User talk:Gnangarra/2012 archive(july-dec)

 my view for the next couple of days. After that I'll be quiet until I again get 2 days in the other direction.

Future updates of the Fremantle page
Hello Gnangara, I've noted to leave comments whenever I make edits to pages. I am new to Wikipedia and I wish to update the information on the Fremantle page as some of the information is out of date, inaccurate or vague. I would like to continue making the edits to this page once I get accustomed to the proper procedure. Regards COF6160 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:06, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/Perth closed
An arbitration case involving the article Perth has been closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:


 * 1) JHunterJ is advised to respond calmly and courteously to queries regarding Wikipedia-related conduct and administrator actions.
 * 2) Deacon of Pndapetzim is admonished for use of administrative tools while involved, and for reversing another administrator's legitimate administrative action without first entering into discussion.
 * 3) Kwamikagami is desysopped for use of administrative tools while involved in an editing dispute, and for reinstating a reverted administrative action without clear discussion leading to a consensus decision. He may regain the admin toolkit through a fresh request for adminship.
 * 4) Gnangarra is admonished for use of administrative tools while involved in an editing dispute, and for reinstating a reverted administrative action without clear discussion leading to a consensus decision.

For the Arbitration Committee, Lord Roem (talk) 14:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm
welcome back anyways, as for the above, the less said the better I suspect SatuSuro 11:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:20, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Huawei question
Hello Gnangarra, last year you were helpful when I asked for unverified, contentious material to be removed from the Huawei article. A similar issue has arisen and I have posted another question on the article's discussion page. Would you be willing to review the question and make the edit? Thank you --Bouteloua (talk) 15:01, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Page Triage newsletter
Hey all. Some quick but important updates on what we've been up to and what's coming up next :).

The curation toolbar, our Wikimedia-supported twinkle replacement. We're going to be deploying it, along with a pile of bugfixes, to wikipedia on 9 August. After a few days to check it doesn't make anything explode or die, we'll be sticking up a big notice and sending out an additional newsletter inviting people to test it out and give us feedback :). This will be followed by two office hours sessions - one on Tuesday the 14th of August at 19:00 UTC for all us Europeans, and one on Wednesday the 15th at 23:00 UTC for the East Coasters out there :). As always, these will be held in #wikimedia-office; drop me a note if you want to know how to easily get on IRC, or if you aren't able to attend but would like the logs.

I hope to see a lot of you there; it's going to be a big day for everyone involved, I think :). I'll have more notes after the deployment! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:55, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

New Pages newsletter
Hey all :)

A couple of new things.

First, you'll note that all the project titles have now changed to the Page Curation prefix, rather than having the New Pages Feed prefix. This is because the overarching project name has changed to Page Curation; the feed is still known as New Pages Feed, and the Curation Toolbar is still the Curation Toolbar. Hopefully this will be the last namechange ;p.

On the subject of the Curation Toolbar (nice segue, Oliver!) - it's now deployed on Wikipedia. Just open up any article in the New Pages Feed and it should appear on the right. It's still a beta version - bugs are expected - and we've got a lot more work to do. But if you see something going wrong, or a feature missing, drop me a note or post on the project talkpage and I'll be happy to help :). We'll be holding two office hours sessions to discuss the tool and improvements to it; the first is at 19:00 UTC on 14 August, and the second at 23:00 on the 15th. Both will be in #wikimedia-office as always. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:00, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

WTPF guide?
Hullo! :-) I was just wondering what the name was of that nice woman from the State Records Office who showed us around the Esplanade?  I thought it might be good to just mention her in the wrap-up to WTPF.  Oh, and I like the "1/3 of users continue to edit" ...so, that's one then!?  hehe.  :) —Sam Wilson 01:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Shh!!!!! Gnangarra 01:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks good! —Sam Wilson 22:20, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

am I fighting an unwinnable fight?
I don't know if you are an expert on copyright but you've uploaded enough photos to have a pretty good idea, so I'd like your opinion. I'll admit defeat on the 1946–1955 public domain issue but the deletion of has got me quite pissed off, to be honest. I assume you can still see it. Should I/can I appeal the deletion or am i just wrong and is the banner a copyrighted work that can't be photographed or released under a licence of my choice? If that's the case then surely any corporate logo on signs or clothing labels or similar is also a problem and puts thousands of photos in danger (i know it's an otherstuffexists argument). Would Freo hold the copyright, even though it was probably created by volunteers not employees? Would fair use/non free rational/otrs be the only option? Won't be long until they find another banner photo I've put on commons. I have raised it with the deleting admin but didn't get much satisfaction from his response. The-Pope (talk) 14:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:51, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

File:Banksia temp 103 gnangarra.jpg
Hi. This and other of your uploads have "temp" in the name. Should they be deleted or moved to Commons? --MGA73 (talk) 18:16, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
 * THanks I'll sort them out Gnangarra 01:06, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Military history coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 09:06, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Page Curation update
Hey all :). We've just deployed another set of features for Page Curation. They include flyouts from the icons in Special:NewPagesFeed, showing who reviewed an article and when, a listing of this in the "info" flyout, and a general re-jigging of the info flyout - we've also fixed the weird bug with page_titles_having_underscores_instead_of_spaces in messages sent to talkpages, and introduced CSD logging! As always, these features will need some work - but any feedback would be most welcome.

National Federation of the Blind
Hi, regarding your move of the National Federation of the Blind article a couple of years ago: what I think of the organisation is unprintworthy, but [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=National+Federation+of+the+Blind+%28United+States%29 it's most definitely the primary topic]. You could have asked me first; I know several major blindness organisations in the UK, but I'd never heard of the NFBUK before. Asking me would have been better than waiting for me to notice that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=White_cane&curid=37150&diff=513520326&oldid=512789828 the disambiguation page even existed]. But thanks for trying to talk sense into the anon IP at the article's talk page; I 100% agree with what you said there. I don't even know where to start with cleaning up that article, however; I did a quick Google search for National Federation of the Blind+rivalry and found this page from its breakaway organisation ... yergh! As indicated at the bottom of that page, such petty squabbles didn't get much coverage in secondary sources at all, and I doubt things have changed much on this front. Graham 87 16:57, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Seriously Graham when I disambiguated it it'd be because of a google search (not en:WP links) which showed neither was obviously primary, as you noted I was dealing with IP issues of advertising at the time anyway. If you dont like it feel free to make the changes you want if someone doubts its the primary topic they'll question your changes, but its uncivil to come here telling me I must ask your permission and notify you of any changes I make to articles about organisations. Gnangarra 07:11, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * A lot of editors have problems with this concept of "primary topic". It leads to ridiculously wide scope in articles like "Collins Street" (now changed to "Collins Street, Melbourne" after a long and bloody fight. There are streets by that name all over the word. Tony   (talk)  12:25, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * primary topic is just another place for drama, its a seriously flawed process especially where google hits vs written sources just cant be compared, what is the value of 300page book written 100 years ago on a subject compared to 1,000 ghits that only has the word/phrase mentioned once like say an address which has nothing to do with a subjects notability. If you think something is the primary topic then go for it I'm not wasting energy in specific renaming discusions because reasoned discussion is IMHO always trumped by weight of numbers, or idiology. Gnangarra 12:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Page Curation newsletter
Hey. This will be, if not our final newsletter, one of the final ones :). After months of churning away at this project, our final version (apart from a few tweaks and bugfixes) is now live. Changes between this and the last release include deletion tag logging, a centralised log, and fixes to things like edit summaries.

Hopefully you like what we've done with the place; suggestions for future work on it, complaints and bugs to the usual address :). We'll be holding a couple of office hours sessions, which I hope you'll all attend. Many thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 10:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

small problem
some help needed 'The Perth Group' was an artists group in the 1950's and the current article in wp en is an aids denialist group - any suggestion of how to disambiguate? SatuSuro 11:44, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * nah - not enough for the article about the artists - I dont think for the moment anyways - sorry to have bothered SatuSuro 13:48, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

You have mail!
--LauraHale (talk) 08:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project and/or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:37, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Page Curation newsletter - closing up!
Hey all :).

We're (very shortly) closing down this development cycle for Page Curation. It's genuinely been a pleasure to talk with you all and build software that is so close to my own heart, and also so effective. The current backlog is 9 days, and I've never seen it that low before.

However! Closing up shop does not mean not making any improvements. First-off, this is your last chance to give us a poke about unresolved bugs or report new ones on the talkpage. If something's going wrong, we want to know about it :). Second, we'll hopefully be taking another pass over the software next year. If you've got ideas for features Page Curation doesn't currently have, stick them here.

Again, it's been an honour. Thanks :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 12:02, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ian Rose (talk) 02:32, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Please Publish page for Chess Club and Scholastic Center of Saint Louis
To Whom It May Concern:

I'm not sure if this is the best way to contact you, but this was the best solution I could find.

An attempt to create a wiki page for Chess Club and Scholastic Center of Saint Louis was deleted in 2009. Since that time the Chess Club and Scholastic Center of Saint Louis has hosted every major U.S. Chess Championship (U.S. Chess Championship in 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012; U.S. Women's Chess Championship in 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012; U.S. Junior Closed Chess Championship in 2010, 2011 and 2012). All three of these these events will be held at the Chess Club and Scholastic Center of Saint Louis once again in 2013. The CCSCSL also has partnered with chess legend Garry Kasparov to launch an elite training program of the nation's top young chess players and it also was responsible for breaking a Guinness Book of World Records approved world record for the World's largest chess piece.

The Chess Club has received international press from countless reputable sources over the past four years including:

'''High-tech Mo. Chess Center Prepares for Match'''; Associated Press; April 28, 2009: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/8477836 St. Louis at Center of Chess World; KSKD; May 13 2010: http://www.ksdk.com/sports/story.aspx?storyid=202058&catid=6 A Club only About Chess; New In Chess Magazine; 2011 Vol. 4 (print only ... preview available): http://www.newinchess.com/Shop/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductID=473 Chess Coach, Players Moving On; ESPN.com; April 5, 2012: http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7781098/legendary-chess-coach-jumping-another-school-taking-players-her Article Excerpt: It also has a swanky new chess club and scholastic center bankrolled by a billionaire, the kind of place where students can immerse themselves in chess arcana, learning moves such as the King's Indian Defense and others with mysterious names steeped in the game's 1,500-year history.

Webster lured the team with the promise of a greater financial investment.

"The program grew rapidly, and Texas Tech wasn't ready to grow with the speed of the program," said the coach, who founded the Susan Polgar Institute for Chess Excellence, known as SPICE, in 2007. "St. Louis today is the center of chess in America. It just seemed like a perfect fit."

The Webster program will be based on campus, but its top players will clearly spend plenty of time at the Chess Club and Scholastic Center of St. Louis, a 6,000-square-foot shrine to the game where the resident rock star is Hikaru Nakamura, the top-ranked U.S. player and No. 6 in the world. He, too, is a recent transplant to St. Louis. The club was bankrolled by businessman Rex Sinquefield, a retired financial executive and avid chess player who is also active in Missouri politics.

Entire Chess Team Follows Queen to New School; NPR; April 10, 2012: http://www.npr.org/2012/04/10/150372274/entire-chess-team-follows-queen-to-new-school Quote from Susan Polgar: "Yes. It was a nice coincidence that even though the sponsor behind the St. Louis Chess Club didn't have anything directly to do with our moving to Webster, but nevertheless, it's very nice that, for our team members, the world famous St. Louis Chess Club, which is the venue of the U.S. championships for the past few years and in the coming-up championship in May, we'll be right around the corner about a 10-minute drive from the Webster campus."

St. Louis Chess Club partners with KCF on Elite Training Program; USChess.org; June 18 2012: http://www.uschess.org/content/view/11785/671/

World's Largest Chess Piece is Unveiled in St. Louis; St. Louis Post-Dispatch; May 7, 2012: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/the-world-s-largest-chess-piece-is-unveiled-in-st/article_4e369334-984c-11e1-b123-0019bb30f31a.html

This is just a small sampling of the international attention that this facility has garnered over the past four years. I certainly hope you will reconsider publishing this article.

This is my first time doing this, so I apologize if I am not following the guidelines correctly. Please let me know if there is a better way to have this discussion.

Thank you for your time.

(Mcw5g9 (talk) 02:50, 24 October 2012 (UTC))

Thank you
Thanks for joining WikiProject Freedom of speech! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:00, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Bidgee's block
Thanks for that; you beat me to implementing the unblock, and your decision to protect the article is a good idea. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 11:44, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Well. I'm more than a bit dismayed to see one administrator saying stuff like this, "IP editors running to notice boards asking for blocks are red flags, its most unusual except in circumstance of sockpuppets, stalkers etc."--it's complete bollocks, it's loaded with bad faith, and it indicates that in this particular case the admin in question did not look into the edit history that led to the block. Nick-D, that you would commend Gnangarra for the unblock and thereby endorse those kinds of statements does not reflect well on us admins either. I've looked at the history, and the block by Bbb23 was completely justified. These accusations, that Bidgee got baited into an edit war, are prima facie ridiculous, and that the IP should have been blocked as a kind of reciprocity is just as ridiculous. On top of that, the article is now protected--the IP doesn't even get a chance to prove their good faith. No, worse: on top of that, an admin uses rollback to undo an edit which wasn't even contended--an edit with a proper source--and then said admin protects the article! You can't roll back (justified or not) and then protect. No wonder there are claims of admin abuse. This all looks terrible, absolutely terrible. We have abuse of rollback, an unjustified unblock of an edit-warrior, besides unwarranted and involved protection. Great. I'm trying to figure out what the proper thing to do is here. I propose the following: I unprotect the article, and I will apologize to the IP editor on y'all's behalf. Oh, and Bidgee stays away from that article. There are other options, but I don't wish to pursue those yet, since they involve going to AN and that would be nasty, since the entire defense of Bidgee rests on the assumption that the IP was acting in bad faith, as a sock, or whatever, and that's not a solid defense. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 02:10, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Drmies, for taking the time to read the edit history. Anyway, I put the sourced information back in, and there's already a section on the talk page to discuss it should anyone care to dispute it.  I'm happy to talk about it, and I'm not a sock puppet, I just prefer to edit as an IP because it keeps me mindful of the golden rule. 208.54.4.203 (talk) 02:17, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually Drmies, at no point did I endorse the statements about the IP being a sock. Claiming that because I raised concerns with Bidgee's block and supported the unblocking means that I therefore also automatically believe other stuff is pretty silly. Nick-D (talk) 07:06, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Your revert and protection of Gibraltar Hill
I don't think anyone's actually edit warring over the article any more. Bidgee took the material about the other hill and started a new article with it, so that's resolved. The material I added about the turbines was perfectly well sourced and no one, not even Bidgee, has complained about it. Why did you take it out? 208.54.4.203 (talk) 01:58, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * as part of the unblock that page is was supposed to be protected(which I did, not sure why it wasnt) while the issue is resolved I reverted your edit as it occurred after that was suppose to happen and reinstated the protection. feel free to edit elsewhere Gnangarra 02:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't the page protection have expired already? Anyway, if the edit war is over, as it seems to be, there's no reason to protect the page. 208.54.4.203 (talk) 02:09, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Gibralter Hill protection
I really don't understand why you protected this one. There has not even been a single revert, so how can there be an edit war? Bidgee and I actually made this page together quite peaceably. I think you're going overboard. 208.54.4.203 (talk) 02:35, 6 November 2012 (UTC)