!

EJLefever (talk) 14:10, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

RfC
I noticed you participated in the Deadmau5/Deadmaus RM and I was wondering if you were willing to leave your two cents here at Talk:Tech Nine to overturn another horrible move based on a name no reliable sources refer to the subject as. I am just trying to get consensus to move it back to Tech N9ne in the same manner Deadmau5 was moved back.  STATic  message me!  15:57, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Beta Wikipedia
Hi Charmlet,

I just wanted to check in with you in regards to the Article wizard project you were planning earlier on the Beta Wikipedia. Let me know what our plan is. I was thinking of making a "To-Do" list on my user page, if you don't mind (either on Wikipedia, Beta Wikipedia, or both). --JustBerry (talk) 21:14, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
L Faraone  02:52, 9 July 2013 (UTC)



IRC office hours for wiki-mentors and Snuggle users
Hi. We're organizing an office hours session with the Teahouse to bring in mentors from across the wiki to and discuss it's potential to support mentorship broadly. The Snuggle team would appreciate it if you would come and participate in the discussion. We'll be having it in on '''Wed. July 17th @ 1600 UTC'''. See the agenda for more info. -- EpochFail (talk • work), Technical 13 (talk), TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi! I just wanted to post a reminder that this discussion will be happening in about 24 hours.  If you haven't already used Snuggle, I recommend giving it a try before the meeting.  I'll be in  a half hour early to answer any questions you have.   -- EpochFail  (talk &bull; work) 16:16, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I won't be able to make it (with any reliability), I'll be in transit. If it'll be logged and posted or emailed to me I'd appreciate it :) Thanks ~ Charmlet -talk- 16:26, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I think I can manage that. It seems that the norm is to record office hours sessions.  -- EpochFail  (talk &bull; work) 18:21, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

GOCE Menu Page
Hello,

I appreciate your skills in designing pages; hence, would like to show you the following page: User:JustBerry/GOCEMenu. The "menu page" is a potential menu tab for WP:GOCE. The idea has already been accepted by the WP:GOCE coordinators, but I would certainly appreciate if you could let me know any ideas/suggestions you may have for the page. Thanks. --JustBerry (talk) 18:14, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Charmlet. There's some feedback on the proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Coordinators. Note that Stfg and myself are not the only coordinators and neither of us are the lead coordinator so further approval will be needed before implementing the change. Cheers, -- Diannaa (talk) 18:24, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Ban Warning?
I just put up a request for comments on the on the Psychology Project -> Self and Identity Task Force -> Talk page to help resolve an edit war in The Milgram Experiment. I just got this unsigned comment from PoeticBent, " This is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ". I am pretty sure it is illegitimate because I have provided citations to my reasoning on the talk page. I just wanted to make sure it is fake. Thanks for your time. Aetherist (talk) 13:29, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * That probably was in reference to something else you did, as it references removing content. Most times, that's just going to be an accident. I'd ask the person who gave the warning for clarification on their talkpage. ~ Charmlet -talk- 13:03, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Bity
I think the message I placed was quite neutral in tone, considering it was directed at a woman who was socking (based on the contributions of ), where the previous articles she had written about her husband were intended solely to promote his books. It's aggravated in light of the fact that her husband wrote an essay that discusses online promotion, including writing Wikipedia articles about your own books. I didn't complain about her conflict of interest or her forum-shopping. I tend to keep my contributions to the Teahouse relatively light, but there's a limit. Retaining newbies is one thing, but retaining known spammers is another.&mdash;Kww(talk) 00:39, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not just about who you are replying to. It is about everyone who reads the replies to that question to try to answer their own, and all who are considering asking questions. For example, a waiter must be nice to all patrons, as if he is mean to one patron, others may see that and leave. (bad example I know) ~ Charmlet -talk- 00:43, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I suggest you go back and read my comment. It was neutral in tone, and actually very far from biting. It told her that she did not control the article. It pointed her at the discussion where the deletion had been discussed. It assured her that the redirect to Judith Reisman was now gone. It invited her to make an article based on independent sourcing, and reminded her that once she did so, it would still be subject to editing by others. If you see anger or bitiness, it's because you know me from other discussions. It truly wasn't in that message. It may not have been written as a soothing invitational, but it wasn't biting.&mdash;Kww(talk) 00:58, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Blogs on CSM
This seems to be off track. Mathsci - you shouldnt've edit warred over it. Diannaa, thanks for finding the RSN posting. It seems to be resolved, so we're done here. ~ Charmlet -talk- 22:57, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

You have a reply at User talk:GabrielD2
Hello, Charmlet. Thanks so much for your response. I have a reply posted on my talk page. You have provided the missing link that everyone else seems to have overlooked. Thanks much!

GabrielD2 (talk) 11:04, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Review?
Hi! I got a notification that you reviewed me, but I am unsure what that means. In any case, thanks for your time! NewAccount4Me (talk) 04:59, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Signature help
Thank you for the help.. lets see if it works :) -- (Loriendrew) talk 23:17, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I live in Wisconsin
That was not an accident. -- Orange Mike |  Talk  02:51, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, then it was an intentional placement of him along the lines of the others, which is a pretty obvious BLP violation. I've removed it from the page. Please refrain from politicizing things on Wikipedia, and making BLP violations, however masked they are. ~ Charmlet -talk- 03:00, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Charmlet is right. But I'm glad I read the original answer before it was removed, it was funny. And it made the point, rather well I thought, that assessment of "evil" can be subjective. Maproom (talk) 05:21, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * It was an interesting way of making the point, just not an appropriate one. ~ Charmlet -talk- 13:29, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Revamp of Article Wizard
You may  wish  to  coordinate with   because there is a possibilty that new development  will  continue on the Article Creation  Work Flow. It would be a shame to  duplicate efforts on  similar projects, especially  where the Foundation can help  unburden the volunteers from  some of their work. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:25, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. I've actually not done much more than conceptual ideas on napkins for now, so hopefully having it all coordinated in one team will work better. ~ Charmlet -talk- 02:08, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC Reviewer permission
You are invited to join the discussion at WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC Reviewer permission. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:01, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Bang on a Can cleanup
Hi Charmlet -

I have updated and added many citations to the article Bang on a Can which you have been an active editor of recently. I'm going to remove the cleanup and needs references tags on the article. If you think it still needs further work, please make some specific recommendations on how to improve what I've done on my talk page. Thanks!

Squarecandy (talk) 20:22, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/The Pixar Theory
I have determined through some research that the concept of a "Pixar Universe" preceded the Negroni thesis by a decade, so I created THIS as means of dealing with it. Upon further reflection, perhaps best that I fold my little sourced article into the main topic Pixar so we'd have a suitable redirect target for The Pixar Theory? Think it worth doing?  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 22:16, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I don't see why a section in Pixar wouldn't be appropriate (1-2 paragraphs). ~ Charmlet -talk- 22:18, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you :)
♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ( ♥ Talk ♥ ) 01:29, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Would you mind...
Would you mind making an edit using User:Gwickwire to confirm that you are the same person who controlled that account? Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:17, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

In case no one's told you yet
Your email got hacked last week. Only just noticed while checking my spam filters. — PinkAmpers  &#38;  ( Je vous invite à me parler )  04:05, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
 * +1 --Rschen7754 04:11, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, hopefully its fixed now. Yahoo seems to put the "open email and download attachments" link too damned close to the delete button. Thanks for the notice. ~ Charmlet -talk- 04:13, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Common.js hack to disable VE for non-autoconfirmed editors
Hi! I saw your edit to Common.js on beta labs trying out a JS snippet to disable VisualEditor for non-autoconfirmed users. It looks like it didn't quite work: one person observed that VE is sometimes disabled but sometimes isn't (my theory is there's a race condition where your code sometimes runs too late, after VE has already checked the preferences and decided it's going to be enabled), and User:Cmcmahon(WMF) noticed that the Selenium tests that he runs on beta labs broke intermittently because VisualEditor's edit tab sometimes wasn't there.

If VE is to be disabled for non-autoconfirmed users, then I think it's better to implement that on the server side rather than in JavaScript. In the meantime, could you revert your change on beta (I see you've already done that) and, if there's any sort of discussion somewhere that led you to experiment with this, point me to it?

Also, thanks for using Beta :) I talked to User:Cmcmahon(WMF) and he said that he'd be interested to talk to you to help him figure out how we can provide a space for people to experiment with JS/CSS tweaks while also providing a somewhat stable pre-deploy testing space. --Catrope (talk) 22:40, 17 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I sent him an e-mail, and sorry for the confusion (again). We (the community) had always wanted to implement it server-side (WMF side) but the WMF refused. Thus, the only option is JS/CSS/wikipedia-admin-front-facing-side (does that have a name?).  I'm on IRC as Charmlet during the day, but I'm always connected, so leave me a PM or PM me if either of you are on, or there's always emailuser. Sorry again. ~ Charmlet  -talk- 23:24, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

See the discussion at Village pump (technical)&mdash;Kww(talk) 23:27, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Stuff to test
Want to give User:Kww/nove.js a try? It should force the preference to "disable" for an non-autoconfirmed editor.&mdash;Kww(talk) 20:34, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Laughing my head off
Posting a huge picture of penises on WP:ANI. They've fixed it, but I'm still laughing. -- Neil N   talk to me  02:12, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit war
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war with yourself. Being involved in an edit war with yourself can result in other editors wondering what you are doing and offering you a cup of tea. -- Neil N   talk to me  16:05, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Putting your oar in
Hey, I wiped this garbage off my page. Can I respectfully ask you not to post there again? The reason is that a) I can't stand self-appointed civility warriors b) I don't like being misquoted (I never said what you said I said) and c) your post contained an egregious typo which betrays carelessness and makes me value your opinion even less. Thanks ever so much, --John (talk) 17:51, 22 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Going on calling it garbage isn't going to help you any. Just because we don't enforce civility super strictly does not mean you can go around calling peoples' comments (and by virtue of that them) retarded, nor call someone calling you out on that garbage. ~ Charmlet -talk- 17:55, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Assistance with citations from published article for NAREIT
Hello Charmlet,

This is Joethesmow from the IRC chat earlier, thank you very much for your faith and gesture of good will to give me time to fix my article for NAREIT. I have found the following article to reference heavily and cite the NAREIT organization in regards to a number of definitions, statistics, political movements, etc. that the Organization has contributed to REITs as a whole. I am try to help establish within the article here on the wiki to emphasize the importance of this organization for the investment term REIT, without sounding promotional. The facts all point that NAREIT is the go to source for this information, but as you have no doubt seen a large majority of information is self publication.

The publication I am asking assistance potentially in verifying it's notability can be found in the following link.http://books.google.com/books?id=fG8uT4t1lv0C&pg=PA35&lpg=PA35&dq=nareit+index&source=bl&ots=aIb856uImr&sig=FWMkMRkfxXMEVrbdXDeGJXqnX9c&hl=en&sa=X&ei=78NAUtDQBOab2wXmnIHwCw&ved=0CDwQ6AEwAzha#v=onepage&q=nareit%20index&f=false

The book was written by Richard Imeriale and published by John Wiley & Sons. The source is indeed a third party publication, now to only clarify if this article is enough to warrant the notability requirement for NAREIT in order for me to further dissect the book.

Any assistance/guidance you can provide me in this endeavor is greatly appreciated Charmlet.

Regards, Joethsmow (talk) 23:01, 23 September 2013 (UTC)


 * The best way to cite references is to cite them with the examples on this page. Past that, it certainly helps, but the more the merrier :) ~ Charmlet -talk- 23:05, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Working towards a better process
Hi Charmlet, I was just reading some of your posts on Maggie's talk page, and I wanted to say thank you. Firstly, for looking for some solutions to fix the current situation, which is dismal. (You have some good ideas there, and I'm pushing in a similar direction in my discussions with other staff) Secondly, for approaching staff with a collegial tone. Like any dispute on Wikipedia, the light fades as discussions become personalized and recriminatory. Like Maggie's, my talk page is always open for chats about constructive ways forward. Best regards, PEarley (WMF) (talk) 20:16, 24 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I also spoke with James today on IRC, and if he agrees I'll be happy to post a summary/log of it somewhere, or he can (minus personal talk). I think there's a general agreement between everyone I've talked to that a WMF noticeboard with periodical (weekly/biweekly) updates of everything going on in the WMF would be beneficial. I'd be happy to draft up a proposal for what it'd include, etc. if you'd like. ~ Charmlet -talk- 20:55, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know if you're aware of a similar noticeboard that was turfed recently. There was a feeling there that Meta served the same purpose, but I'd argue against that.  Only certain editors are active on Meta.  If a WMF decision impacts en.wiki, en.wiki should have a place to watch for it/discuss it.  However, this new board would only be effective if staff resources are given to keep it up to date and active.  Before doing much work on it, I'd talk more with James about how possible that is.  I will bring it up with Philippe, also.  My desire is to have more workshop pages/roundtable discussions on specific design questions, i.e. the VE toolbar layout, the VE Reference Editor, etc.  Anyways, more engagement between the community and the WMF before decisions are made is the goal.  A noticeboard would work towards that goal, and I support the idea at least. PEarley (WMF) (talk) 21:56, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I was aware, and from what I saw that would not be used for what I propose it be used for. Everyone's said it's a time and workload issue, so if that's the reason it can't be implemented it's all good. But maybe you should just hire a "community updater" for it? Idk, it's all just ideas. ~ Charmlet  -talk- 21:59, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * That's not a bad plan. It could be limited-hours part-time position and not eat up a lot of funds.  I think, to meet the foundation's goals, this position would have to work to improve WMF/community comms across all the wikis, not just English.  But it's a real possibility. Maybe just another liaison - I know the liaison team right now is pretty taxed. PEarley (WMF) (talk) 22:21, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Is the WMF really having that many problems with other communities? If so, sure, spread the noticeboard idea around, but I think the enwp noticeboard/employee would be a good start. ~ Charmlet -talk- 22:28, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Other communities often have their own, unique issues, such as Input Method Editor, Universal Language Selector, and problems related to character/language script support. (I recently found out that MediaWiki has been futzing certain characters in Thai, but the stoic Thai editors had just been dealing with it for years!) There are myriad other cultural issues as well. Often, what is important to en.wiki users doesn't bother some wikis, and vice versa.  I guess the idea is that the WMF shouldn't spend funds on one language group without serving the others as well. PEarley (WMF) (talk) 23:06, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I won't bring up the rollout of VE to enwp for months before other wikis ;) But in seriousness, I think enwp is a good start, as it is for most things :P ~ Charmlet -talk- 23:10, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * For sure. I'll let you know about any feedback I hear about the noticeboard idea. PEarley (WMF) (talk) 23:24, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) As always, I'm on IRC if you want to talk more realtime (cause I hate, personally, this non-realtime chatting, but c'est la vie). ~ Charmlet -talk- 23:27, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Your involvement with DRN
Hi there, I noticed that you haven't been as active at DRN as you was before. DRN has been a bit backlogged lately and we could use some extra hands. We have updated our volunteer list to a new format, Dispute resolution noticeboard/Volunteers (your name is still there under the old format if you haven't updated it) and are looking into ways to make DRN more effective and more rewarding for volunteers (your input is appreciated!). If you don't have much time to volunteer at the moment, that's fine too, just move your name to the inactive list (you're free to add yourself back to active at any time). Hope to see you again soon :) Steven Zhang (talk) 13:13, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

♥ L'Origine du monde ♥
~ Charmlet, I left you a message on her/his talk page I hope you can answer if you get a moment but right now that conversation is collapsed. I was looking at your original post at AN/I and you stated: "'I feel that this user is exhibiting a battleground behavior overall, and if someone uninvolved could look and remind the user about talkpage guidelines with regards to other persons' comments..." I see that you weren't asking for an indefinite block but the discussion just spiraled out-of-control. That makes quite an impression on me, a very negative one, that confirmed what I've seen before at AN and AN/I. An Editor posts about one problem they see and the Solution the noticeboard regulars come up with is something completely different. And it seems like speaking up for the benefit of someone who is getting a beat-down is like yelling into the wind. I've only been editing regularly since July but I feel like I've already become jaded. Liz Read! Talk! 22:48, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Friendly note
Thank you for your note. I'm afraid I can not rely on these channels, however, because the user in question is an administrator. I'm afraid that others will be too inclined to dismiss my complaints and even attack me for that very reason. I have tried to go to admin noticeboards and complain about this particular admin before and the mere act of complaining about an admin was met with attacks from left and right. I no longer will rely on use of Wikipedia channels to complain about abusive admins like Bbb23. I will do some Internet searching tomorrow and perhaps even go to the BBB to figure out how I can get in contact with a representative of this site because I've totally lost my patience with this administrator's incessant abuse. It's been nonstop since I got here. Thank you so much however! AmericanDad86 (talk) 00:52, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Admins have the upper hand on Wikipedia. Complaints through Wikipedia itself doesn't get anything resolved. I need to get ahold of representatives of the site if something is to be done about an abusive admin. AmericanDad86 (talk) 00:55, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

I've told you what I was going to do. Please offer no further advice! AmericanDad86 (talk) 01:00, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail
sentausa (talk) 10:37, 30 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Seen - will respond later. ~ Charmlet -talk- 15:29, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment
As you previously participated in related discussions you are invited to comment at the discussion at WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC for AfC reviewer permission criteria. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:26, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
United States Man (talk) 16:04, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion of interest
A discussion you may be interested in is this RFC, a proposal to make the second comma in a date/place optional. United States Man (talk) 02:31, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

New RFC on draft namespace
Hello,

As one of the participants in the previous related discussion, you are requested to comment on the RFC on creating a new Draft namespace at the Village Pump.

Thank you, TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:46, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Missing?
Where are you Charmlet? You have not edited for over six months now! Dustin ( talk ) 22:16, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see you are alive. Back in October, I only had 200 edits or something, and you 1200. Now, I have over 4000 edits. That is how long it has been. Well, hello. By the way, where have you been? Tired of Wikipedia? Dustin  ( talk ) 03:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Long story. Personal story :P I'll mainly be in -en-help and making edits related to that, so don't expect magic from me :) ~ Charmlet -talk- 03:14, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * And now I presume that you have disappeared for another nine months? Dustin  ( talk ) 00:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

DRN needs assistance
You are receiving this message because you have listed yourself as a volunteer at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard.

We have a backlog of cases there which need volunteer attention. If you have time available, please take one or more of these cases.

If you do not intend to take cases or help with the administration of DRN on a regular basis, or if you do not wish to receive further notices of this nature, please remove your username from the volunteer list. If you later decide to resume activities at DRN you may relist your name at that time.

Best regards, TransporterMan 15:52, 8 January 2015 (UTC) (current DRN coordinator)

MfD nomination of User:Charmlet/Ken Ludden
User:Charmlet/Ken Ludden, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Charmlet/Ken Ludden and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Charmlet/Ken Ludden during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 08:48, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Help needed at DRN
You are receiving this message because you are signed up as a volunteer at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. We have a number of pending requests which need a volunteer to address them. Unless you are an inexperienced volunteer who is currently just watching DRN to learn our processes, please take a case. If you do not see yourself taking cases in the foreseeable future, please remove yourself from the volunteer list so that we can have a better idea of the size of our pool of volunteers; if you do see yourself taking cases, please watchlist the DRN page and keep an eye out to see if there are cases which are ready for a volunteer. We have recently had to refuse a number of cases because they were listed for days with no volunteer willing to take them, despite there being almost 150 volunteers listed on the volunteer page. Regards, (Current DRN coordinator) (Not watching this page) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:48, 20 November 2015 (UTC)