User talk:Hajatvrc/Archives 1

Re:Random Dose of Joy
Haha thanks, that was pretty cool. JJ (talk) 01:05, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Your rollback request
I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback correctly, and for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 12:43, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, Hajatvrc! I have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on or by typing helpme at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or place helpme on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! from hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 06:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article

RE David Odgen part 2
Hi, I tend to ignore messages when I've gotten a bit annoyed so that I have a chance to calm down so I'm only replying now. I understand how you feel although as I guess you now know people did make an attempt to keep the part they felt was of merit in the article. While not everyone may agree, in my opinion particularly in contentious edit wars like this, the best thing is for an uninvolved party to force it to the semi stable version until the disputes can be resolved and in BLP cases removing contentious information until disputes are resolved is usually the only option. Also when people aren't even convinced something belongs or think it does but don't care that much and so have little interest in fixing it themselves, I don't feel it's intrinsic on them to fix the major problems with poor edits, when it's made clear why those edits are problematic and they're willing to partake in the necessary discussion to improve it. Sure it's great if they are but I don't feel it should be an expectation. To put it a different way although wikipedia is a colloborative effort and not perfect, some edits are bad enough that they need to be reverted until someone can be bothered to fix the issues, be it the person trying to push the edit or someone else who is interested. In my particular case as I think I mentioned somewhere, I didn't really have much interest getting involved in depth into the issue and it was an issue that would have required careful thought and likely careful discussion if it's going to be added (particularly the bit about child pornography laws) and given that it did seem to me there were people involved I didn't feely my involvement was necessary and had planned to revert, explain why and let others deal with it. (And as with you I didn't even notice at first part of the information was already in the article although I had read something about it being redundant.) For that reason, and given I feel very strongly about BLP I did get annoyed when you reverted me and that came out in my responses and I apologise for that. I admit, I don't feel much sympathy for the anon given his/her history and refusal to partake in any real discussion other then strange accusations against other editors and rarely do when I see that sort of behaviour and that probably influenced my decision to just revert and let others deal with it. Nor do I agree with his/her politics although I try not to let that influence my behaviour (for example, I feel I would do the same if it were e.g. Ann Coulter and for that matter got into another somewhat similar dispute recently even though my views are similar to the person I was in the dispute with.) In fact, from what I've seen since (e.g. the fact that one of the other parties added back one of the references the anon had used), I feel even less sympathy then I felt when I first reverted.

Cheers Nil Einne (talk) 15:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism override
Please be careful. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 20:15, 17 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Ha, we must have pushed the button at the exact same time. You were using Twinkle and I was using Huggle, and there are often conflicts between the two automated programs. I have experienced many such instances, and I'm sure this won't be the last. Thanks for the heads up. from hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 20:47, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. Drmies (talk) 20:50, 17 December 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) 04:24, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

DFTT
A note: Ludwig2 has had issues with trolling talk pages before. He will suck you in and you will never get out. He managed to get me to drop Intelligent Design from my watchlist for several months. You've been really good with the others who post regarding this issue, but trust me on this one. Everything he'll say is just to suck you in to respond. Don't take the bait! 07:29, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I've taken your advice. Thanks from hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 08:06, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I would say, let him have the hatnote. It makes no difference at the end of the day. Ben (talk) 10:07, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * While what you say is true, it does not discount the fact that even as he undid my edit he placed in his edit summary, "please don't continue with this hostility, or I'll have to ask for administrator assistance," which is blatant mockery. As he obviously has had similar trolling disputes in the past and it is thus a continuing part of his editing behavior, it is time to get a neutral arbitrator. He openly admitted that he gets pleasure out of such trolling:"I'll admit, I've been enjoying this debate... and you have to forgive me if I get under the skin a bit - I'm a political psychologist by training, and I can get aggressively Socratic if I don't watch myself. ...for instance, I've been consciously pushing people's buttons throughout this debate, but I've been doing it because I've been trying to force a certain type of reflection on the problem. the whole thing about zealots, for instance, was intended to use a word I knew you wouldn't like but couldn't actually object to on technical grounds" He continuously uses circular logic that brings up the same arguments over and over again. Because he openly admits to his pleasure, we have reason to believe that his logical fallacies are not just misguided thinking, but intentional disruption. His activity is absolutely ridiculous. I'm not going to deal with it now because I'm going to bed. But soon. from hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 10:17, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well I'm looking forward to seeing how it turns out. Cheers, Ben (talk) 10:35, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep, he openly admits it. There've been several AN/I reports about him, and I believe he's been blocked in the past because of the personal attacks. There should probably be another report made for this, but with the holidays and all, I'm just don't have the time or patience. Hopefully cutting him off of sustenance will do the trick for now. Auntie E. 18:25, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

User_Talk:Actionrezults
Related conversation

True enough that his edits weren't really vandalism as opposed to a cry for help - that is why i reverted the first edit without warning and started typing a message to ask if he needed help. However when i saw this edit and a right after that another one i decided that warning the user was the quickest way to get him to his talk page, to prevent him from making more changes that might cause warnings from other patrols. At the very least it gave me a minute to figure out the problem and to see if i could fix it :). Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 20:44, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * True, I should not have used the word vandalize. Pretty ironic that I did (laughs). from hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 20:48, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * O well, we can always dub that the "CVU cleanup reflex responce" and create a featured article out of it. Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 20:57, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

An apology
Well, I really do need to thank you, because you're right, I was being uncivil yesterday. I felt (and still feel) that you are completely mistaken in your understanding of the term, but your reply to me this morning convinced me that you're not just one of those overbearing editors whose prejudice against anon editors makes them believe that they can ignore any argument put forward by the latter. Your reply this morning seemed both thoughtful and sincere, and your decision not to report me makes you a bit Gandhi-like (which is about as high a term of praise as I ever utter).

Accordingly, if you say the word, I will not post to your page any more. But I will pursue the topic further, in some other venue. I am open to the possibility that there may be a reason that the term should not be used in the way I used it, but if there is a reason to proscribe it, it is most certainly not what you are stating, despite your obvious sincerity. Referring to a politician as being the "lame duck mayor" is no more POV than calling another politician a "mayor-elect". It is simply a descriptive term, and a useful one, at that. But as I said, maybe there's another reason not to use the term--maybe something about style, or, well, whatever. I'll go elsewhere for the answers if/since you have no interest in the topic.

The only thought I want to leave you with is this: Despite the inarguable fact that I am an asshole, I am also not a vandal. My wrath and accompanying comments were not justified, but they were the result of being accused of being a vandal by one editor and then having you issue me a "final warning" for violating the NPOV policy, when no one else had ever accused me of that before. So yeah, I had my dander up, and I'm sorry that I let it get the better of me.

Okay, well, it's been real, and I truly wish for you that you will go many days before having to deal with as big a prick as me again. Sorry. 65.80.246.160 (talk) 16:52, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Test
I was testing the system because something weird had happened and I was trying to figure something out you will notice that I removed the edit after 30 seconds and the reason why I picked it was because it was random, that threat to block me was totally unwarranted. Is there a way to appeal a decision made by an admin to block a user? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelkirschner (talk • contribs) 20:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC) Michael Kirschner 20:16, 30 March 2010 (UTC) Thank you for your helpMichael Kirschner 20:36, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The warning template (the piece of text that threatened to block you) is chosen automatically by an automated program called Huggle. It gave you a "final warning" because you had already been warned multiple times for other reasons. "I was testing the system" is not a valid reason for writing unencyclopedic information on an article. You could make test edits on your own user page or talk page if you need to.  So yes, you normally would have received only a general note describing Wikipedia policy on such things, but the program put a "final warning" because it sensed the warnings that were already on the page. Happy editing from hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 20:20, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * There is no threat to block you--there is a warning that you should not make any more disruptive edits. Testing the system by inserting some random text in a random article is disruptive. There is a way to appeal, but you have not been blocked, and you won't be blocked if you stop making disruptive edits--leaving AfD and maintenance templates alone would be a good step (see Jay & Jack). Drmies (talk) 20:23, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Sign your posts with four tildes ( ~ ) so sinebot doesn't break. :) from hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 20:32, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I did the 4 ~ but my name is no longer a red link Michael Kirschner 20:37, 30 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelkirschner (talk • contribs)

I'm thinking you set a custom signature in "my preferences" but it doesn't have a link to your user/talk page so sinebot doesn't like it. from hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 20:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: Promise
I wont anymore. I said what i meant, and i meant what isaid I'm faithfull 100% so there.

' pls do not reply —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.33.222.174 (talk) 23:22, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Promise 2
I was trying to prove to a fiend that you can't just edit however u want. I'm sorry ); —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.33.222.174 (talk) 23:24, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

May 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Steve Ritchie, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. ~ Nerdy Science Dude  (✉ • ✐) 19:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops, looks like you beat me to it. ~ Nerdy Science Dude  (✉ • ✐) 19:50, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Happens all the time Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 19:51, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Now igloo is saying your edits are probable vandalism. ~ Nerdy Science Dude  (✉ • ✐) 19:53, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Have you tried Huggle? It has a whitelist of users who are trusted so their edits don't show up in the feed even if they've been warned. You can also filter results to only show IP edits, etc.. I find it far superior to Igloo. Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 20:14, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I would be using Huggle if it is natively compatible with Mac OS X. User:Ale jrb, the developer of igloo, will probably add a whitelist feature to igloo. ~ Nerdy Science Dude  (✉ • ✐) 20:29, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Adam Burke
Hello Hajatvrc. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Adam Burke, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  00:35, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I'm still trying to learn how to fairly judge the validity of new artcles. I'm slowly makng progress in ths venture thanks to admins like you. Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 01:00, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * OK one key thing to remember is that speedy deletion is for the really uncontentious deletions. In that particular case "holds two Guinness world records" is a pretty clear assertion of importance. If it had been "holds an Irish juniors record" then a prod or AFD would probably result in deletion, "fastest rower in our high school" would be a straightforward A7 tag. There is some stuff you might find useful at User:WereSpielChequers, also I recommend installing wp:hotcat, and working on the basis of if in doubt, categorise! Take care and happy editing.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  01:21, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

non public help needed
My problem requires the discrete intervention of an admin. Can you help? Thanks. --Ring Cinema (talk) 00:50, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Mboya Nicholson
I'm sorry, but I disagree with your orphan tag, as 40 plus links does not seem to be the definition of "as few or no other articles link to it" in my mind. Please see my user page for the quality of the pages I create and my autopatrolled status. Thanks.Paradise coyote (talk) 20:07, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Greetings! I think you misunderstand the meaning of "orphan". It is true that there are lots of links from Mboya Nicholson to other pages, but there are no other pages that link to Mboya Nicholson. To illustrate this point, please visit Special:WhatLinksHere/Mboya_Nicholson. Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 20:35, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Gotcha. Thanks. I'll take care of that.Paradise coyote (talk) 20:42, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Samuel Jackson Pratt
Hi - just to thank you for your feedback & kind comments on my Samuel Jackson Pratt article. I appreciate you taking the time to review it & comment on it! Thanks, too, for removing the "new unreviewed article" tag. Hopefully a few more editors will contribute to it once they realise the article is there! All the best, Butcherscross (talk) 00:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

NPP
Thank you for patrolling  new pages. Please consider that AWB is probably  not  the best  tool  for this task, and that  simply  tagging  new page to  be Wikified might  not  be conducive to  an improvement  in  a very  short article's quality. Happy editing! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:24, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments. While I completely see your point regarding the tag, other tags that I add using AWB (such as, , , or  ) can be helpful to an editor working on their first article. For example, glance above to the header "Mboya Nicholson" where USER:Paradise coyote was working on a new article with no other articles linking to it. Before I tagged the article with  in AWB, the editor had no idea that a problem existed. I had to direct the editor to Special:WhatLinksHere, but now that editor knows for good that orphan articles are a (fixable) problem thanks to AWB. Happy editing,  hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 19:08, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Edit Also, I'd like to clarify that I do not use other NPP programs because 1) they are all still in testing, and 2) I have gotten use to the AWB program itself. If you could direct me to a program that works well for you, I will certainly be willing to give it a try! Happy editing,  hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 19:08, 6 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately we do  not  have any  'NPP programmes' because most  of the work expected at  NPP can only  be done manually because they  need personal  judgment. Please consider taking  a moment  to  read WP:NPP to see the the tasks new page patrolling  involves. Tagging is only a small  part  of the work that  has to  be done. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * So you would not recommend any of the programs such as NPWatcher, Kissle, or WikiAlerter? Or are these programs for performing other tasks? Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 19:57, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Lillian Klapisch
I am new to this and learning something new each day. This artist is part of a GLAM project I have now added a few references (I was not done yet). The Hebrew page will follow. would you help me to correct the spelling mistake I made it should be Lilian Klapisch (one L in her first name) thank you

(Drkup(IMJ) (talk) 18:19, 14 August 2011 (UTC))
 * ✅ I moved the page to Lilian Klapisch Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 18:24, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, I apologize if I seemed too hasty in tagging your article. It is customary to wait 15 minutes after an article is created to tag it for deletion. Sometimes an editor needs more time than that, which is perfectly fine. Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 18:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Lillian Klapisch
Hi,

You tagged Lillian Klapisch for deletion according to Proposed deletion of biographies of living people. This was a Wrong Thing: when you added the template, that page already had several reliable sources that deal with the article's subject. In addition, the article author's user page says that it was created by a professional writer about art - the kind of people that the Wikipedia community is supposed to warmly welcome and not to scare off with deletion templates.

Please be more careful about this next time. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:22, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The article in question had a list of external links, but no references that directly support the statements made in the article. There is a difference between the two. Please do not make personal attacks such as saying that I was not being careful.
 * As far as "scaring off the experts", these users have just as much a responsibility to follow Wikipedia's rules as anyone else. If you would read the BLPPROD template, it outright says "If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. These templates are not meant to scare off any user, they are simply meant to inform them of Wikipedia's guidlines. If you look above one heading, the creator of the article came to me asking for further help after I tagged the article with BLPPROD. This certainly does not seem to be "Scaring off the experts". Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 18:39, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The link to "Liliane Klapisch from the Israeli artist list of the Information Center for Israeli Art at the Israel Museum" very directly supports the statements in the article. Sorry, but you were wrong and not careful.
 * Many experienced Wikipedians' rashness at templating new users and tagging new articles for deletion, supported by the firm conviction that these users deserve such treatment because they have "just as much a responsibility to follow Wikipedia's rules as anyone else" is the main cause for the dwindling numbers of new editors.
 * So again: Please be more careful with templates. They are not as friendly and understandable to new users as they seem to you even when their placement is justified, and in this case it was not justified. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:58, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, a list of external links does not constitute legitimate references. Just because you can go into one of the links and find support for the article, if the author has not properly formatted, placed, and directed a coherent list of references, these links might as well not exist.
 * The PROD template is made to be easily redacted as soon as a problem is fixed. It is not meant to tell the author that their work is wrong, but only to let them know that something needs to be improved. If we ran Wikipedia like a kindergarten class where the teacher never corrects the student for fear of offending them, the entire encyclopedia would fall apart.
 * Your accusations of "rashness" are uncalled-for and counter-productive. You are claiming that I am not being civil to another editor, and yet you are not being civil to me. Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 19:08, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You just can't expect a brand new editor to properly format a link to your taste. At most, this article should have been tagged as No footnotes; better yet, you could have just bothered to read the external link and format the reference yourself. Tagging an article with perfectly verifiable information for deletion is Just Plain Wrong.
 * I'm pointing out to you a particular mistake that you made. Please try to understand it instead of dismissing it as a personal attack. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 19:38, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I absolutely agree than in other cases it would be appropriate to tag it for footnotes. I tagged it for BLPPROD because it was a BLP. BLPs operate on a totally different set of rules, which should be taken very seriously. As I've already stated, the BLPPROD template is not supposed to say "We want to delete your article," it is to say "There is a serious problem that, while fixable, needs to be fixed in a timely manner (10 days)." The timescale is the important factor.
 * It is by this token that PROD and AFD are different. AFD says "we don't think your article is salvageable," PROD says, "it needs to be salvaged in 10 days or we can no longer support it." Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 19:47, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * BLP is an issue when the information is not verifiable. This article was verifiable right from the start. It is so short that it hardly needs references formatted as footnotes. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 20:17, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Csige
Hello, Regarding the article on Paul Csige which you marked for deletion for having no sources: The more serious issue with this article is the strong likelihood that Csigne created the article himself. The sources are not adequate for all the details and I am not able to revise the article but I did create footnotes to his independent sources as a heuristic exercise for the author if nothing else. If it is to be deleted, I think it should be for reasons of COI, not absent sourcing, as the author did attempt to provide (some) legitimate references, albeit in the wrong format. Alawa (talk) 19:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I completely agree. If you want to nominate it for deletion, I will certainly support you. If you look in the page's history, I was the one who originally tagged it for COI. Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 00:07, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I would just let him have some time, perhaps absorb the lesson of proper sourcing, maybe read the talk page so he has a better understanding of the issues but if no solution to COI appears then it will have to be dealt with. Is there a set length of time that one has in such cases?  I think I may be more patient than many, especially with an article that is not malicious, but I would not question the judgement to delete it if you or others found it egregious. Alawa (talk) 02:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


 * FYI One additional editor has voted for deletion. I have done all I can to find sources but there is too much OR. I have to give up now. The author is not responding.Alawa (talk) 17:02, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

My edit wasn't vandalism
My edt wasn't vandalism, I explained in my description of the edit. If someone goes around reducing others of right to live in the eyes of others than what would you call them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.79.113 (talk) 22:28, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Your addition to the article was inappropriate. Please see Help:Editing for information on how to contribute to this encyclopedia. Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 22:34, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Your signature
Hello, there.I recently noticed that your signature does not appears following WP:CUSTOMSIG.As your signature is somewhat annoying while reading the page and has a very deep shadow that makes eyes tired.It gives a bit of inconvenience as it distracts the attention of readers from the content to signature.Would you please mind changing it? Max Viwe &#124; Viwe The Max  17:20, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Though WP:CUSTOMSIG says nothing about shadows, I have removed it for the sake of avoiding an argument. Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove@ 17:27, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Your a tool
Your a tool — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.113.51 (talk) 18:54, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Always happy to help! Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 18:56, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!!
Hello Hajatvrc, I just wanted to stop by and say Thank you!!! for giving me some guidance on my question at the Teahouse. I did post a response, fyi, for your interest, earlier today. I really really appreciate your thoughts. Cheers, --Charlie Inks (talk) 00:52, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright holder uploading images
At the help desk, you said "copyrighted images must be uploaded by the copyright holder personally or by someone with direct permission to do so." Direct permission is not required; if the content is licensed appropriately for Wikipedia in the first place, then it technically is permission to upload and use the image. If that user can point us to a website that has their desired photograph with a compatible license clearly displayed, anyone can grab it and upload it. BigNate37(T) 05:34, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, now that I go back and read my post, it was pretty sloppy. I should have said "images without a compatible license". Happy editing, hajat  vrc  with WikiLove @ 05:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, well we all make mistakes. If you count that one, you've still got six or so to go today before you're caught up to me. By the way, there was one other thing I wanted to say:



Edit request you completed at 2012 Aurora shooting
Hi Hajatvrc, I left a reply for you on the 2012 Aurora shooting talk page. Thanks! No need to leave me a message on my talk page. --76.189.98.33 (talk) 12:18, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Update: I left you another reply to your new reply on the talk page. Haha. Thanks. --76.189.98.33 (talk) 14:17, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Update 2: I left you one final note on the talk page. ;) --76.189.98.33 (talk) 15:21, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Update 3: Hi again Haja. Well, after all that work you and I did on improving that sentence, User:2001:db8 [edited it]. The user removed the three words "as chaos ensued" at the end of the sentence. His reason is that it is "trivia". Of course, it is not trivia. It is one of the important elements that shows how the Aurora shooting and the movie trailer mirror each other. This is an example of what makes Wikipedia so frustrating. Two editors work together on the talk page to find a great solution for some content, then a third user comes along and unilaterally edits what was decided. Can you please revert his edit? Thanks! --76.189.98.33 (talk) 19:31, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

You have a barnstar!

 * Thanks a bundle!  hajat vrc  @ 00:35, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Teahouse reply
Hi. I tried to reply to the question about images by Aurelius99 at Teahouse and your answer, but my reply got mixed in with yours and turned bolded and blue. Maybe something to do with your signature? Anyway, I stopped by the page he mentions and all of the photos look fine for me except the one subtitled "Altar inside Old Sarum cathedral ruins." The picture isn't showing up for me, just the caption. (But no red x, just an empty box.) The image works without "|thumb|Altar inside Old Sarum cathedral ruins.]]" in my sandbox, but when I add them it doesn't. I don't know why and I'm lousy with images. Maybe you or someone else there can figure out what's wrong for him. I left him this note, too. Tlqk56 (talk) 00:21, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * In this edit the two closing brackets in my signature were removed, causing its effect to continue into your edit. Maybe you pressed delete when your cursor was not where you thought it was, or maybe it just happened on its own. I don't know, but it's fixed.
 * The image situation is strange. I see the "Altar inside Old Sarum cathedral ruins" image just fine. It's weird, because it is not like the image is an enormous file or anything. It looks like a normal, properly uploaded file.  hajat vrc  @ 00:31, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry - I probably deleted the brackets by mistake, my typing is sloppy, unfortunately. The cursor jumps around on me sometimes. But it was puzzling. Also, the issue of the pics is weird. I definitely don't see the one image. But if you do it's probably fine. Thanks for following up, though. Tlqk56 (talk) 00:39, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

TH Answer of The Year!
As far am concerned that is my answer of the year unless you coin another one that can beat that. Keep up and I will be joining the TH soon, hopefully as a host. ₫ӓ₩₳  Talk to Me.   Email Me.  06:02, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
SarahStierch (talk) 18:27, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Hi Hajatvrc! Thank you for signing up to be a future host at the Teahouse. Well, great news - the future is here: we'd love you to be a Teahouse host! Teahouse hosts do more than just answer questions. A few things we'd love to see you do as a Teahouse host:
 * First, declare your Hostness! Add yourself to the Host page! This page is where new editors and your fellow hosts can learn about you and get in touch with you easily if needed. By signing up here you declare that you know how to serve up a great cup of tea. Add yourself here.


 * Invite new users with our invite guide. Please invite new users to the Teahouse! At that guide you'll find some tips on how to invite. It's super important; we have plenty of Wikipedians answering questions, but not enough asking the questions!
 * Visit the tips page. The tips page provides you some basic tips on how to engage with visitors at the Teahouse. We have a special way of doing things - unlike other areas of Wikipedia! (Such as greeting new editors with a simple "Hi!" and being as easy to understand and friendly as possible.)
 * Join the conversation by participating on the host lounge talk pages. We also have an IRC channel now for hosts to get to know one another, develop your skills, and eventually the channel will serve as an additional help space for new editors!
 * To visit the IRC channel: (Feel free to ask me for help if you're having trouble connecting!)
 * Participate in developing the Teahouse further by getting involved in phase two. Learn more here.

I'm so happy that you volunteered to lend a hand at the Teahouse. I look forward to following your contributions and invitations, and your assistance in making the Teahouse a great and warm place for new Wikipedians. See you there :) SarahStierch (talk) 20:56, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

RE: sorry, weird talkback error
Hi. My error at Teahouse/Questions, not yours! -- Trevj (talk) 17:48, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah I saw that you accidentally moved the page. I was going to move it back myself but you had already done so.  hajat vrc  @ 17:51, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * OK. Thanks! -- Trevj (talk) 18:41, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

My Goodness!!! Thank You Mr. Hajatvrc! :D
Well Hello there, Mr. Hajatvrc, I'm probably getting this right - it's my dyslexia - so I'm sorry about that(Not sure how to use the template to leave you a note here that I have a message for you on mytalk, yeah?). '''Wow!!! What do I say?''' My Goodness.... What Have You Done?!! My Life Is Over Now...... Please do read my message to you. My Goodness!!! Thank you. Thank you..... Mr. Hajatvrc. Thank you..... You've really really really made My Day in so many ways.... Please just read the talk on my page, yeah? Oh my Goodness.... Charlie Inks (talk) 00:02, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Mister Lovelass
I've requested for this to be deleted and then Mister loveless moved to the capitalised version, so if you want to improve it, work on the lowercase version for the time being. NtheP (talk) 17:12, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I just saw it. We just have to wait for an admin to get around to it. Do you know of any that are online right now?  hajat vrc  @ 17:13, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Not off hand - but in my experience, G6 deletions tend not to take too long. NtheP (talk) 17:19, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank You
Thank you for removing Analmon for me. You are awesome. Pengmunk (talk) 23:11, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help w/ formatting!
Hey Hajatvrc! Thanks for your help w/ the formatting on my Userpage (I see you deleted my thanks to you from my page so I'm stopping by here.)! I'm still thinking about whether to leave the Whole Page purple. I find it's hard on the eyes - a bit difficult to read. I'm going to give it a couple of days and see how I feel about it. I may end up leaving purple under Jimi's quote and the rest black on white. :D 'Kay, back to Jimi. Cheers!! Charlie Inks (talk) 15:31, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * What we can do is make the rest of the page a very light shade of purple, one that still permits black type or some other dark color. Let me know what you think. I didn't delete anything since your last edit to the page. I think the text you submitted did not have what you thought it did :D  hajat vrc  @ 16:12, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey Hajatvrc! Thanks for this suggestion - I wondered about that too, but I'm not sure I could live with lilac - that's not purple. But yeah, there are several shades in between. Re deleting, I know you didn't delete - I'm sorry that's not what I meant to say. What I mean is, it was removed by someone :D in the edit that restored full purple to the page. I didn't put it back in b/c I know sometimes people want to help people out and not be quite so out there when the person who got the help wants to say thank you. Does that makes sense? :D Anyways, You Know Exactly what I'm Saying, okay?! lol :D Cheers! Charlie Inks (talk) 16:22, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The edit in which you tried to thank me was done after I made the page purple. In that edit, the only other thing I did was link to Writ Keeper's userpage, which may be the cause of the confusion if you also tried to do that. Do you know how to view "diffs"? This will allow you to see exactly what changes were made in every edit in the page's history. When you are in the history page, click on "diff" after the date of the edit. You will see that no one deleted anything related to myself.  hajat  vrc  @ 16:28, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, if you have the default settings it will probably show up for you as "prev" before the date of the page, not "diff" after the date!  hajat vrc  @ 16:31, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey! Thanks for this! I did add the link for Writ Keeper's userpage - so maybe like you say, that's where things got mixed up. When I looked at the diffs, my thanks to you weren't there. Re dates and all that, this is where my dyslexia can kick in looking at a page, but I'll keep this in mind. Anyways, Thank You For This And For That!!! :D Charlie Inks (talk) 16:39, 3 August 2012 (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, 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) 17:03, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Five
Hi! Welcome to the fifth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!


 * Guest activity increased in July. Questions are up from an average of 36 per week in June to 43 per week in July, and guest profile creation has also increased. This is likely a result of the automatic invite experiments we started near the end of month, which seeks to lessen the burden on hosts and other volunteer who manually invite editors. During the last week of July, questions doubled in the Teahouse! (But don't let that deter you from inviting editors to the Teahouse, please, there are still lots of new editors who haven't found Teahouse yet.)
 * More Teahouse hosts than ever. We had 12 new hosts sign up to participate at the Teahouse! We now have 35 hosts volunteering at the Teahouse. Feel free to stop by and see them all here.
 * Phase two update: Host sprint. In August, the Teahouse team plans to improve the host experience by developing a simpler new-host creation process, a better way of surfacing active hosts, and a host lounge renovation. Take a look at the plan and weigh in here.
 * New Teahouse guest barnstar is awarded to first recipient: Charlie Inks. Using the Teahouse barnstar designed by Heatherawalls, hosts hajatvrc and Ryan Vesey created the new Teahouse Guest Barnstar. The first recipient is Charlie Inks, for her boldness in asking questions at the Teahouse. Check out the award in action here.
 * Teahouse was a hot topic at Wikimania! The Teahouse was a hot topic at Wikimania this past month, where editor retention and interface design was heavily discussed. Sarah and Jonathan presented the Teahouse during the Wikimedia Fellowships panel. Slides can be viewed here. A lunch was also held at Wikimania for Teahouse hosts.

As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. SarahStierch (talk) 08:27, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Née
Could you provide some examples to AWB/T. I will then look into it. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 20:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
SarahStierch (talk) 16:59, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Glozell Green
I have fixed up the article a bit. Till I Go Home 12:22, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
SarahStierch (talk) 23:36, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Your input is requested at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/HostBot 2
Thought you might be interested in weighing in on the invites v. welcomes thread? J-Mo Talk to Me   Email Me  21:30, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll check it out.  hajat vrc  @ 21:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
SarahStierch (talk) 06:20, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Jackie_Brookner
Hello! Thank you for reviewing and for your helpful comments on my article. I removed the quote sections entirely, adjusted any non-neutral sounding language, and even supplemented the article with additional secondary sources. However, the article was again rejected, this time citing unreliable sources... I'm not really sure where to go next with resubmitting again! I appreciate your advice and any specific tips you could provide. Thank you! NoraAaron (talk) 01:44, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't forget to make your new host profile!
Hi Hajatvrc! Thanks for being a host at the Teahouse! We're working on the Host lounge renovations and we've created a new way for hosts to become hosts. Please take a few minutes and test it out here, by creating your new host profile. It's also a good excuse to update your image, quote, and information about yourself :) You can join in on the host discussion about the new feature here. See you at the Teahouse! SarahStierch (talk) 20:05, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Six
Hi! Welcome to the sixth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!
 * Teahouse serves over 700 new editors in six months on Wikipedia! Since February 27, 741 new editors have participated at the Teahouse. The Q&A board and the guest intro pages are more active than ever.
 * Automatic invites are doing the trick: 50% more new editors visiting each week. Ever since HostBot's automated invite trial phase began we've seen a boost in new editor participation. Automating a baseline set of invitations also allows Teahouse hosts to focus on serving hot cups of help to guests, instead of spending countless hours inviting.
 * Guests to the Teahouse continue to edit more & interact more with other community members than non-Teahouse guests according to six month metrics. Teahouse guests make more than twice the article edits and edit more talk pages than other new editors.
 * New host process implemented which encourages anyone to get started as a Teahouse host in a few easy steps. Stop by the hosts page and become a Teahouse host today!
 * Host lounge renovations nearing completion. Working closely with Teahouse hosts, we've made some major renovations to the Teahouse Host Lounge - the main hangout and resource space for hosts. Learn more about the improvements here.

As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. EdwardsBot (talk) 00:07, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
SarahStierch (talk) 22:48, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for all the help CHHistory (talk) 19:32, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Rani Maria Vattalil
I don't believe that's a copyvio. We're talking about facts here, so the terms "knife", "contract killer", "poor", and "landless" have to occur. I'm satisfied that now they occur differently from the source. Compare the words "Sr. Rani Maria’s work among poor landless people had angered several landowners" in the Vatican source, which is an independent telling of the same facts. However, I've reworded further to alleviate your concerns, unfounded though I believe them to be. -- 202.124.75.19 (talk) 23:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry
I didn't mean to.:( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.106.13.157 (talk) 23:32, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks a ton =D  hajat vrc  @ 23:44, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem! AutomaticStrikeout 23:45, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
SarahStierch (talk) 00:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

AfC European Food Information Resource Network
You recently turned down the submission for European Food Information Resource Network. We were just processing to improve it but it seems to be deleted before anybody can edit anything. First the page was marked as not including citations and I added quite many of them. Soon after that you deleted it without quite abrubtly. European Food Information Resource Network is a pan-European association with quite many research institutes and Universities as members. For me, the page was no different from tens of the association pages in wiki. Moreover, European Food Information Resource Network page is one essential part of a larger nutritional science related complex on food chemistry and food composition. Now the page seems to be on the stage that any aubmission of the new improved version will lead to immediate deletionof that submission. How to get forward and improve the page before it is deleted again? Porkkana1234 (talk) 17:36, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
 * This was a very long time ago, but it seems that I declined it because every single citation is from the website of the organization. Wikipedia is not a place for an organization to increase its notoriety by making a page that provides a long list of information from it's website. Wikipedia articles synthesize the analyses of an organization by third party sources, meaning sources that are not connected with the organization. This coverage must come from reliable sources and must be substantial enough to warrant an article. If this coverage does not exist, then Wikipedia cannot give it its own article. I am looking for news articles and books that mention the organization, and while I am not finding any news you might want to check Google Books, which appears to come up with a lot. You might need to find some sources in languages other than English. This is completely fine. Books and news articles are really what we are looking for, and if you can find a few and incorporate the information into the article, then I will reevaluate it. Thanks,  hajat vrc  @ 18:01, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, it is not so old. You should not expect immediate reactions outside web :) Now, you put a half of dozen of PhD level nutritionist (not me, I work for ICT) to quite a puzzled state with your fast revolver hand of denial (and some of them already left the editing group pretty frustrated). In the mean time we have updated several pages like food composition and food composition database and we are targetted to add/update quite many others in the field of nutrient science - real science base stuff, no adds. I agree with the lack of the references and actually I already added quite a few of them - to other sources of wikipedia and also to several scientific articles. Anyway, there are plenty of quite similar association pages and then it is a line drawn into water what is suitable. EuroFIR originated as European Union framework 6 program and continues in several projects under framework 7 and I have seen quite many similar networks/associations with their pages obviously without any problem (actually our old page which we tried to make better was very much lousier than this one and it did not bother anybody in about five years. Our main intention is to create a page of the organization with the basic issues and tell what the network and its members. Even though the organization is small the network actually produces most of the food composition information (how much which vitamin etc in which food) you can ever find. The problem was really that the deletion come to fast for us to do anything - I was in the middle of part of the reference adding process (in Finnish wikipedia the deleting procedure is not so fast). To the practical side: Now have a new version to be added. Should we edit the page in the creation as there is no point of adding the same page again. I would like to have a conflict free continuation as this process already killed the motivation of several people to update wikipedia but I managed to convince some of them to continue. Does this suite you or should we ask a second opionion from some other admin.Porkkana1234 (talk) 18:51, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I must have misunderstood your question. You most certainly may continue editing the article. I review so many articles that I do not even remember this one. If my declination came before you expected, maybe the server still had you listed as waiting for review even though you weren't. I remember that being a problem around the time this occurred. I apologize if you had not submitted the article for review. That problem with the server is now fixed, so I do not think anyone will try to review it again until you explicitly ask for it (which is how it usually works). We do not want anyone to get frustrated and leave because of misunderstandings, but do note that a Wikipedia article needs to fulfill the criteria I explained above. Thanks,  hajat vrc  @ 19:06, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

OK. Now, I begin to understand what has happened. The original page was deleted and replaced by the redirection page. Then, for some reason the just inserted new page went immediately to the review process well before we considered it ready. Then the denial was interpret as the final resolution. Believe me, people involved in this process have quite a long experience with very strict review process of the scientific papers. In science, the denial is the final word for any paper - no way to continue anything in that journal. In this case, people were quite convinced that they could not continue the editing process. I asked them to try again. Our intention is not to push through anything which is not under WP's conventions but the most of the editors are new to WP (I try to hang aroung as a helping hand but my experience is from the Finnish WP which is not exactly the same).So, I will ask them to edit the page which is now under creation and we ask the review. Probably, we will need some assistence in the potential grey areas. Would this be a reasonable road map? Porkkana1234 (talk) 19:57, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I will provide what assistance I can. Maybe take a look at The Teahouse, which is where you can ask questions and get answers from many experienced hosts instead of just one (who may not be available all the time). I will see all of your questions there, but others may answer before I can because it is very active.  hajat vrc  @ 20:13, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I think
I had no idea where to put my vote. -Fjozk (talk) 01:30, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The creator of the page is kind of new, and he seems to incorrectly assume that his contributions to the discussion need to be separated from the rest. This is disrupting the normal flow of AfD pages by adding line breaks. So yes, the page is difficult to follow, but as it is a discussion and not technically a vote, some form of chronology should be preserved for the sake of clarity. I saw that you had entered your addition to the end of a cluster of other !votes, but it was, at the time, at the end of a cluster that still had another cluster of !votes below it. It was essentially in the middle of the page. I hope that makes sense, I am kinda tired. =P  hajat vrc  @ 02:19, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Totally fine. And thanks for the elaboration about how the AfD works. -Fjozk (talk) 02:24, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

how to sign
24 November 2012

Hi. I am new. How do I sign on talk pages

alison — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisonkeay (talk • contribs) 12:37, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi there, and welcome to Wikipedia! To sign your posts on talk pages, you add four tildes to the end of it, which looks like this: ~ . These tildes will turn into your signature when you submit your changes to the page. On my [US English] keyboard, the tilde is immediately to the left of the number "1" key, and I have to hold down the shift key to produce it. This could vary greatly depending on where you are. Also, you can click on the link below the edit box that follows "Sign your posts on talk pages", which will insert four tildes for you.  hajat vrc  @ 20:28, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Teahouse
Thank you for the invitation to visit the Teahouse.--Madame Bonheur (talk) 07:38, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Help for newbie
Hajatvrc, I am a new user and would like your help. A user has started demanding an article layout be changed according to his desire against the vote of everyone else who has reverted the changes. It is really odd. I am a new user and have no idea how to handle the situation. And is this type of thing a regular occurrence?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_people_who_have_been_called_a_polymath

I am also updating the page of Patrick M. Byrne which has extremely confusing Talk page requirements.Bhalluka (talk) 18:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi there. I placed a response at Talk:List of people who have been called a polymath. I admire the fact that you are diving into such a discussion with so little experience, but I think the best thing right now is to wait for third parties to find the Request for Comment that has been placed on the talk page. The discussion seems to just be going back-and-forth, and the people searching for RfCs will be ready to give fresh opinions. You ask if it happens all the time—well, there are so many ways of solving these problems (Wikipedia is a big place) that they all look a little different. It is hard to categorize such things. The important thing is to not get too emotionally attached, as that never results in civilized disputes. I will look at Patrick M. Byrne in a bit—don't have time right now.  hajat vrc  @ 19:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help Hajatvrc, the guy is continuing to bully me and threatening with warnings. "Consider this your last warning" ? What kind of non sense is that? No one on the talk page wanted his changes, two people reverted them, and he threatens to ban people? What a welcome to Wikipedia, yah? Thank you for your time and help. Bhalluka (talk) 20:18, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Seven
Hello again! We have some neat updates about the Teahouse:
 * We’ve added badges! Teahouse awards is a pilot project to learn how acknowledgement impacts engagement and retention in Teahouse and Wikipedia.


 * We’ve got a new WikiLove Badge script that makes giving badges quick and easy. Add it here.  You can give out badges to thank helpful hosts, welcome guests, acknowledge great questions and more.


 * Come join the experiment and let us know what you think!


 * And...for all of your great work and all of the progress that you've helped the Teahouse make, we hereby award you the Host Badge:


 * You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here

Thanks again! Ocaasi 01:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Seven (special Birthday recap)


It's been a full year since the Teahouse opened, and as we're reflecting on what's been accomplished, we wanted to celebrate with you.

Teahouse guests and hosts are sharing their stories in a new blog post about the project.

1 year statistics for Teahouse visitors compared to invited non-visitors from the pilot:

Over the past year almost 2000 questions have been asked and answered, 669 editors have introduced themselves, 1670 guests have been served, 867 experienced Wikipedians have participated in the project, and 137 have served as hosts. Read more project analysis in our CSCW 2013 paper

Last month January was our most active month so far! 78 profiles were created, 46 active hosts answered 263 questions, and 11 new hosts joined the project.

Come by the Teahouse to share a cup of tea and enjoy a Birthday Cupcake! Happy Birthday to the Teahouse and thank you for a year's worth of interest and support :-)
 * -- Ocaasi and the rest of the Teahouse Team 20:53, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To add or remove yourself for receiving future newsletters, please update the list here

The Teahouse Turns One!
It's been an exciting year for the Teahouse and you were a part of it. Thanks so much for visiting, asking questions, sharing answers, being friendly and helpful, and just keeping Teahouse an awesome place. You can read more about the impact we're having and the reflections of other guests and hosts like you. Please come by the Teahouse to celebrate with us, and enjoy this sparkly cupcake badge as our way of saying thank you. And, Happy Birthday!


 * --Ocaasi and the rest of the Teahouse Team 22:46, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Hajatvrc,

Thanks for leaving a message for me. I do not think there is much you can do to help me with my post. It relates to the AMIA Bombing ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMIA_bombing ). I tried to edit the "Other Opinion" section. Soosim removed my edit using the following reason - sorry johanne, i don't see hunter's name mentioned in the report at all. is this WP:OR? Hunter's name is mentioned in the report so I don't see anywhere to go on this. After 3 attempts to enter an edit, I have given up. If you can look at history relating to my entries and tell me how I could make this entry successfully, I would be very interested but I doubt very much that you will be able to.

Many Thanks

--Johanne Johannes (talk) 17:08, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Small image problem from new user
Dear Hajatvrc, Thank you for welcoming me to the American Wikipedia and being a perfect host. I am a user in the Greek Wikipedia since June 2012. Among the entries that I have contributed is the one on the stage director Fotos Politis (1890-1934). Out of curiosity, I checked with en.wikipedia to see if he was included. Unfortunately he was, with an appalling entry by someone who was not even familiar with basic English. Of course, I noticed that he has been blocked from Wikipedia since 2010, but the entry remains for all to see. I thought I had an obligation to remedy the situation for such an important personage in the Greek theater scene, and I am now over halfway through. However, in the process of uploading a 1926 drawing of Politis, which I have already used in the Greek version and have also uploaded it on Wikimedia Commons, I seem to have made an error and it doesn't appear. If you had some time to visit the entry, and could give me some advice as to where I went wrong, I would appreciate it greatly. All my best.--Johnbastias (talk) 16:30, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello, there. You can see how I fixed the template with this edit. Really all that needed to be changed was the first line({{Infobox became {{Infobox person). If you have any further questions, please reply here. Thanks for your contributions!  hajat vrc  @ 18:31, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Updated article on EuroFIR project
Hello - I've just updated an article that you declined before. - I've taken out a lot of the extra information that was there and kept it very short and added references to peer reviewed journal articles. Can you let me know if this is ok? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/European_Food_Information_Resource_Network Thanks BbenelamBbenelam (talk) 15:51, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi there. I have accepted the article, which you can find at European Food Information Resource Network. Good work.  hajat vrc  @ 16:03, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

That's great, thanks for looking at this so quickly Bbenelam (talk) 17:00, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your invitation to the Teahouse, Hajatvrc
I will go there right away!! 8) — Preceding unsigned comment added by VALID REALITY (talk • contribs) 18:37, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I guess that THIS is the box in which to write. I tried to do it another way, so I hope that I did not muck things up. I find these Wiki communications hard to make and to understand how to go about things.

I limit my contributions to the bibliographies and suchlike on articles. I am going through my book collection at present and set aside interesting titles to see if they are cited on Wiki or not. Usually they are not, so I make an entry in a bibliography for something worthwhile that I have, so that others will know about the publication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.217.101.43 (talk) 03:05, 11 May 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 &bull; work), Technical 13 (talk), TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:32, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Ya (programming language)
I made the aticle specified in subject. Yet they are going to remove it. Questions: Pavel Senatorov (talk) 07:22, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Is it possible to make an article remain in place?
 * If yes - how?

Huggle 3
Hey Hajatvrc! I am Petrb, one of core developers of Huggle, the antivandalism tool, which you are beta testing (according to https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Huggle/Members#Beta_testers). I am happy to announce that Huggle 3 is ready for some testing. You can read more about it at WP:Huggle/Huggle3_Beta. Please keep in mind that this is a development version and it is not ready for regular use. That means you must:


 * Watch your contribs - when anything happens you didn't want, fix it and report a bug
 * Frequently checkout source code and build latest version, we change it a lot

If you find any problem with a feature that is supposed to work perfectly, please let us know. Some features are not ready yet, it is listed in known problems on Huggle3 beta page, you don't need to report these - we know it! So, that's it. Have fun testing and please let us know about any problems, either using bugzilla @ http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/ or. Please respond to my talk page, I am not going to watch your talk page. Thank you Petrb (talk) 10:57, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Huggle 3 beta is out - and we need more feedback!
Hey Hajatvrc, how are you? I am Petrb, one of huggle developers, and you are currently subscribed as a beta tester of huggle on meta (Huggle/Members. You may not have noticed, but this week I released first beta precompiled installers for ubuntu and microsoft windows! Huggle/Huggle3_Beta has all the links you need. So if you can, please download it, test it and report all bugs that is really what we need now. Don't forgot that as it's just a beta it's unstable and there are some known issues. Be carefull! Thank you for helping us with huggle Petrb (talk) 16:20, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

We need your help testing latest huggle
Hello,

I am sending you this message because you listed yourself on Huggle/Members as a beta tester. We desperately need attention of testers, because since we resolved all release blockers, we are ready to release first official version of huggle 3! Before that happens, it would be nice if you could test it so that we can make sure there are no issues with it. You can download it packaged for your operating system (see Huggle/Huggle3_Beta) or you can of course build it yourself, see https://github.com/huggle/huggle3-qt-lx for that. Don't forget to use always latest version, there is no auto-update message for beta versions!

Should you find any issue, please report it to wikimedia bugzilla, that is a central place for huggle bugs, where we look at them. That is i mportant, if you find a bug and won't report it, we can't fix it. Thank you for your work on this, if you have any questions, please send me a message on my talk page, I won't be looking for responses here. Thanks, Petrb (talk) 15:12, 10 April 2014 (UTC)