User talk:Ian.thomson/Archive 27

Back (on Wikipedia), but still setting up
I've got an ethernet cable and two very good VPNs, but I've still got to crank out some lesson plans (eight classes, though thankfully only 2.5 different courses). May do the occasional anti-vandalism patrol and snide remark, but I really shouldn't do that until I've got everything written and rehearsed for at least the first week of class. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:22, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Re:Bingo
Been there, seen that. Thank you for adding some humor to the encyclopedia. Altamel (talk) 23:07, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

I got it!
take it easy,i didn't kill anyone. I will create a page with all the requirments needed...i cleaned my page already. Lexander1978 (talk) 08:24, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * In case anyone else reading this is curious: he just deleted a huge chunk (but didn't actually blank the page), and one of the "requirement" problems is that he is creating a page about himself, with no sources. Oh, and it makes claims that should be verifiable, but for which no evidence can be found. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:31, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Just saying....
maybe is my chinese name instead of P Lexander1978 (talk) 08:25, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * You did not make that claim at all, and the cast lists I provided were in English. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:28, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Minhas Craft Brewery Page - continued
(Moved from User talk:Ian.thomson/Archive 26)
 * Hi Ian-


 * I used the advise/ feedback from you and Jim to revised my write up. If you would like to take another look you can find the revised write up in my User:Bbazos/sandbox.


 * I currently have a message out to Dianna, she marked my original page for Speedy Deletion, and Lelepat, he created a redirect for the Minhas Craft Brewery page (redirected to Joseph Huber Brewing Company), for their feedback before I officially try to create the page.


 * Thank you for your time,


 * Bbazos (talk) 23:40, 16 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I will try to get on this when I wrap up lesson plans. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:02, 17 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Awesome, thank you. Bbazos (talk) 14:19, 17 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Update- Dianna gave me some great feedback and modified the page to remove any copyright issues. We are communicating on her talk page- talk. I have a question out to her right now about the bullet points.Bbazos (talk) 14:32, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

User:Chaoyangopterus and hyaenodontids
Re: Chaoyangopterus....please revert his edits on hyaenodontids. he has continually misrepresented the literature int he sources he has presented to support his own personal speculation that hyaenodontids are afrotherians. There is no mention in any of these sources he presents that hyaenodontids are afrotherians. he has gone on from there to begin editing pages on living afrotherians to push this claim even further! 71.236.93.51 (talk) 23:08, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

ANI
Hello,. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at regarding. Thank you. New User Person (talk) 22:56, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I did not misunderstand.
Do not insult or kidding me. I knew wikipedia is not censored but there is source  already. Quran 2:285 messengers of ALLAH have no distinction Weaktry (talk) 23:36, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

There is source already. primary source is Holy Quran. the article is strictly about islamic belief of prophet Muhammad(peace be upon him). and must obeyed the belief of Islam. Weaktry (talk) 23:38, 29 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Where did I insult you? The material you removed had even more sources that original research based on exegesis of a primary source (something we do not encourage here).
 * The article is a summary of about academic descriptions of Muslim belief about Muhammad. See Emic and etic.  Ian.thomson (talk) 23:40, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

In islamic belief, prophets of ALLAH have no distinction and all praise is only for Oneness of ALLAH The God. the article is strictly about prophet Muhammad in Islam. Weaktry (talk) 23:41, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
 * See my previous response. The article is a summary of academic discussion about beliefs Muslims have about Muhammad.  Academia does not get into sectarian disputes over who is or isn't a "real" Muslim. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:43, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

is it not original research if you are referring to academic. kindly fix the page. The primary source in Holy Quran stated in 2:285 messengers of ALLAH have no distinction. i have source. Weaktry (talk) 23:48, 29 September 2015 (UTC) Holy Quran is one of Islamic belief. and the article i edit is islamic belief of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Weaktry (talk) 23:51, 29 September 2015 (UTC)


 * You have one source, which is a WP:PRIMARY source. Per WP:PRIMARY, you need a non-primary source for any interpretation.  The sections you removed from the article were full of dozens of other sources.  I did fix the page when I undid your censorship.  Ian.thomson (talk) 00:07, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

you are forgetting something.

 * You are forgetting that the article is not devotional literature, it is a summary of academic description of Islamic beliefs. No article on this site follows the Quran, or the Bible, or the Vedas, or any other religious text -- it follows academic sources and that's it.  If you looking to push your religious beliefs, do it elsewhere.  Ian.thomson (talk) 00:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Byronmarchant
This is in regard to the ping I had left you earlier. Just wondering whether you think the misuse of the repeated misuse of the user talk page of the above editor, including after final warning still visible there, and his apparent disregard for most of the guidelines, policies, and editors here, might be enough to raise concerns at ANI. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 14:25, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I was kind of waiting for him to do something to article space again, but he is a pretty obvious WP:NOTHERE case with too much of an ego precluding the capacity for WP:AGF. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I personally don't see any need for ANI. I have given a final warning about the purpose of the project. There are certain people out there who really enjoy arguing about stuff all day and we cannot entertain these people, not unless they are very useful. HighInBC 01:38, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for the lull in activity
Since arriving in China, I've had to do a fair amount of paperwork to ensure I can stay (and eat), and I'm kind of having to re-register my students. The school gave me their info, but it's in Chinese (which I cannot yet read) and it's missing things that the school wouldn't need but I would (contact info, interests, etc). Thankfully, I'm off for the Mid-Autumn Festival and won't have classes until next Thursday. Will leave my watchlist open while finishing the data entry (3.5 classes down, 4.5 to go), so I can at least occasionally swat at vandals whenever entering QQ and WeChat IDs starts to make my eyes bleed. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:20, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Oh, I'm also going to be on for this:


 * Ian.thomson (talk) 03:20, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Good luck with the RfA, Ian. It's a long seven days so just know that most RfAs go through phases and have their ups and downs. Liz  Read! Talk! 22:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Ditto - Ret.Prof (talk) 14:27, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Reptilians
See V — Preceding unsigned comment added by Only in death (talk • contribs)
 * Saw the remake (mmm... Morena Baccarin), familiar with the role the original had to play in David Icke's fantasies, but will need to watch the original some time. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:45, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The orginal is worth watching mainly because it places more emphasis on the politics/interactions between the aliens and the humans, rather than playing up the sci-fi aspect as the remake did. Still, I do have to laugh at Icke thinking Kris Kristofferson rules the planet... Only in death does duty end (talk) 12:53, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I would recommend some sleep
Hi Ian! I've not had the pleasure of speaking with you before, but may I recommend that you get some sleep before answering more posts at the Teahouse. I've heard that doing an RfA takes its toll and you can get cranky towards the end. I also understand that you are probably sick and tired of fending off every company that want an article here, but sarcasm and snide comments should be kept out of the Teahouse. If you can't keep a civil tone and a level head right now you should not be editing. Please remember that should your RfA succeed. Best of luck, w.carter -Talk  10:41, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations
The outcome is certain and time has expired. Good luck with your new mop, and may you always wield it in the spirit of service to your fellow editors. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:00, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, is true. You are mopped. Check WP:NAS and let me know if you run into any issues. Happy adminning, –xenotalk 03:05, 9 October 2015 (UTC) Could some well-wisher update WP:RFAS for me? Thanks!
 * ✅. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:24, 9 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Congrats Ian. Glad to finally have you on the team! S warm   ♠  03:26, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on become an administrator. I wish you all the best in your endeavours. :)) -- Eurovision Nim (talk to me)(see my edits) 04:06, 9 October 2015 (UTC)


 * (Currently on lunch break in my next classroom, definitely not logging in on this computer, but I am Ian): Thanks, guys. I'm teaching make-up classes tonight (...and tomorrow...) so it'll be a while before I can log in, but I'll get to mucking about as soon as I can. 115.236.1.18 (talk) 04:38, 9 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Congrats? :) I'm also open to questions/advice as needed. Keegan (talk) 04:46, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  12:38, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the club! Let me know if you want to be introduced to any of the cabals. Now pick up the mop and get to work! HighInBC 04:49, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Not one, not two, but three mops to help you out. One for WP:RFPP, one for WP:AIV, one for WP:SPI. Time to get to work :) --Neil N  <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 05:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, Ian. I just wanted to leave you my personal congratulations. I'm honestly very happy that consensus disagreed with me, and that my 'Oppose' vote did not prevent you from succeeding on your RfA. I believe that the community as a whole made a good judgment call to overlook the concerns expressed, and that you'll make a great administrator. I would just review CSD really quickly, and be on my merry way :-) Congrats, man! Also, there's a spill in article 834,356,253 - here's your mop - can you clean that up and block the user? I recommend wearing gloves :-P  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:45, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, Ian. Well done! -- Sam Sailor Talk! 05:48, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Just don't block Jimbo...at least not for a couple weeks. Congrats!--MONGO 06:55, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Good news! If you need any help or pointers do ask, but I'm sure you'll be fine! Another one to the hall of shame fame. Pedro :  Chat  07:17, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Congratulations. Now, WP:RFPP is thataway..... <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  08:35, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Congrats and welcome aboard, Ian! ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 09:46, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Congratulations to you, Ian! There are lots of resources to help new admins and I encourage you to look them over when you get the chance. Liz  <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 09:54, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Congratulations. If you need any help, don't ask me - according to most people I only give bad advice ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:13, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, Ian. The community have placed their faith in you and we are certain that you will do a good job. You should be seeing some new buttons and links by now. Proceed with caution and don't be afraid to seek advice. Try to avoid the village stocks...it has been a good while and we are overdue for a major mishap. ;)
 * Congratulations, enjoy your new tools, and remember to keep doing article work as well as admin stuff (it keeps you sane). --MelanieN (talk) 14:53, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * You more than earned this. And it feels great that I now have someone other than Doug Weller to pester with the various problematic religion and philosophy discussions we have. You may well come to dread seeing my name on your user talk page too. John Carter (talk) 16:58, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Congratulations.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:21, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Nicely done. Congratulations. :) Kafka Liz (talk) 21:15, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! When you get bored of scrabbling round for the right block template in the bowels of template space, have a look in my monobook.js. Some kind person put some code there that gives admins a really nifty dropdown menu.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  21:44, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm very pleased to see your RfA succeeded. I wish the community could have nominated you a year ago. Many other editors commented about how thick-skinned you appear to be and they also mentioned your level-headedness and respectfulness. Now that you're empowered with the mop don't forget (as I'm sure you never would) the mere editors like me that will need help when the vandals and POV-pushers start clanging at the gates. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 15:35, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on being an administrator, I appreciate your edits on the Number of the beast page, where I see you most. Raquel Baranow (talk) 18:49, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I am so late in congratulating you, sorry. Well deserved. Doug Weller (talk) 10:00, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Again, thanks
Again, thanks everyone here and those who voted -- be it for me, or those who voiced legitimate concerns that I will need to address through my actions. I will get on admining tomorrow, but for now I can only manage dinner and bed. Ian.thomson (talk) 11:03, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations
Nice to hear that! and I see many others here having the same feeling as me. I just meant to ask you tell me what you would not recommend in my contributions, as you said here? Thanks. Mhhossein (talk) 13:13, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, it was just the usual unideal stuff that can be found in the contributions of any editor who hangs around contentious topics long enough. Nothing major enough that I can remember anything in particular -- I'd have to dig through again to point to something specific.  The most I can remember is seeing a few instances where it looked like you (and other people) were arguing against each other rather than seeking consensus by focusing on content.  Ian.thomson (talk) 09:54, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your civil response. Tell me if there's something I should not do! There was a problem which seems to be solved by now! Anyway, I congratulate your becoming an Admin and I wish you can help the community and bear such a heavy burden. Mhhossein (talk) 12:59, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Taylor Swift
When the full protection ends, will you restore indefinite semi-protection? --George Ho (talk) 00:50, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If I am on, yes. Er... Actually, I'll be in the middle of teaching at this time in three days, so I may have to cut the full protection a few hours short.
 * Course, if there's a consensus on the talk page before then, I could bring the full protection down earlier. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:59, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Wasn't the protection time indefinite? You set it to expire in 20 minutes. --George Ho (talk) 00:05, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry! I should've taken it down even earlier just to make sure I did it right.  Ian.thomson (talk) 08:27, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Page protection
Hello, Ian, nice to see you getting right down to business at RFPP! Could I make one suggestion? Most of us add a brief edit summary showing what action we took - "semi one month", "3 days full", "salted", "declined", etc. Not required but can be useful to people scanning the history. Thanks for the help there and elsewhere! --MelanieN (talk) 00:55, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Will do my best to remember. Did most of that before the morning caffeine got to me. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:59, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Page protection at Albertus Seba
Belated congratulations on the adminship! Anyways, I noticed you've been busy page-protecting, so could I trouble you for semi-protection on Albertus Seba? There's some crazy anon and new editor vandalism going on there. clpo13(talk) 08:27, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure. Thank you for a more obvious case for me to gum on. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:31, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protection needed at Huma Abedin
Huma Abedin and its talk page probably need semi-protection at this point. Thanks. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 01:52, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Part
The editor you warned has taken no notice: another revert. Do you want to handle it directly, or should I file a new report? Nomoskedasticity (talk) 07:26, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Nomoskedasticity edited the article once again prior to me. I responded with an NPOV version which you can check for yourself. This is not a revert. Part (talk) 07:31, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Part's edit again removes a reliable source, something he has done repeatedly -- and it restores text to a version he has repeatedly implemented. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 07:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'm going to count everything that might be a revert (even a manual revert) from both of you within 24 hours of your last edits. Happy?
 * - 16:11, 13 October, 21:53, 13 October 01:41, 14 October, 04:28, 14 October, 15:24, 14 October. Since you so very much want me to block someone for edit warring, I guess I'll have to block you.
 * Part, this is not really different from this. It is a revert, and there is no honest or reasonable argument to the contrary.  Your claim here of reverting vandalism here would have some semblance of merit if you weren't just using it as an excuse to edit war over the rest of the content changed.  If the problem was really the date, you'd just remove the word "July."  Obviously, that's not your problem with it.
 * Also, the KevinMD blog is, at best, only good for saying that Baker claims that Gawande didn't take offense. Unless you have a source that directly asks Gawande for his views on the matter, it fails WP:BLP.
 * - 00:40, 14 October, 15:06, 14 October - Oh, look, not edit warring.
 * Any other business? Ian.thomson (talk) 09:24, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Your comment at RFPP
Hi Ian. You can take multiple admin actions and multiple types of admin actions to resolve a situation without being considered WP:INVOLVED. Blocking users and then declining protection is pretty standard. I've used the block, delete, and protect tools all for the same situation. As long as you're not involved with content as an editor, you're fine. BTW, you may want to look at the User:MusikAnimal/responseHelper script. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 11:36, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Cool, will do and will try to look into that script in a bit. Ian.thomson (talk) 11:39, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Re:
DH. 5 Sleeper. Active use.--Calford23 (talk) 12:10, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi.
I thought I'd wait for the furor to die down to congratulate you on your successful election to adminship... so... Congratulations on your successful election to adminship! I hope you're finding it interesting work, but I wouldn't trade places with you for all the tea in Iceland. Best, BMK (talk) 07:35, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Most of what I've done has been fine.  Had a meeting a few days ago that confirmed I need to overhaul my curriculum before Thursday, but I will at least be logged in.  Ian.thomson (talk) 00:23, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry by CrispinAspen on Fight the New Drug
Hi there. Since you have also interacted extensively with this user on the article talk and various user talk pages, I'd like to make you aware of the sockpuppetry investigation I have opened concerning this user. Please feel free to offer your comments if you wish. Best,  M w w 1 1 3    (talk) 07:35, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Changes on Fight the New Drug
Being quite inexperienced, I'm not even sure if this was the right place to talk to you, but I just wanted to know if we can come up with a consensus on the minor change on Fight the New Drug. Maybe using using the word "declaring that..." or even simply "saying that...". This isn't really important in and of itself, but I feel like it will set a tone for the article. I also wanted to ask you if we could change the wording of the article from "Mormons" to "members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints". I do not know if Wikipedia has an internal policy regarding this, but the Church has an official style guide released here. If you could also let me know what the best method of reaching consensus in the future would be, that would be great. Captain Cookie 22:09, 26 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CaptainCookie (talk • contribs)
 * The article's talk page would probably be a better place. "Saying" might be acceptable, but "declaring" still comes across like it's a proven fact and not just their claim.
 * As for LDS or Mormon, it depends on the sources. From a non-sectarian perspective, there are Mormons who are not necessarily members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.  Should the sources clarify that the founding members all be members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, then we can go on ahead and be more specific that they are LDS members.  Should the sources use the more broad term "Mormon," then we follow suit.  One source says "LDS," two say "Mormon," but one of those two cites an LDS magazine for that information.  So, that change appears to be fine as well.  Ian.thomson (talk) 04:09, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Re: Giorgio A. Tsoukalos
His hair... They're so extraterrestrial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.92.225.77 (talk) 04:26, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back!
...mind, you, I'm still MIA. But so it goes. Killer Chihuahua 16:45, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Usvruefktpi (talk) 10:25, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:18, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Reworked article - would appreciate your review
Based on our earlier discussion in United Lodge of Theosophists, I have created a new draft article here: Draft:United Lodge of Theosophists. I have marked the old article for deletion as it is beyond repair. I hope to move the draft into the main namespace after the old article is removed. In the meantime, I would really appreciate it if you could take the time to review the draft. Ratreya (talk) 02:38, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#FF4646; background-color:#F6F0F7; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:7px; border-radius: 1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);;" class="plainlinks">Happy Holidays text.png Hello Ian.thomson: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, JudeccaXIII (talk) 04:37, 25 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Gog and Magog
You took part in a discussion about Gog and Magog, and a possibly related but possibly unrelated Hindu myth. This discussion has been reopened at the dispute resolution noticeboard. You are invited (but not required, because dispute resolution is voluntary) to request to be a party to this case. Please let me know whether you want to take part in discussion. If so, you will be added to the list of participants. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:21, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

RfC announce: Religion in infoboxes
There is an RfC at Template talk:Infobox concerning what should be allowed in the religion entry in infoboxes. Please join the discussion and help us to arrive at a consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:23, 17 January 2016 (UTC)