User talk:GlassCobra/Archive 25

{| style="width: 100%; background-color: #f5fffa; border: 1px solid #a3bfb1; padding: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; vertical-align: top;"
 * colspan=2 style="vertical-align:top" |

September 13, 2009 - October 31, 2009

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. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:28, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi
Why did you revert my edit? I removed the "For people named" 'cos I figured that with the otheruses directly beneath it, it was pretty redundant. 92.29.29.128 (talk) 19:56, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Weather day
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weather_day&diff=prev&oldid=314779800 Prod and not speedy? You have got to be kidding....] – ukexpat (talk) 20:00, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you...
...for blocking that troll. It could be anybody I've irritated in the past. There have been a few vaguely-similarly-named harassment accounts recently. I don't keep track of them. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 23:36, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you...
...for indef'ing that harassment account. Also for removing Nimur's false charge of sockpuppetry, hence I don't have to accelerate it to ANI or someplace. His vision of the ref desk is rather different from mine, but I've tried to do better after a previous ANI discussion about it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 00:44, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Pierre Brossolette
Thank you for explaining the reason of your edit. I could agree in general terms but in this case the rank of his leadership is quite unquestionable as he is considered by historians and informed people on par with Jean Moulin. I believe that N#2 in worst case qualifies for "a top lead[*]". Please take the time to check the links, especially from M. Douzou (#4) (in French) about the heroes that could qualify as N#1 for De Gaulle, where out of a very short list of 5, only these 2 would stand final screening. (with quite objective criteria). Would you propose something different, like a "senior leading member" ? In French they usually say "la haute résistance" to distinguish those top leaders from others less influential but using "High Resistance" would be probably inexpressive in English. Mpbb (talk) 21:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

About the mop
Thank you for the nice note on my talk page. I'm honored that you would think of me as a potential admin. Unfortunately, I'm not up to the task at present due to off-wiki commitments. However, I may reconsider the matter next year. Is it OK if I contact you at that time for your advice? Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 22:23, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 September 2009

 * From the editor: Call for opinion pieces
 * News and notes: Footnotes updated, WMF office and jobs, Strategic Planning and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Wales everywhere, participation statistics, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject Video games
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 23:26, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Douglas Coe
I reverted the edits you made to the article on Douglas Coe. The name of the group is in fact, "The Fellowship" not "The Family" as you changed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EricLeFevre (talk • contribs)

I apologize for not signing my post there, I was in a bit of a hurry. As for the article being called "The Family" I have no idea why. Every single source from major newspapers, (NBC, Newsweek, ect) refer to the organization as the fellowship. A guy named Jeff Sharlet wrote a book about it awhile ago and religiously referred to the group in question as "The Family," but he was actually talking about "The Fellowship." Why he would get the name of the group wrong is beyond me. Regardless, whoever wrote that article named the group incorrectly, so the name of the article needs to be changed, how to do that without breaking all the internal links I don't know. I don't think I even have the ability to change the articles name, it might be something an admin has to do. EricLeFevre (talk) 23:46, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Train station
Actually, there are many, many articles about train stations in Wikipedia, mostly in the U.K. (can you say trainspotting? I knew you could!). Is there any reason not to have those for Indonesia, if we tolerate them for the U.K.? -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:46, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Kristen McNamara
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Kristen McNamara. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Facha93 (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: IRC Ping
Yeah, I'm bad about updating that. I can't get on IRC at the moment (I'm in class) but I might be able to get on once I get out (about 45 minutes). If it's urgent, I should be able to respond to emails. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 22:17, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

steal your goals
why did you delete this article? all the information contained was accurate, and the article was relevent since it is a part of these two bands history —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fantasyfan101 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * i suppose it would be best to link it to the record label Gavity DIP, though i still feel the release is relevent, ecspeacilly to the steal since i think it was one of their first offical releases. But whatever as long as the record is recognized in someway that it actually exists.


 * pax
 * ryan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fantasyfan101 (talk • contribs) 01:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Jack Deth
Please don't revert it. It's worth keeping. Plus, not every Trancers movie has a Wikipedia page yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.235.168.144 (talk) 23:57, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Articles for deletion/Jack Deth was closed as a redirect to the Trancers article, and it is not up to you to unilaterally reject the consensus decided upon by the community. Further unredirection of the Jack Deth article may result in a block being placed on your IP. Glass  Cobra  00:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 September 2009

 * Opinion essay: White Barbarian
 * Localisation improvements: LocalisationUpdate has gone live
 * Office hours: Sue Gardner answers questions from community
 * News and notes: Vibber resigns, Staff office hours, Flagged Revs, new research and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Stunting of growth, Polanski protected and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject National Register of Historic Places
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:43, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Lawlessness
In view of what you said here I was hoping you might respond to the gist of what I said to Jayron32 here (you can get the gist in the second and third paragraphs).

I don't think we've interacted much and possibly not at all, but I'll tell you that my jaw dropped a bit when I saw this comment: "...I determined that I felt sufficiently comfortable to place my trust in him once again by nominating him. I did purposefully leave out any mention of The_undertow in his RfA nomination; I wanted editors to judge him solely by his actions and edits as Law." Aside from the fact that you nominated him and wanted him to pass RfA, I'm curious as to where and when you feel you accrued the authority to knowingly misrepresent an RfA candidate's past to the community and act as arbiter of what Law would or would not be judged on. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 06:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm also very distressed that you thought it would be a good idea to end-run around the rules like this. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 11:48, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Greg Mowry
Why did you delete the page, Greg Mowry? Everything and all the information is and was correct. Greg did star in Starlight Express as Rusty on Broadway at the Gershwin Theatre from 1987 to 1989. The facts are documented on Broadwayworld.com and also on ibdb.com

DadsbabyG —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dadsbabyg (talk • contribs) 12:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Adminship
You said, Yes, I was aware that The_undertow and Law are the same person.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances that I'm unaware of, I think you need to resign. Jehochman Talk 14:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Um, what? What has adminship got to do with anything?  Majorly  talk  16:24, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, its like Clinton, his dick, and his lying about where it had been. What did that have to do with being prez? Directly, not a thing. However, he damn near was removed from office for it, and a great many people feel he should have been. Or if you prefer, finding out a policeman does a little pot or coke when not on duty. They lose their badge, because they've shown they have no respect for the law. "Gross misconduct" it is called, and it has nothing to do with how they carry out the duties as a cop. KillerChihuahua ?!?Advice 19:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Request for arbitration
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Requests for arbitration and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
 * Requests for arbitration;
 * Arbitration guide.

Thanks, Jehochman Talk 16:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Recall?
Are you still willing to be recalled? If so I would like you to resign your bit for your conduct over Law. Spartaz Humbug! 20:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I also feel that nominating Law without disclosing your knowledge that he had previously been desysopped badly damages the community's trust in you, and would urge you to resign, even though this doesn't meet your criteria for recall.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Indeed, you have abused the community's trust with your cronyism. Friday (talk) 01:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry to join the chorus, GlassCobra, but I have to say I feel the same way as the others here and I think you have really betrayed the community's trust in you. Your statement that, "I determined that I felt sufficiently comfortable to place my trust in him" is really very shocking to me. If you felt that you could trust Law, you should have presented him for an appeal and helped him regain the tools in an honest and honourable manner, not knowingly and purposefully assisting him in regaining admniship with a sockpuppet. I'm so appalled by this stunning business of enforcing policy strictly on poor regular unconnected users and giving special treatment and free passes to friends. How are we supposed to answer users who complain, rightfully I now see, that blocks and unblocks and access to trusted positions aren't decided on by merit but on who you're friends with? I'm really very shocked and perplexed by your actions and the fact you don't seem to 'get it' and say you find the reaction to recent revelations a "mystery" leaves me completely astounded and seriously concerned about your judgement. I have never had any problems with you in the past but I sincerely believe you need to retest the community's trust in you by having your position as a "trusted user" reconfirmed. 03:40, 2 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarah (talk • contribs)


 * I agree with Sarah. I consider the nomination of a banned user at RfA without disclosing this fact to be a flagrant abuse of the process and the community's trust in you. Those supporting Law based on your nomination relied on your perceived good character and good judgment. It was reasonable for them to assume that you would have let them know if you were asking them to support a controversial candidate (especially someone who was to you knowledge evading a ban at the time). If you are willing to behave in this manner to benefit your friends, I don't think it is possible to trust you to be an administrator on this project. WJBscribe (talk) 17:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

What's most disheartening is that I've always seen you as one of the "good guys." I guess it's foolish to trust anybody around here. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 02:34, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I have a question.. Please see this diff, last paragraph. This explains why the editor you helped was originally banned. You were a friend of his, right? Did you know about these things he did? Friday (talk) 13:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I am an administrator in good standing, and uninvolved with this situation (in fact, I was on wikibreak for much of this year, including the time of the RfA). Now that I'm taking a look at things though, I have serious concerns. You nominated a de-sysopped user for adminship, and failed to disclose his previous identity.  This was a  serious lapse of judgment. The way it should have been handled, was to first make things right with the previous account, and then try again with the new one, while making it absolutely transparent that there were other previous accounts involved. Keeping it secret was not the way to go. Because of these serious concerns that are being expressed both by me and other uninvolved administrators, at a minimum, you should resign from your position as an arbitration clerk. --Elonka 18:26, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe that you are correct in this matter, and I have resigned as a clerk effective immediately. I have expressed my openness to sanctions, including a reconfirmation RFA, and if ArbCom deems them necessary, I will certainly comply. Thanks, Glass  Cobra  17:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

What a joke this arbitration is. Heaps of very high-ranking folks knew of another admin's sock that double dipped. Sounds like the token public executions that Nguyen Cao Ky and Nguyen Van Thieu did for some hapless guy for corruption when their wives looted hundreds of millions and 30% of the army were ghost soldiers being used to plunder payrolls.  YellowMonkey  ( bananabucket ) 01:16, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Accusations of bad faith
Which users did you mean when you said,  I do note FT2's comments involving the questionable motives and bad faith on the part of certain users here, ? Please be specific. I have no personal gripes with you whatsoever. Our relationship has always been positive as far as I can remember, and I hope you're not referring to me. Jehochman Talk 00:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Your statement on Arbcom
You mention the name of the editor in question - are you sure you mean to do that? Friendly question just in case that was a slip. - Wikidemon (talk) 00:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops! Quite right, thanks for catching that. Glass  Cobra  00:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello, GC!
Gp75 here, just wondering if I can exercise RTV and go to another account. -- Gp 75 motorsports  TALK  16:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, that's the thing. I don't want to leave totally; it's just that I've been feeling a bit stalked (hence the lag in my edits). Besides, my t-ban expired a while ago, didn't it? Gp 75 motorsports  TALK  17:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikistalked. I feel like the involved admins are following me a bit too tightly. Speaking of which, it'd be helpful to have a list of everyone currently watching me. -- Gp 75 motorsports  TALK  21:16, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, not really, beacuse the emotion itself is very vague. Sorry to concern you about it. ^^; Gp 75 motorsports  TALK  16:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikis Take Manhattan
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:01, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Pig scramble
I deprodded. It's not a neologism, I can find uses on Google News back to 1945, and there are hundreds of news stories referring to this event at fairs. I've added one from the 1950s. Most of the stories are in local press, but this is a widespread tradition by the looks of it. Fences &amp;  Windows  02:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Net reproduction rate
Another one. The number of wikilinks isn't a relevant criteria on judging deletion of an article, and this statistic is discussed and used by thousands of sources, including the UN. Are you looking for sources before prodding? Fences &amp;  Windows  03:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 October 2009

 * New talk pages: LiquidThreads in Beta
 * Sockpuppet scandal: The Law affair
 * News and notes: Article Incubator, Wikipedians take Manhattan, new features in testing, and much more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia used by UN, strange AFDs, iPhone reality
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: New developments at the Military history WikiProject
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 04:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Arbcom motions under consideration
Clerk courtesy notice: You are a subject of one or more motions being considered by the Arbitration Committee. The motion(s) is/are: Sincerely, Manning (talk) 13:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Arbitration/Requests/Motions
 * Arbitration/Requests/Motions
 * Arbitration/Requests/Motions

Vedic Cultural Center Sammamish WA
Thank you GlassCobra for being the gatekeeper for content quality. I will rewrite my article (maybe take a course in Journalism before) and resubmit article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryerrams (talk • contribs) 18:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you GlassCobra for the education. For now I will stick to adding to knowledgebase that exists on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryerrams (talk • contribs) 19:43, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Please delete my website's TITLEs from your system immediately. & this users comments
Dear Wikipedia, Please delete my website's TITLE: datingpeoplemixer.com & Dating People Mixer from your system immediately. I refuse to support or donate to Wikimedia when my website is being discriminated against with a repeated speedy deletion sign that is constantly posted on the pages with datingpeoplemixer.com and dating people mixer in the Wikipedia pages. Please delete my website's title IMMEDIATELY! - I REFUSE TO DONATE NOR HAVE MY ASSOCIATES DONATE TO WIKIMEDIA EITHER WITH THIS TYPE OF ACTIVITY! Here are the links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dating_People_Mixer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datingpeoplemixer.com Also I would like to REPORT THIS USER: GlassCobra This User GlassCobra within the Wikipedia system is putting out degrading statements about Datingpeoplemixer.com and Dating People Mixer and GlassCobra page should be deleted on Wikipedia. This users statements comes up in the Google search when typing in Datingpeoplemixer.com. THIS IS WRONG! From the Owner, M.F. Ever DatingPeopleMixer.Com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.238.191.173 (talk) 15:08, 10 October 2009 (UTC)


 * LOL... I'm not sure whether to take this seriously or not... as far as I can tell, you (or one of "your associates") created an article about your website, and is was speedy deleted for fails notability concerns, at which point you created it 3 more times, and even tried to change the article title... then, instead of reading up on policy and understanding why this happened, you got angry...
 * are you getting angry because the promotional article you wrote about your non-notable website is being deleted? Also, you then wish to have the deleting admin "deleted"? (Who wasn't even the deleting admin...)  I always like to start my day with a laugh, but this is new... also, if you are going to make a claim such as "This User GlassCobra within the Wikipedia system is putting out degrading statements about Datingpeoplemixer.com and Dating People Mixer", you should really have some kind of evidence included with the claim, it would help the rest of us to believe that a trusted admin is doing something wrong... - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, I see nowhere that GC wrote anything (degrading or otherwise) about you or your website... please show me any kind of evidence for anything you are claiming... - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:09, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

This User GlassCobra within the Wikipedia system has no right to make comments on a situation of an inexperienced Wikipedia insert on Wikipedia. This users "GlassCobra" statements comes up in the Google search when typing in Datingpeoplemixer.com. There are important things going on in this world for someone such as GlassCobra to be posting silly remarks about a insignigicant situation that is needs to be addressed and deleted by Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.238.191.173 (talk) 16:22, 10 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Again, please show where he made a comment... I see a link on google to GC's user page that transposes the UAA report made by TheLetterM, but no comments by GC himself... I really hope that you stop and figure out what is actually going on before you dig your hole any deeper... and the comment below is verging on incivility... please calm down and read our assorted policies before you make any more comments... - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

How old is GlassCobra? He presents himself as very immature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.238.191.173 (talk) 16:27, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Arbcom motions
Your attention is brought to the text of three motions passed by the Arbitration Committee on 11 October 2009.


 * GlassCobra: nominated  for adminship.  Law was an undisclosed account of previously 9-month blocked and desysopped editor, and GlassCobra made his nomination while aware of that fact and without disclosing it. GlassCobra has since agreed that this was a breach of trust incompatible with his holding the position of an ArbCom clerk and has resigned from that post at the Committee's request. GlassCobra has apologized, pledged not to repeat such an error, and is willing to accept a sanction.
 * GlassCobra admonished: GlassCobra is strongly admonished for having knowingly promoted the request for adminship of an editor he knew was using an undisclosed alternate account. He was aware that knowledge of the former account's history would materially affect the request, and displayed poor judgment by failing to disclose that information along with his support.
 * GlassCobra desysopped: GlassCobra is desysopped for having knowingly promoted the request for adminship of an editor he knew was using an undisclosed alternate account. He was aware that knowledge of the former account's history would materially affect the request, and breached the community's trust by failing to disclose that information along with his support. Adminship may be regained by request to the arbitration committee or via the usual means.

For the Arbitration Committee, Manning (talk) 16:20, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Removal of administrator status
As per Motion 3 of Case "Disclosure of known alternate accounts" at Arbitration/Index/Motions, a request for the removal of your administrator status was lodged at Meta and this request has now been processed.

As per the terms of the motion, you are immediately free to request the reinstatement of your administrator status directly to the Arbitration Committee, or via an application at WP:RFA.

For the Arbitration Committee, Manning (talk) 16:20, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * That's a shame: though as far as I'm concerned, you were a great admin, and I hope you will be one once again. It would be nice to think that your desysopping will have set precedent (i.e. the fact you weren't desysopped for tool abuse), and we'll now be able to remove admins who cause trouble all the time (a list which, I should note, you were not on) but don't actually abuse their tools, and also admins who pushed for desysoppings just to get rid of some people they didn't like. You still have my trust. Best. Acalamari 16:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's a shame, yes, but did you seriously expect otherwise given what you knowingly did? Anyway, I've given you rollback status to make things a bit easier. DS (talk) 16:33, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your kind words, Acalamari. I may try to re-acquire the tools at a later date, but I think I'll take a while and write some articles and putter around some areas that I did not frequent as an admin. Glass  Cobra  21:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I've always found you to be an exceptionally level-headed, thoughtful, and clueful administrator. I've seen you do a lot of good work, and it's unfortunate that this one lapse in judgment seems to have, at least temporarily, overshadowed the good you've done with the bit. Enjoy life with less clutter on your tab bar. I would be happy to support you if you ever wish to re-apply for adminship. MastCell Talk 23:09, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I was sorry to see all that transpired recently, but I want you to know you have my vote of confidence. Cheers, amigo. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:10, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * ^ This. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:58, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ouch. Hope to see you with the mop again someday. -- Dylan 620  (contribs, logs, review) 13:25, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * What MastCell said. You were otherwise an excellent admin, in my opinion. Jamie  S93  16:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you all very much, it means a lot to me that you all stopped by. :) Glass  Cobra  14:59, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

User rights clarified
For the purpose of clarity, you still possess the following user rights.
 * Edit Filter manager
 * Rollback
 * Autoconfirmed user
 * Autoreviewer

Although not explicitly instructed to do so by Arbcom, in my capacity as a clerk I have updated your user rights log accordingly. Manning (talk) 16:59, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

The Family (Christian political organization)
Hi, I as wondering if you would be willing to help out with a dispute at The Family (Christian political organization). An editor claims that a source is unreliable. I feel that his reasons are specious at best, trollish at worst. Thanks in advance. &mdash; goethean &#2384; 20:45, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 October 2009

 * From the editor: Perspectives from other projects
 * Special story: Memorial and Collaboration
 * Bing search: Bing launches Wikipedia search
 * News and notes: New WMF hire, new stats, and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: IOC sues over Creative Commons license, Wikipedia at Yale, and more
 * Dispatches: Sounds
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject Tropical cyclones
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:53, 13 October 2009 (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. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:19, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 October 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:03, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * News and notes: WikiReader, Meetup in Pakistan, Audit committee elections, and more
 * In the news: Sanger controversy reignited, Limbaugh libelled, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

RFA spam

 * &mdash;Kww(talk) 19:30, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Velvet Acid Christ
Is not a Gothic band. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.42.127 (talk) 18:12, 21 October 2009 (UTC)


 * According to their article they are... do you have a reliable source to cite that they are not? - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:26, 21 October 2009 (UTC)


 * No. According to their article they're electro-industrial. Big difference. 76.181.42.127 (talk) 19:09, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Truth be told, I don't care much about VAC being included on the list; I get tired of people squabbling over what bands are or are not what genre. What I do care about is trying to circumvent the system by first removing a genre from a band's article, then removing that band from the list, saying that since the genre is gone, they no longer belong on the list. I would recommend that you stop edit warring, and discuss your issues on the talk page. Glass  Cobra  19:12, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: Pulling stuff like this doesn't count. VAC was clearly not previously discussed, do not attempt to mislead editors by adding it to that list. Glass  Cobra  19:14, 21 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Note. YOU are edit warring. YOU are violating the 3 revert rule. VAC has never been considered Gothic rock. They've ALWAYS been industrial. Getting all butt-hurt and reverting my edits changes nothing. No wonder your admin status was taken away. What are you, 12? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.42.127 (talk) 19:17, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I said very clearly above that I don't care what genre you think a band is or is not; the correct way to propose improvements to an article is to take your argument to the article's talk page if your change is disputed. I hardly consider myself "butt-hurt" over a minor squabble with some Internet malcontent, nor does this type of exchange have anything to do with why my admin tools were taken. Glass  Cobra  19:22, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Aung San Suu Kyi
Hi Glass Cobra

You have twice reverted edits that I made to the Aung San Suu Kyi page ("Prime Minister-elect"). I have left a detailed comment explaining my actions in the discussion under that page. It would be appreciated if you respond to those comments before reverting again. Thanks!

Richard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.173.78.131 (talk) 16:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 October 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Interview: Interview with John Blossom
 * News and notes: New hires, German Wikipedian dies, new book tool, and more
 * In the news: Editor profiled in Washington Post, Wikia magazines, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Soulja Boy Tell 'Em
Why did you revert the picture? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DjayXL (talk • contribs)
 * The picture appears to be a non-free image, which we cannot use in our articles about living people per WP:NFC. Furthermore, as the file appears to be from some sort of press shoot, as has been uploaded without any kind of credit or copyright, it does not belong as Wikimedia Commons and has been nominated for deletion there. Glass  Cobra  20:25, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Community College Futures Assembly
I would like to contest the deletion of the page I created on the Community College Futures Assembly. This is a conference held by the University of Florida. I am a professor at the University of Texas, so I have no affiliation with this conference. I am a professor of community college administration and have been working to "fill in the gaps" on aspects related to community college administration and vocational education on the wiki pages.

I put the community college futures assembly wiki up and it was immediately flagged as blatant advertising. I was not sure how because there was no solicitation for products, attendance, or any other attempt to sell any product. It was written in a neutral voice, much in the same vein as your other commercial sites such as Best Buy on wikipedia. It was suggested from the administrator that I just redo the page and submit again as a new prospective page and perhaps the next admin would allow it. (l’Aquatique, Sept. 2008). I contested and Nyttend upheld, in that the article needed to be written from a more neutral point of view. They said they would help if I needed it…I replied and never heard back from them. I decided the time spent chasing down admins to even respond was not worth it.

Ok, being a techie I decided to give wiki’s one last try…

I brought the page back up, did some updates and added some references with the intent of adding more. Before I could even finish adding references the next admin flagged it for speedy delete as being SPAM (Queencake). She even put in there “thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia…your test worked, and the page you created has been or soon will be deleted” which I found to be offensive since I spent a lot of hours working on that particular page. I added the hangon tag and responded to her as to why the page should not be deleted and, again, was ignored and received no reply. In the reply I provided a list of other education-related conferences and other conferences in general on the wikipedia for which my wiki followed their format.

Again, Spam is something this page is not. It is encyclopedic knowledge of one of the main community college administration conferences (wiki already has pages on some of the others). This time the admin suggested I added more citations and references and follow the guidelines for conference pages. So, I added 58 references from external sources such as academic journals, newspapers, and websites touting the importance and relevance of this conference.

This time the admin went and sought out the older deleted article and based their decision upon the older one, instead of the newer one. (Spartaz). I asked them if they could look at the current one which follows the requirements for conferences and did not receive an answer (but, this has only been a day or so at this point, to be fair to Spartaz, but wiki shows them on-line for the past 12 hours and they have been actively posting.).

Thus, I am turning to appeal to you. I have followed the wikipedia guidelines on conferences. I have 58 references, citations, and sources. I do intend on providing more but I have spent the better part of three days on this I do not wish to spend anymore time if this effort is fruitless. The page is written in a neutral voice. This is not my conference and I have no affiliation with it. I am merely a professor of community college administration who is attempting to fill in the gaps of encyclopedic knowledge on wikipedia. If you could look at the most current page I would appreciate it. Thank you for your time.

UTAPROF ZXQ (talk) 11:53, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I have responded in detail on your talk page. Frank  |  talk  12:51, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

World Series style article
Because 2004 World Series is a featured article, 2008 is not. If you can find sourcing for the international broadcasters, awesome, but the country flags are just unneeded. Staxringold talkcontribs 15:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think so. The policy as to why is cited on the 09 talk page. But my focus is the 09 WS, I wanna get that to FA status (hopefully with the Yankees winning. :) ) Staxringold talkcontribs 15:27, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We should work together and co-nom this sucker, then. I've been staying away from major editing while it's underway, but I'll hit the ground running as soon as it's done. Staxringold talkcontribs 15:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!


As Halloween is my favorite holiday, I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Halloween! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 23:35, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

User and User Talk page unprotection
Would you mind unprotecting mine, please? Thanks! Kurt Weber ( Go Colts! ) 17:07, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry Kurt, I'm not an admin anymore. You'll have to ask someone else. Glass  Cobra  17:25, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Kurt. I saw your request while reading GlassCobra's talk page, and have undeleted and unprotected your user and user talk pages. Please let me know if there is anything else you want me to do. NW ( Talk ) 17:59, 31 October 2009 (UTC)