User talk:Jayron32/Archive21

How 'bout those Bucs, eh?
Mwalcoff (talk) 01:54, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Eh. Well, you win some, you lose some... -- Jayron  32  12:37, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit summaries when closing ban discussion
OK, I'll rephrase the question a little less sarcastically - and it was a genuine question - since you suddenly decided to archive your talk page rather than answer it. Do you think it is appropriate to close the discussion on a ban - quite a radical move, which prevents an individual from participating in the encyclopedia that anyone can supposedly edit - with an edit summary in which you appear to feign humming this tune? Is that not at best a little flippant and at worst a taunt?  N-HH   talk / edits  17:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You are correct. -- Jayron  32  12:33, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Science Desk Oversight
Thanks for this. After I deleted the text, I meant to find someone to go deeper, but was sidetracked. Bielle (talk) 17:54, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Technically, I didn't oversight it, I RevDeleted it (I don't actually have oversight privileges, just the standard admin package). When I saw you deleted the text, and the rationale, I thought it prudent to also remove it from public view.  Just doing my job.  -- Jayron  32  17:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

RE: Unblock request input
I'm not the blocking admin (I'm not even an admin). User:Materialscientist blocked him. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  18:41, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Oops. My bad.  Misread the talk page.  Carry on.  -- Jayron  32  18:55, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Deuce
I know Deuce was a former member of Hollywood Undead but he should have his own page. He may not have an official label yet but he has a huge amount of songs. If you keep referring him to their page they will keep talking about Hollywood Undead and not Deuce. I'm a pretty reasonable person so if you could write back with your explanation of why you keep changing it, I might see your side of the story and reconsider the whole thing. I have also already read the discussion on his page. Jhardyrules9 02:15, 21 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhardyrules9 (talk • contribs)

Okay thanks for helping me out, I'll try to find some reliable links and try to get it overturned. I thought you were the one to go to because it says it is protected by you. Thanks again for helping me out. I'm sort of a rookie with wikipedia and I guess that is why your a pro. Jhardyrules9 02:37, 21 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhardyrules9 (talk • contribs)

Peer review
Hi. I found your name on Peer review/volunteers. I was wondering if you could do a peer review for Canberra Roller Derby League, with a focus on sources. A goal is to potentially nominate the article for featured. I've never really written an article about a sport team. I know the article topic qualifies for notable and that the text is supported by the sources. I'm just worried, after having watched the sourcing issues surrounding articles like men's rights that the sources used may not hold up to WP:V when put under the microscope that is WP:FAC. And yeah. If you have the time, I'd really appreciate a peer review for the article. :) --LauraHale (talk) 10:16, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Village pump (policy)
Hi Jayron32. You participated in Village pump (proposals)/Archive 78, after which Request close and Category:Requests for Close were created. There is a discussion regarding non-admin closures of non-AfDs at Village pump (policy). I have posed several questions there and am interested in your thoughts. Cunard (talk) 06:09, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Re. Bonobos
ROFL! I'd assumed that this would link to our sex-crazed hairy cousins, and didn't check. Well spotted... AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:49, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, they could be sex-crazed and hairy, but I don't know the band all that well. As far as the horny apes go, I was pretty sure that's what you were talking about... -- Jayron  32  03:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

invitation
--nijil (talk) 15:49, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

hand drawn map - 1860 Election
Could you chime in on the discussion page 1860 Presidential Elecion on the subject of your recent map deletion in the article there? Thanks. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 11:07, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 October newsletter
The 2011 WikiCup is now over, and our new champion is, who joins the exclusive club of the previous winners: (2007),  (2008),  (2009) and  (2010). The final standings were as follows:



Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.


 * The Featured Article Award:, for his performance in round 2. matched the score, but Casliber won the tiebreaker.
 * The Good Article Award:, for his performance in round 4.
 * The Featured List Award:, for his performance in round 4. matched the score, but Miyagawa won the tiebreaker.
 * The Recognised Topic Award (for good and featured topics):, for his performance in round 3.
 * The Did You Know Award:, for his performance in round 1.
 * The In the News Award:, for his performance in round 1.
 * The Reviewer Award (for good article reviews):, for his performance in round 3.

No prize was awarded for featured pictures, sounds or portals, as none were claimed throughout the competition. The awards will be handed out over the next few days. Congratulations to all our participants, and especially our winners; we've all had fun, and Wikipedia has benefitted massively from our content work.

Preparation for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Interested parties are invited to sign up and participate in our straw polls. It's been a pleasure to work with you all this year, and, whoever's taking part in and running the competition in 2012, we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn and The ed17 00:42, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * — JCbot (talk) 01:18, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Otium
This is my latest article. Feel free to make any improvements. --Doug Coldwell talk 19:42, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Expanded article. Any ideas for a DYK hook?--Doug Coldwell talk 11:12, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, no. It's an interesting article, but I can't really think of anything except the basic definition.  There's not much there to be "catchy".  -- Jayron  32  14:07, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I am going to try to turn this article into a Good Article. Any suggestions or help?--Doug Coldwell talk 12:31, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Question
Just one question. If it were a named account with its first ever edit instead of an IP: would there be a substantial difference in the way you would look at it? I do completely understand what you're saying about it possibly being a good-faith user on a mobile IP, and I hope you don't think I discount that. But I've also had plenty of experience with vandals, trolls, canvassers, etc., and I know that side pretty well. Enlighten me, please! Doc  talk  04:46, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * A named account would require the deliberate act of creating a new account. Different situation.  Most people don't know, understand, or care how IP addresses work or are assigned, and Wikipedia has a long standing tradition of WP:AGF in the absense of evidence of bad faith.  Creating a brand-new account to mask your identity during a discussion is a vastly different event than having your IP change in ways that are out of your control.  So my answer is that those are different situations which would require different attitudes and responses. -- Jayron  32  05:39, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm probably a bit "jaded" when it comes to IP-hopping. For example: have a look at one of my "pet projects". How do you classify this individual? Soooo many IPs, no point in a SPI or CU, right? But they're all one person. Hopefully the vote will be discounted by the closing admins is all I can say. Cheers :> Doc   talk  06:16, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

question re: 'more appropriate venue'
I'm at a loss to determine where a more appropriate venue is - suggestions would be appreciated. Not on the Muhammad page, obviously; village pump seems wrong. I suppose I could reopen it at wp:NOT, but it seems a little odd just to dump an RfC into the mix over there. Is there a better venue that I'm missing?

Really, I was hoping for a quick administrative straw poll to settle the issue since we were in ANI already, but I can see your point. -- Ludwigs 2 17:16, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe I suggested a venue. You should read what I said and try it there.  -- Jayron  32  20:38, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Everton F.C.
If you have the time and you are interested could you peer review the Everton F.C. article. Thnks for your time. SenorKristobbal (talk) 01:16, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Category talk:Anti-abortion violence
Category talk:Anti-abortion violence was reopened after a review at Administrators' noticeboard/Archive228. I am notifying all editors who participated in these two discussions or Neutral point of view/Noticeboard/Archive 26 to ensure all editors are aware of the reopened discussion. Cunard (talk) 04:01, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

JoePa
You might want to take a look at WP:ITN/C. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:21, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Sylvia Stark removal
Hi Jayron32,

I'm curious to know why the page for "Sylvia Stark" was deleted. I am a strong advocate for the full disclosure of her involvement with the "Miss Canada International" pageant, along with her history of fraudulent activities. Hundreds of young women across the country are investing large sums of money into this organization, most of which has been fundraised by their communities. They have the right to know all that is available about Ms. Stark's history in relation to the organization. Could you share with me why this page has been removed. Is it possible to add the content to another page? Thanks! CherylTavs (talk) 20:28, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Note to self Re: I concur troll

 * Warned at 1 & 129, blocked after action continued on 2. -- Jayron  32  03:07, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Warned at 1 & 129, blocked after action continued on 2. -- Jayron  32  03:07, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Warned at 1 & 129, blocked after action continued on 2. -- Jayron  32  03:07, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Warned at 1 & 129, blocked after action continued on 2. -- Jayron  32  03:07, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Warned at 1 & 129, blocked after action continued on 2. -- Jayron  32  03:07, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Shashi Ruia
Hi Jayron, could I ask for your advice as an admin please? I was doing some NPP and hit the above article. Written by a single user who has also written one for another member of the same company, so it got my hackles up slightly. Anyway, I was going to leave a comment on the talk page (something along the lines of "Why does this article make it sound like the sun shines out of his arse?" but more delicately phrased) but it seems the talk page has already been deleted under G8 twice before: once in 2010 and once in 2009. Do we have someone repeatedly creating the article only for it to get deleted please? The puffery on the article makes it seem that he might be notable, but it's poorly referenced. What's the best course of action please? Brammers (talk/c) 11:19, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Like the other two times, this was a copyvio, in this case of . If you see anymore additions by the user that created this, please check for copyvios carefully.  -- Jayron  32  02:26, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

FYI
User talk:72.130.254.147. Drmies (talk) 05:33, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Feel free to block that IP, decline the unblock request, and refer to WP:BASC, which is what the last admin to respond did. I should note that I left a note at User talk:Jack Merridrew which deals with the user's claim that it is their real name.  -- Jayron  32  05:40, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought I'd give you that pleasure since I think I met my block quota for this week already., but MuZemike took care of matters. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 06:18, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Ref Desk: Modifying the postings of other editors

 * I have opened a discussion thread about the modification of the Ref Desk posts of others at Wikipedia talk:Reference desk. Your input is most welcome. Edison (talk) 06:47, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your post on "cooperative learning"
Jayron, thanks so much for sharing your insights on this on the RefDesk. I actually work in education (though not as a teacher) and your insights are very instructive. Marco polo (talk) 15:58, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kind words. Teaching is my passion; that thing I would do if I were so rich I could do it for free.  I take it quite seriously, and thinking about education is something which occupies my thoughts almost continuously.  It is a joy to be able to share ones passion in this way, and I am glad to have had the opportunity to bring it up.  -- Jayron  32  18:34, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Excellent point
You made an excellent point and have perhaps changed the way that I view disputes. That opens up my eyes to a different perspective which I hope to incorporate in my dealings with others. Cheers, ⋙–Berean–Hunter—►  05:05, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kind words. I just call it like I see it... -- Jayron  32  00:15, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment on Sanctions Given Previously
Just want to put out in the open that User:Delicious carbuncle and I's paths have unintentionally crossed at an SPI I started (not something I am complaining about). You have previously issued sanctions for me to "Leave User:Delicious carbuncle alone, even when engaged". I had a question for him about something he posted (mostly a clarification) and in the effort of politeness and AGF, I posted what I like to call a "Poor Man's Talkback" on his talk page. I did this this way, mostly cause I wasn't sure the TB notice from TWINKLE would work and only wanted to edit his talk page once.

I did this, again in AGF for a clarification, in no way was I trying to start anything or create a problem. Just a talkback notice, nothing more. Maybe I am trying to rebuild some bridges too. I have burned plenty...shit, I blew the damned things up with a small grade nuclear weapon...and maybe I am trying to rebuild them. Since you are issued the sanction, I thought it best you hear it from me before someone came along and with "guess what Neutralhomer did". Again, talkback, nothing more at this point (DC and I aren't going out for beers anytime soon). -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 01:30, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm all for reparing bridges. If you sense things starting to go sour, please disengage voluntarily, though.  I would hate to see this return to unpleasantness.  Indeed, it looks like he isn't interesting in having his bridges repaired.  Perhaps sleeping dogs need to be let lie.  -- Jayron  32  14:19, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * He reverted my post, I just shrugged and moved onto something else. It's cool.  It was just a talkback notice. :)  Oh well, guess I will let the dogs go back to sleep. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 18:04, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Deleting AGRODEP wiki page
Dear Sir;

How are you? I am a creator of the wiki page "AGRODEP", which you recently deleted. I am not sure that why you deleted the wiki page. Could you explain why? Is there any way to restore the wiki page? Thanks for your considerations!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.100.141.210 (talk) 19:42, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Tyler Palko
Ref: better wording...only if you say so! (smile - just kidding!) Palko did receive a drubbing! ha ha Keep up the good work! Regards, Warren Fish (talk) 04:55, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * He was ground into a paste. He had his ass handed to him on a platter.  He was made to look silly.  Such language isn't all that good in an encyclopedia article, even if true.  -- Jayron  32  04:58, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Concur! Thanks for the laugh!  Regards, Warren  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warrenfish (talk • contribs) 05:02, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
The Bushranger One ping only 17:29, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

ip 190.45.54.212 avoiding block
190.45.54.212 who you blocked for 31 hours is avoiding his block under ip 190.44.140.37; See: and. Now he has also made comments under the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents which was about him; see:, however, that I can understand. I only ask that you look into the matter. Thank you, Kierzek (talk) 02:09, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The ip address continues to edit. I have literally never before seen such tolerance to block evasion by others.  I imagine you're not on line right now, I'm sure this will be well handled once its properly reviewed.  There's getting to be too much personal interest in me and KZ at this point, I'm signing off in a few which I think would be best - back to my Wikibreak!. -OberRanks (talk) 04:08, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Point of order: Sometimes, I need to eat, take a crap, sleep, enjoy the company of live humans, etc. I am not the only admin around; if this happens again, use WP:AIV or WP:ANI to alert someone else.  -- Jayron  32  00:46, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Good point - I have always gone the route of alerting the actual blocking admin; I was amazed there wasn't action by someone else for such blatant block evasion. The user is now on a different ip address, and I don't think anything is going to change.  Based on the current tone, there is a desire now for a "reprimand" against those who "falsely accused of vandalism" .  I leave this your capable hands. -OberRanks (talk) 02:46, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Enough other admins are working on this. He's not personally attacking others, and given the other eyes on this, and several other admins who are working on it, I'm not going to act unilaterally unless he decends into personal attacks again.  -- Jayron  32  03:12, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I suggest the matter be closed for now. I think enough has been said. Hopefully the ip guy with follow a different path. Thanks for your time. Kierzek (talk) 19:29, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Are you serious?


Are you serious that the majority of Wikipedia's articles is utterly useless information, as the picture implies? Just so you know, I do use Wikipedia for some sense of the world. Since Wikipedia is the free open encyclopedia for everyone to edit, precaution is the key when using facts from Wikipedia. But the sources/references to which Wikipedia articles link outwards are reliable. SuperSuperSmarty (talk) 04:29, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

P.S. I may look like a newbie, but really, I haven't edited Wikipedia in a loooooooong time (since 2008)...now, if I could just remember how to add a frame to the picture. SuperSuperSmarty (talk) 04:29, 23 November 2011 (UTC)


 * In regard to the item on the lower right, all I can say is, "Bill, Wyoming". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:33, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * SSS's P.S. reminds me of Groucho's line from Duck Soup: "[Bugsy|Chicolini] may look like an idiot, and act like an idiot, and talk like an idiot... but don't let that fool you... he really is an idiot!" ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:54, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Dispute Resolution
You may be interested in this. Peter jackson (talk) 17:59, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Happy Thanksgiving.  -- Jayron  32  19:52, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Mail
WilliamH (talk) 02:51, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Tommy Green (athlete)
How did you revdelete the original edit? My PC didn't let me get to the revdelete window because of the attack launching when clicking revdelete. Materialscientist (talk) 05:51, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I saw that "unblock request". Lacking originality. The thing is I tried what you wrote, but get

"You have either not specified a target revision(s) to perform this function, the specified revision does not exist, or you are attempting to hide the current revision." , though I specifically separated the edits not to make them current version. Materialscientist (talk) 06:05, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Aha .. (sound of clapping the forehead against the table). Materialscientist (talk) 06:08, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Letters, we get letters...
-  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 08:28, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank You
I just wanted to thank you for considering my unblock request. You won't regret it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan Atwood (talk • contribs) 18:01, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry
I'll take the barnstars off — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan Atwood (talk • contribs) 18:55, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

question
I was wondering if you could mentor me in how to make my posts more aesthetically pleasing and other knowledge that you have gained in your years as an administrator. I really think my passion for making wikipedia better would be best served if I could have some sort of mentor who could help me. Please consider me Ryan Atwood (talk) 20:26, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Is that a no, or are you just ignoring me? I'd like some sort of response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan Atwood (talk • contribs) 23:42, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I was not ignoring you, I just wasn't online. I do eat and sleep and share the company of live humans sometimes.  No, I'm sorry, I'm not terribly interested in being a mentor at this time.  If you are looking for a mentor, Mentorship is where you can go to find one.  Good luck!  -- Jayron  32  04:06, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh you hang out with other human! That'd interesting. You're one of the few of the human-dwellers I've meant. I never hang out with humans, but I am sarcastic sometimes ;). Thanks mentor Ryan Atwood (talk) 01:37, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
 Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 21:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC) 21:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Blocking of editor done way too quickly
As per Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents there appears to be information that editors did not take into account in their rush to indef an editor based upon one-sided information. Whilst that information may have been presented in good faith, it would be pertinent to wait for the editor in question to comment. They have now done so on their talk page, and their comments have merit. You are getting this message as you have supported their block on the thread in question, and I think you should go back and read their comments and reconsider your position. It is disappointing that too many people jumped the gun on this occasion in condemning the editor in question. Russavia Let's dialogue 05:56, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * OK. -- Jayron  32  05:58, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Deleting AGRODEP wiki page
Dear Sir;

How are you? I am a creator of the wiki page "AGRODEP", which you recently deleted. I am not sure that why you deleted the wiki page. Could you explain why? Is there any way to restore the wiki page? Thanks for your considerations!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soonho.kim (talk • contribs) 21:50, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Grey Cup on ITN
Hello. I saw that you supported the addition of the Grey Cup to ITN, and that you are an administrator. Would it be possible for you to add it to ITN, as it is gaining unanimous support? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.207.112.155 (talk) 00:20, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No can do. I voted, so it would be inappropriate for me to act also as an administrator.  You're going to have to wait for someone else to do it.  -- Jayron  32  00:54, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Hold up please
Jayron32,

Please reconsider closing the HiLo48 thread. The thread is relatively young, and frankly, some of the behavior (and I am in fact thinking my post alone) provides evidence for individual admin action. As the discussion is currently structured its an eye sore, but the Talk:Pregnancy drama has been going on for months, and I don't want to see (in my opinion) one of the major trouble makers given a free pass without giving time for significant community input.--Tznkai (talk) 06:57, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * If you would like community input, try the structure of an RFC/U. The discussion that existed at ANI had, of itself, no hope of resolving anything.  A new discussion may (or may not, I make no judgement) be justified, but continuing that discussion was pointless.  -- Jayron  32  13:33, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * When was the last time RfC/U solved anything?--Tznkai (talk) 13:57, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Accepting the umpire's decision, or not
Re your closure of the thread at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, I note that some of the involved editors have started complaining about the result, firstly, against explicit instruction, on that page itself, and now I see on this page.

What is important here is that the behaviour I was reported for was condemning others (a lot) for not accepting an umpire's decision. It's sad that that's exactly what they're doing again. I'm sure they won't see the irony.

I was tempted to respond to the whining posts (against instructions!) at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, but thought better of it. I don't want to escalate things in any public way at this stage, but can these guys ever give up? Are there any consequences at all for their repeated refusal to accept rulings they don't like?

I didn't like the final ruling in the image squabble at Pregnancy, but I won't disrupt this encyclopaedia by fighting it.

It's incredibly hard to participate sensibly in discussion threads with people who won't follow the rules. HiLo48 (talk) 22:17, 29 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm not particularly interested one way or the other in the matter at hand. It genuinely doesn't matter at me WHOSE tits are shown in what article and where they are located.  It matters not to me.  In other words, find someone who cares one way or the other.  I am not disagreeing with you, nor am I agreeing with you.  I'm just not taking sides.  -- Jayron  32  23:06, 29 November 2011 (UTC)


 * You're clearly taking sides by closing this discussion Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents. 4 users supported action, and the "multiple" requests for close came from two users opposing it, and you quickly closed it using their words. 4 users supporting action, and other users who think he's acted inappropriately but didn't explicitly support action is not a place that an actionable result can't come from.--Crossmr (talk) 23:25, 29 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Then reopen the discussion. How many times do I have to explain, to you, that I do not care, and I am not going to take sides.  You cannot force me to care, no matter how hard you try.  You cannot tell me what side I am on, and I will thank you not to do so.  -- Jayron  32  04:05, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Hats on a Thursday
 Chzz  ► 18:23, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

The importantce of being Earnest
Fun typo, The word "importantce" was chosen deliberately in A7 on ANI. (you mean, "importance")  Chzz  ► 20:31, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Fat finger syndrome. Will correct.  -- Jayron  32  20:34, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Haha! That "fat finger syndrome" thing was quite funny. --Cerlomin (talk) 22:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to the December Wikification Drive
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 01:26, 2 December 2011 (UTC).

Night_of_the_Big_Wind_inappropriate_CSD_tagging
Hi. You closed ANI.

Today, the user has tagged another - and to me, that seems to assert notability; Google News search indicates likely notability too.

I don't want to cause unnecessary DRAMA, so I thought I'd ask you first - do you think the thread should be re-opened?  Chzz  ► 17:59, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I think you should start by approaching him personally and asking him to undo his mistake. If that does not work, then feel free to unresolve the thread.  Remember, I am not more important than you.  You really have to learn that.  -- Jayron  32  18:30, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for that...
No idea how I upset this one. Cheers,  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  23:26, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Day nah dah. -- Jayron  32  23:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Irish Americans
Please see WP:GF and don't automatically assume that I've overruled you. I failed to check the history, but that's incompetence, for which I apologise, not malice. The article is sourced only to the organisation and looks like a cut-and-paste, but I never argue with other admins about this sort of stuff, life's too short. Feel free to restore.  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

NW at ANI
I supposed it would have been nice if GerardW informed me of the ANI thread he opened on my edit, but it's no big deal I suppose. Do you think there is anything I should say or do, or should I just leave it be? NW ( Talk ) 20:24, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

MikeWazowski
I presume you're watching MikeWazowski's talk page, but I just wanted to let you know that I've given Mike a final warning on his poor CSD tagging. This has been going on for months, and to me it has escalated into a blockable offense. Mike's error rate is disruptive and harming the encyclopedia, and while I'd prefer he get better, if he won't or isn't able, I see no choice but to block him to prevent further harm. Feel free to let me know if more problems crop up from this point on. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:16, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have no prior contact with this user, but if his CSD tagging is a documented problem for which he has been warned, and you are familiar with the case, feel free to block if it continues. Just make sure to compile a list of diffs showing warnings, as such a block may be contentious.  But I'd support it iff it has been a long term problem, as you claim.  -- Jayron  32  04:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Please help my article not get deleted!!!
Yoy might not remember but the other day you saved my article, 50th Redlands International Caded Australian Cahmpionship, from being speedly deleted. The same person who put it up for speedy deletion has now put it on the articles for deletion page. I worked so hard on my very hard article and i do not want it deleted. I worked very hard writing how the event is notable and many other sailors in the event have taken up wikipeida accounts just to write that they are outraged this useful page might be deleated and that it is notable. The two users trying to delete my page just keep critisisng how these new users have no real substance but never say why the artice is bad. Finnaly one of them, the one who aplied for speedy deletion has put up some substance to has argument. As I am new to wikipedia I don't understand the fancy language he uses and I would realy like someone who is experinaced to reply back to him. Seeing you said my article is clearly notabe I wondered if you would do this. The article for deletion site is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/50th_Redlands_International_Cadet_Australian_Championship

Please Help Me . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tris.obrien (talk • contribs) 10:57, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Question from someone new
Hi, I am new to Wikipedia and have a question. I recently attempted to edit my first page on Wikipedia, only to find that there seems to be a group of three editors who have clearly "Ganged up on me" with regards to editing pages that are clearly biased and in violation of WP:NPOV, WP:OR and contain material where the source references are distorted or falsified or the source material clearly presents a WP:Fringe point of view. The problem I have other than the unreasonableness of these three editors is that they clearly know the rules of Wikipedia much better that I do, considering that I am new and they have been on Wikipedia for years. I noticed that the founder of Wikipedia has a page and I am considering writing a letter to him on his talk page requesting deletion of the pages in question, one of which I have already requested, and it was speedily denied in less than 1 day. I can only assume they also have a friend who is an administrator who did this for them, so it looks as if I am hopelessly outnumbered, thus the reason I am considering writing the letter to the founder of Wikipedia. About the page I requested deletion for. I tried to discuss in talk, but met only hostility and unreasonableness, I requested they edit the page to make it more objective and less of an attack, they in turn said I should tell them what is wrong with the page, but there are SO many things wrong with the page that requiring me to list them all is an unreasonable request. When I attempted to edit the page and correct some of the issues, they reverted the page even while I was editing it, so as to make my attempt at an edit futile. They seem determined to make sure that this hostile and misleading page(s) remains as is, likely due to their personal bias and inability to remain objective about the particular subject. I would like your help if possible, in finding out how to report their conduct as well as in how to get the pages corrected or deleted (it appears there are about 6 pages that are tied together with links) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willietell (talk • contribs) 01:15, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 03:03, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Beckonamist
Hi Jayron32, please be aware that, upon expiration of her block, made a beeline back to the Kryptos article and resumed edit-warring and incivility. Would you like to take a look, or should I start another ANI thread? My own recommendation of how things should be handled is an indefinite block, until the user promises to (1) Be civil; and (2) To build consensus on the talkpage rather than edit-warring. Thanks, --Elonka 21:01, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Elunka, You call it edit-warring ONLY because you have no non-trivial response to the evidence I present. A beeline?  Seems to me, a beeline could have been done yesterday.  I can't help it that you find genuine evidence (of which you have no adequate response) incivility.  Contrary to what you claim, I have behaved civilly.  You may have had to put up with argument, the consequences of which make you uncomfortable, but it is I who has had to wade through the scum of disingenuous, trivially-refuted claims on your part.  It was YOU after all that started this by removing WITHOUT consultation, edits that had been there for months.  Then you accuse me of vandalism?  Pathetic. Beckonamist (talk) 21:36, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Jayron32, looks like we have a block-evading sockpuppet here: . Would you like to do the honors? --Elonka 20:13, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- Jayron  32  21:40, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll keep you posted if any others pop up. --Elonka 21:45, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi
Please answer my Question69.131.127.76 (talk) 20:10, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Pokemon + Nobunaga's
Will this game be rated A all Ages in Japan so children can play it?69.131.127.76 (talk) 21:23, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Seriously. Cut it out.  You're going to be blocked for trolling.  -- Jayron  32  01:21, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

User:Bigsean0500
I see you applied a 24-hour block for this new user. It might be useful to glance at the history of the rather coincidentally named Fat&#38;Happy (talk) 06:51, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 03:24, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Salma Siraj
Hi there. I nominated Salma Siraj for deletion as it was redirected to a defunct news channel. Yes, Salma worked there, but has done other work as well. Therefore, if no one is going to write an article for this presenter, it should be deleted, to allow links to it to show up as red, making people aware that an article has not been written.

Did any of that make sense, or am I mumbling? LOL GMc (talk?)  00:30, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * If that is the case, your best option is to bring up the matter at WP:RFD. -- Jayron  32  00:33, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

ANI notification
I have discussed your conduct at WP:ANI. Did you really mean to offer to act as admin in a quarrel with which you are involved; did you really mean to dismiss the closing admin who imposed my ban as merely "a single editor"? Please rephrase, or withdraw. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 07:36, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

De facto bans
Noting your comment here. I asked about this a while ago and some discussion recently started and petered out at WT:BAN. Maybe we should all be concentrating and getting this distinction resolved? I'll speculate that the wording may originally have been changed due to concerns over editors getting the bit in their teeth and declaring that just because another editor hasn't been unblocked yet they are therefore zOMG BANNED! I'd love to clear up what "everyone knows they're banned" means. Franamax (talk) 19:04, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Note
Regarding this, has LC moved to Spain now? (Rhetorical question.) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:22, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I checked that. Either a) he's figgered out how to mask his IP b) he's on vacation or c) it's another troll.  Any way, I'm not sure we needed that question on the ref desks.  -- Jayron  32  03:25, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I suspect the ref desks will survive its absence. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:26, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I can think of some ref desk regulars who may not, given their need to enable the trolls... -- Jayron  32  03:27, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * If we're lucky, maybe they're on holiday and won't notice. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:38, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe a Holiday in Cambodia? -- Jayron  32  03:43, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

2012 WikiCup
Hi! As you've previously expressed interest in the competition, I'm just letting you know that the 2012 WikiCup is due to start in less than 24 hours. Signups are open, and will remain so for a few weeks after the beginning of the competition. The competition itself will follow basically the same format as last year, with a few small tweaks to point costs to reflect the opinions of the community. If you're interested in taking part, you're more than welcome, and if you know anyone who might be, please let them know too- the more the merrier! To join, simply add your name to WikiCup/2012 signups, and we will be in touch. Please feel free to direct any questions to me, or leave a note on the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! You are receiving this note as you are listed on WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Please feel free to add or remove yourself. EdwardsBot (talk) 01:21, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment at Fandi Ahmad's ongoing peer review!
Hope you have a wonderful 2012! Thanks for volunteering to peer review football-related articles. I have written an article about Singapore football legend Fandi Ahmad and am aiming for GA status. Would you like to start 2012 by commenting at its ongoing peer review and thus supporting the quest to counter systemic bias on Wikipedia? Thanks! 谢谢！Terima kasih! நன்றி! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 17:11, 31 December 2011 (UTC)