User talk:ErrantX/Archive/2011/December

Wikimedia UK
In order to achieve charitable status, Wikimedia UK evidently had to argue that it exercised some editorial control over Wikipedia's content. As our continuing problems with BLPs show, that is not a true statement. Once Wikimedia/Wikipedia's administration gets its house in order, I have no problem with the chapters obtaining charitable status. In the meantime, however, they should not be doing so under false pretenses. Cla68 (talk) 23:46, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Seems reasonable, although I disagree on a number of points. :) --Errant (chat!) 00:33, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to the December Wikification Drive
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 01:22, 2 December 2011 (UTC).

Suicide methods
Good edit, but you forgot to sign it. -- Hoary (talk) 14:21, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Done thx :) --Errant (chat!) 14:22, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

RFPP
Thank you for protecting the dead scientists :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carstensen (talk • contribs) 21:51, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

New place for CommonsNotificationBot to post
The File namespace noticeboard has just been approved. Could you have CommonsNotificationBot post its alerts for files that are used on 50 articles or more than 75 pages at Wikipedia talk:File namespace noticeboard (note that it's the talk page) in addition to posting them at VPM? This was part of the idea as it was being developed, and really there isn't much other use for the talk page right now, so it makes sense to give the file workers an additional heads up there. Thanks.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  03:51, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I remember we discussed this once before. Looks great; will enable it ASAP (tomorrow probably) --Errant (chat!) 22:01, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

User:CommonsNotificationBot/tracking log.js
For some reason this page is showing up in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion for unspecified reason. I can't tell why, maybe you can? Beeblebrox (talk) 19:54, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's probably the deletion message for an image somewhere, the bot stores the messages as part of the log. Bit tipsy now, so I'll look at it tomorrow. Thanks for the heads up :) --Errant (chat!) 21:54, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey, I was about to leave you the same message. Would you consider splitting that up into separate log files (by date, or something)? Right now it's browser-crashingly large. 28bytes (talk) 05:13, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll have a look... it's not intended to be opened in a browser :) I'll try and fix the issue tonight. --Errant (chat!) 19:08, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Undetected rationales
Hi ErrantX- your bot marked these files that I watch: File:Last words.jpg, File:Huie's sermon.jpg, File:Jagmandir.jpg, File:Look at life screen.jpg as having no FU rationale. All of them do have rationales. I'm not sure how your bot is detecting a rationale or not... maybe looking for the word "rationale"? Do you agree that these pages are OK as is? Staecker (talk) 13:15, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's just notifying you that someone else has tagged the image; it looks like an editor is tagging a number of images in this way - probably you need to raise this with them :) --Errant (chat!) 19:08, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Right you are- sorry to bother you. I should've noticed myself. Staecker (talk) 23:04, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries. :) I'd have looked into it myself when I replied, Fastily seems to be tagging a whole load of images ATM, but this weekend has been manic :) --Errant (chat!) 23:13, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Otto_J._Zahn
Hello, ErrantX. I hope you are doing well today! I can't understand why I have just received a batch of warning notices, including one sent to the page above, claiming that there is no rationale listed for those articles, when in fact there plainly are rationales on those pages. Could it be because the rationales were not in the form of templates? Could it be because somebody found the rationales lacking in substance? This sort of thing (claiming there is no rationale when there actually is one) has been going on for a long time and is really debilitating and off-putting. I can usually cure the matter by posting the same information within a template, but why should I (or anybody else) have to take the added time to do so? I would really appreciate some light on this. Thank you very much! Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:07, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hiya - the bot just does a notification to let you know someone has tagged it, I didn'yt do any tagging. You probably need to bring it up with whoever is tagging these images. --Errant (chat!) 19:08, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but how would I find that out?GeorgeLouis (talk) 00:13, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * File history is the place you'd need :) In this case the person who tagged the image is User:Fastily--Errant (chat!) 00:21, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for negative thread at Ut:Jimbo
Errant, I apologize for trying to "reasonably respond" in the sock-puppet threads at User_talk:Jimbo_Wales (viewed 750-900x per day); I had thought the discussion would focus, quietly, on possible early warnings for sock accounts, but it seems other editors insist on piling insults 10x higher. Meanwhile, when the thread went quiet, and the insults should have auto-archived after a 1-day pause, I find that Jimbo expects the archive-bot for 2-day intervals, so the rants have remained in view. Fortunately, the top thread is "BLP" to catch new-reader attention, and pageviews have cooled to only 500x per day, but I had no idea Jimbo's talk is viewed 50% higher than "WP:ANI" (which has many other threads to distract readers from particular insults). In the future, I will avoid prolonging such heated discussions in the Jimbo fishbowl, and perhaps if you stay out of that thread, no new insults will be written about you there. Also, for the future, is there some way to notify another uninvolved user/admin to actively redact slurs there, when the talking editors do not remove unfounded insults? I have tried to hat/archive other heated topics, but I was informed that I should not close a thread which I have edited. I mean you see the problem: there is a pattern of multiple, repeated insults there, rather than acknowledging that admins are basically following current policy WP:SOCK, which quickly protects WP from hundreds of vandals who create dozens of accounts to hack numerous articles. Applying WP:SOCK to new-account users is the issue, not trying to villify admins who followed the current rules about stopping multiple acounts for block evasion. I think there is still an open invitation, in the thread, for people to redact their own insults, but it should have been cleaned up within 1 day. Also, Jimbo would have hatted the thread for archive (as he usually stops disputes), but he writes that he is offline in the World Economic Forum event "until Wednesday", so someone else should archive or redact the insults. -Wikid77 (talk) 01:21, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Heya; don't worry about it! I am staying clear (luckily the next few days are critical at work, so I will be on a break anyway :)), but it wasn't you that sidetracked the discussion. I thought the second thread was much more productive - and in there somewhere there are probably some good ideas to work on. Signal to noise ratio is sometimes a little low on that page :) Perhaps we can revisit the topic again (somewhere else?) in the near future when it is not so closely tied to this one incident. --Errant (chat!) 09:50, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

User:CommonsNotificationBot/tracking log.js
Your bot, CommonsNotificationBot, accidentally included User:CommonsNotificationBot/tracking log.js in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion and Category:Candidates for speedy deletion for unspecified reason. -- Jab7842 (talk) 06:19, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Valid use of alternative account?
This is a courtesy notification as I believe you are peripherally involved in the following AN/I thread.

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at WP:ANI regarding Valid use of alternative account?. The thread is "Is Sleuth21 using an alternate account properly?".The discussion is about the topic User talk:Iridescent. Thank you.--Senra (Talk) 14:37, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I replied there (although; you posted at WP:AN and not WP:AN/I as you linked :) which threw me briefly ;) --Errant (chat!) 14:55, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

User:Rodolph
Thanks for looking into File:RodolphFaneDeSalisbyGSWatson.jpg.

The uploader of that image User:Rodolph has a long history of image copyright issues/image usage issues on Wikipedia, and has directed many rants in my direction when I have pointed out the problems. The fact that many articles Rodolph de Salis edits are related to his ancestors I believe causes him to take my and others actions as a personal affront.

Is there any chance you could try explaining to Rodolph that:

1. Most of his images would be better uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. This would guard against orphaned images being deleted and the Wikipedia articles could then link to image galleries hosted on Commons.

2. Wikipedia policy discourages galleries of random images of the article subject. Witness before the galleries were removed; and now images are slowly creeping back into the article. See also: Jerome, 4th Count de Salis-Soglio, Peter, 3rd Count de Salis, Charles Fane, 1st Viscount Fane, Fingask Castle.

Thanks. memphisto 20:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do. That image is *just* not quite PD (created/published in 1929, I think). Will take this up with him when I get a moment later. --Errant (chat!) 11:29, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 December 2011

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 18:31, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Twitter status message Template
This is a template to generate a direct link to the Twitter status message. You can use this template to navigate directly to the Tweet or to refer someone directly to any Tweet in your wiki. You can use this template freely wherever you need to refer any tweets/twitter users of Twitter for your external references or some other places. --Jenith Michael Raj ( talk ) 06:27, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Twitter_status
 * Heh, not sure why you notified me, but thanks! --Errant (chat!) 09:45, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your kind and helpful reply. --Jenith Michael Raj ( talk ) 10:17, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

carl hirschmann
well this is not media speculation carl hirschmann was indeed convicted in court and then he confirmed himself that he has psychological problems and neurosis etc, re the video reference.


 * please note hirschmann is Franco Swiss here is the reference. please update.

http://www.sonntagonline.ch/ressort/aktuell/1948/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.185.226.46 (talk) 16:51, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * please update hirschmann is not billionaire but only millionaire re his father who died from cancer last year.

http://www.24heures.ch/actu/suisse/millionnaire-carl-hirschmann-condamne-33-mois-prison-2011-09-09


 * please refer to the fact that often Hirschmann was depicted to be a PSYCHOPATH

http://www.sonntagonline.com/index.php?show=news&id=727


 * lots of referances and articles re hirschmann running and investing in a london club le baron, a subsidiary of le baron club paris.

http://www.sonntagonline.ch/ressort/aktuell/1948/


 * if your conviction is longer than 3 months you are automatically in a prison cell. Hirschmann will go in prison and no semi prison, any time soon it is only a question of time . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.185.226.46 (talk) 17:09, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * please update and devellop around this important point for hirschmann: was declared as following a psychoterapie and recognised as suffering from Neurosis...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2fsolncotk

--86.185.226.46 (talk) 19:08, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

--Bioplus (talk) 04:56, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Seyed Mohammad Marandi Picture
There is nothing wrong with the picture currently being used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Storeylas (talk • contribs) 19:56, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:33, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 December 2011

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 17:42, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Contuing to tag IPs as socks of me contrary to SPI
Will you please do something about User:MarcusBritish's latest contributions, he is tagging me as a sockmaster despite being told the details on the SPI (which is still open?), it is becoming obvious this is being done in bad faith yet nothing is being done about it.

Here are three more IPs he has gone at, none which he has listed here to be subject to SPI.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:143.239.102.198 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:93.107.209.165 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:93.107.194.109

Sheodred (talk) 00:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Sheodred
You should look at my post about him on AN/I. causa sui (talk) 17:33, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Replied. He probably needs a good cool down before considering any unblock. But I feel he was, unfortunately, sort of pushed over the edge in this. --Errant (chat!) 17:35, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

baba kirtan singh ji
This photo was taken by me in 1999, in the Lehal village. It belongs to me, as it was captured by my own camera. This photo was taken in Lehal, Punjab, India. PD-self Mslehal (talk) 07:49, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Heya; the only "mistake" you made in uploading the image is that the PD-self needed to go into the image description :) I fixed that for you (take a look at my edit to see what I did) --Errant (chat!) 14:41, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Your discussion at ANI
Unfortunately the discussion you opened at seems to be going nowhere, its deteriorated substantially and it looks like the admins and editors won't even touch it with a 10 foot pole, yet again the subject has turned into a trial where it is I who stands accused, its toxic. Sheodred (talk) 14:28, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Errant. He has just been indef blocked, through his own stupid actions. Would you like to do the honours and wrap the AN/I up? Seems little point in pursuing it now, he's indef blocked for an attacky talk page. Call me an opportunist.. but hey.. life ain't fair! :)  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 17:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * There are still matters relating to your actions the last couple of days that need resolving. Not least another attempt to explain how to avoid escalation of incidents like you did. --Errant (chat!) 17:33, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Just FYI I never "break" in the way he did.. at least not to the point of telling people [everyone] to fuck off under semi-retired banners, which is WP:DIVA. If you're still having doubts about my neutrality, please read the second from last post at Talk:Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington. As I've always maintained, Sheodred stood for a very pro-POV, I stood to return his edits to neutral status. That may appear that I'm on the opposite POV, but would be a false premis. I don't have any anti-Irish sentiments; if I did, I would not admire Wellington. I stand by my actions as for the good of maintaining Wiki NPOV, and I'd do it again. NPOV is a 5P rule. If he had simply looked at the 43 item list on day 1 and said, "fine, I admit I've been over doing it", none of this would have spiralled. Cause and effect.. I'm a great believe in that.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 17:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not talking about your neutrality but your attitude. Surely that is obvious from every single comment I have made to you the last few days. You've hounded him, posted long ranting screed and taken the piss out of him at every opportunity. Escalation takes two to tango - and you have been one of the two, yet again. For example the SPI; that was either a competence issue (i.e. not understanding what us required if an SPI filing - as exhibited by the lack of any evidence except a hunch :)), bad faith or an attempt to game the system and get him blocked the "easy way". Numerous people have told you to tone it down, apparently to no avail. You talk down to people. And criticism against you seems to be taken as a personal affront (example; after calling Sheodred's proposal "near-racist" on one hand, you then twisted around and accused someone of implying you were a racist. That's a facepalm moment if ever I saw one :) But anyway - I have a busy work day today/tomorrow so someone else will have to sort this out. --Errant (chat!) 17:52, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I see your views, I simply don't agree 100% and think there was some slightly pretentious admin scowling in your comments at me in his defence, and I'm not one to take being downtrodden on a voluntary website, or indeed anything else in life, lightly. But that's just me, and you'll have to take it for what it is, like it or not. As for Sheodred: You can drive a man to water.. but you can't make him drink. I don't take responsibility for his actions. Racism/near-racism, probably comes from the same diff as heritage and nationality. Removal of all Anglo-Irish is near-racism, being called a British POV pusher is border-line racist. There's logic to that, if you disagree with his Anglo-Irish views as you say, so no facepalm required, just a little consideration. SPI was a matter of suspected socking; I still believe he used a mobile IP to enter discussions and affect people's opinions. The IPs I tagged were from those discussions. He simply cried about them before I was finished searching. You can't accuse a man of anything without proof first.. you both jumped the gun on me, convoluted my intentions and cast aspersions. It all centres on that one thing again: NPOV. Socking swings neutrality. Tagging isn't an accusation, it's a resource, that's why it says "Suspected" not "Confirmed" sock, so I perfectly understand it. And if I talk down to people.. you simply haven't read enough of my Wikitalk discussions with editors to get a wider perspective. I'm generally very easy going, until someone has a chip on their shoulder because I opposed their agenda. I only talk down to people who who won't see reason, and play the typical keyboard warrior and are determined to "win". You can't reason with people like that. There's nothing to sort as far as I'm concerned.. I was provoked. I've seen far worse and lengthier debates over people on AN/I.. WebHamster, TreasuryTag, Orange Marvin, etc. Lack of interest in me shows one thing.. no one cares about me or my attitudes until they turn sour, and then someone is always ready to moan moan moan; yet when I'm getting on with actual contributing, and editing, no one gives a toss. Such is life. I'm not easily discouraged, but I'm not also that hard to get on with either. I should probably avoid AN/I, some of the leeway people get on there really annoys me, esp. when I get snapped for far less. Enjoy your work. Later,  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 18:19, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * In general, don't tag IP's in that way until you run it through SPI. And you need fairly decent behavioural evidence to make the SPI stand up. One reason I rejected the original SPI was that the IP with the October edit had no explanation from you as to why it was him or not... and I could see no obvious connection. I should probably avoid AN/I; this is probably a good idea (I regularly do so when the effort of trying to keep sane and reasoned gets too much :)). Please, I don't want to discourage you :) just suggest a slightly better approach. -Errant (chat!) 15:08, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

CommonsNotificationBot
Errant, would you please review what your bot, and let me know if this was what it was meant to do. Thanks. --Epipelagic (talk) 01:49, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, thats exactly right :-). Someone tagged it for deletion, so it gives you a notification wherever it is used; just to give a heads up. Fastily then deleted the image. I notice from the history it was tagged as having no license (of I read it right you uploaded it like that). Instead of giving editor assistance to sort out that issue it seems it has been deleted :s there may be a reason. Possibly ask the deleting admin; he is usually happy to take a second look. Otherwise I'll take a look when I fire my PC up later. --Errant (chat!) 07:29, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh that's okay, thanks. The deleting admin offered no clarification, so the moral seems to be to upload images to Commons and not to Wikipedia. Makes sense anyway, so I'll upload again, this time to Common. --Epipelagic (talk) 21:45, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Nasty IP insulted you......badly.
Came across this IP on one of the discussions yesteray on AN/I, some discussions have been archived too that were not closed, strange....... Anyway you better take a look at this, that is quite the PA if I must admit! http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MarcusBritish&diff=prev&oldid=466165596 My regards! TheOneWhoWalks (talk) 22:28, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ignoring the below, for the moment... Yes, I saw that comment. Did it worry me? Not very much. I;'ve had worse (not on wiki; elsewhere). This has perhaps hardened me to abuse. Actually, Ithink it is worth listening to what he has to say. He may not be right, but it is always worth considering. I was !voted in as an admin here, which gives me technical tools. It also, for some fucking stupid historical reason, gives me some sort of authority or seniority. I'm not sure how other admins react to that, but for me I try to live up to that "position" as best I can. Which sometimes means taking abuse. And sometimes means reading my own actions behind that abuse that I need to consider in future. We grow here, as editors. I'm indistinguishable from the guy I was on 2006 when I first edited here. And I am not really much like the guy who came active again in mid-2010. And, really, I am not the person who was voted admin nearly a year ago. As one of the people I most respect in the world said: "in abuse, there is always a hidden criticism". Anyway; I am disgusted in how you have now socked. I've been trying to figure out who the "master" account is for a few days, so really you have shortcut that process. And although I stand by my criticism of Marcus' approach before this, he was dead right with his actions tonight. --Errant (chat!) 00:12, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Topic above this
Don't you find it highly suspicious that this has turned up amid s 1-week block. Not only that he hails from Ireland, and Cork (same as Sheodred), per his userboxes, but also the pattern in text:


 * Sheodred: "Response to MarcusBritish.....here we go again......" — Note excessive use if periods, no space between last period and word. (from AN/I)
 * TheOneWhoWalks: "Nasty IP insulted you......badly." — Also excessive periods and no space.


 * TheOneWhoWalks: "Nasty IP insulted you......badly." – Note full stop at end of a heading.
 * Sheodred: "Your deliberate false accusations of sock puppetry." – Also uses a full stop in headings. From Richard Harvey's talk page.

Also highly suspicious is that the user has only been registered a month, yet pays a great great of attention to my talk page and incriminating me on AN/I again. Funny how he runs to AN/I also, with his tell-tale complaints. And that he posts excessively, the same details on admins pages.

If this isn't enough to prove socking, agenda pushing, attempts to influence admins, and disruptive behaviour, then I know there is a concern. Typing patterns are not that coincidental.

I've opened an SPI: Sockpuppet investigations/TheOneWhoWalks

 Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 23:16, 17 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Which has just been confirmed and block extended to 2 weeks. I rest my case.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 23:26, 17 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Out of curiosity, would you say this incident was a breach of the interaction ban he agreed to on AN/I? I suspect it is, but what with it being a separate account, although same person, I don't know Wiki's stance on this. I left a notice on Sheodred's talkpage regarding his questionable behaviour, which, given the circumstances, was within reason as it was purely vexatious and harassive.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 00:01, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep; that was a good call. And a well presented SPI case (compared *cough* to the last). I'm glad to see you back - following the IP's criticism I was a bit worried you wouldn't bother getting on board :) I'm actually trying to give you constructive criticism based on crap I learned. To be honest, I've done a useless job of it. (I do stand by my previous criticism though). FWIW there is a long term sock master involved here, but I can't figure out who - the BI topic area is one I usually avoid because it is, frankly, idiotic. So it has taken quite a lot of catching up - and so far I have only managed to exclude possiblities rather than find leads. If you have thoughts/ideas let me know :) It's a clear breach of the IB, of course. Bans and blocks extend to *people* not just accounts. But TBH that is the least of his worries. I'd have indeff'd him for this.. but will leave it to the blocking admin. -Errant (chat!) 00:19, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm a bit lost there. BI/IB I assume refers to the British-Irish (vice versa) issues, all over, not just Troubes related, but general nationality disputes? So you're suggesting there is a sock master somewhere with a number of accounts pushing an Irish POV? Or did I totally read that wrong? (Although this discussion springs to mind.)
 * Idk who my "guardian angel" is, and I don't fully agree with their typically British sentiments, but the underlying message had a fair point. As did Seanwal11111 who has been involved in the IMOS debates longer than I. I don't think I've ever been complimented for having an "incredulous tone", although people have asked me for advice in many situations were they have had issues dealing with an over-bearing individual, and know that I don't beat about the bush. I guess I've become used to being quite vocal in my responses, although I don't apologise for it, because I don't employ that attitude with everyone, only those I really find obnoxious. You'll just have to trust me on that.. I've worked in customer service for 4+ years previously, and that attitude wouldn't work "all the time" to keep me in a job that long. And I get along okay with most people at MilHist, and engage with members there a lot. So it can't be all bad. Don't think I talk down to people.. I don't. I just don't believe in "tone" online, only that the right choice of words express confidence and intent.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 00:39, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 03:51, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:.ss
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:.ss. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi
Just posted the wrong details that's all, botched things.Bolegash (talk) 22:40, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!


Wilhelmina Will (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Good tidings to you and your kin! :) Wilhelmina Will (talk) 09:39, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 03:21, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Thermodynamic equilibrium
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Thermodynamic equilibrium. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 22:15, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Military Rabbinate emblem
Why was the Military Rabbinate emblem deleted from the Military Rabbinate webpage? I specifically noted that it's located at free this site:http://www.aka.idf.il/main/rabanut/ I edited the emblem and uploaded it. How do I get it back? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.90.164.108 (talk) 09:55, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi
Hi, hoped you had a great holiday by the way. Anyway I reported that thread because if a thread is made only to provoke by a user who is upset that he got blocked then it is in my opinion vandalism. But if you are of another opinion then thats fine, but make no mistake I feel really offended by this users comments and total lack of understanding the concept of Wikipedia. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:43, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well; vandalism is very specifically things intended solely to damage Wikipedia. Anything done in good faith, even disruptive things, are not vandalism. I think that although that user misunderstands how sourcing and collaboration works you should probably have taken a light approach to the situation - i.e. by explaining how the process works. I suspect that with a bit of encouragement he could have made a good case on the talk page for removing that piece of information (especially as the source didn't support it very well). Remember when we all started out this process was alien to us :) --Errant (chat!) 11:46, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well the user wasnt exactly in the mood of having a discussion from the start:) And I wasnt the one who blocked the user in the first place I simply reported what I was witnessing;). And no matter what the user still didnt have the right to offend me as it has done a number of times now. Anyway I will simply not respond to the strawman arguments of the user at the discussion board and ignore the user;). Have a nice day!.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:51, 30 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I used the talk page. And gave a specific edit summary. You just clicked undo repeatedly, called me a vandal, a sockpuppet, and then altered my comments on my own page. You don't have a right not to be "offended". You also don't have the right, to do all of the above without consequences. Twafotfs (talk) 13:13, 31 December 2011 (UTC)