User talk:Khendon

Tumbly Edits
Thanks for your edits on The Tumble Down Dick Pub page and thanks for correcting my rookie mistakes! Shame we couldn't keep "the tumbly" nickname and the proposed demolition in the intro para. What's your thinking on these? Gtebbutt (talk) 14:19, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi - thanks for your great start to the article! I'll answer about the edits on the article talk page... Khendon (talk) 06:19, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi There
Oi, Dude! I'm not sure I'm addressing the right bloke, but if you're the one who wrote that red label is the highest selling water (I mean Scotch Whiskey, of course) I think it is black label.

Peace be on you and raise a tumbler of Bruiccliaddich (or whatever the hell the correct spelling of the Laddie is)

www.JPFO.org Hello there Khendon, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit How does one edit a page and experiment at Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. BTW, thanks for starting the David Gemmell article. Cheers! --maveric149

Thanks :-) -- Khendon

Hi there. regarding your comment on Talk:List of time periods -- "I *will* start looking at linked pages before spending ages entering lots of data" -- I think most wikipedians have made that mistake before ... it's a good idea to do a search before creating new pages too. Hope it hasn't put you off. cheers -- Tarquin 09:30 Sep 17, 2002 (UTC)

Hi Khendon!

Thanks for taking a look at the Military science page, you comments really help. Feel like taking a crack at War, I'm gonna need the help! Dobbs 15:12 Sep 25, 2002 (UTC)

hmmm...military equipement is not exactly the same as weapon...transport vehicles, barracks and other installations, for example....--AN 12:25 Sep 26, 2002 (UTC)


 * I know - but the redirect for Military technology and equipment was
 * already to Weapon, so I was trying to retain consistency. Weapon
 * has a list that includes things that aren't strictly speaking weapons,
 * anyway. - Khendon 13:49 Sep 26, 2002 (UTC)

Hi Kendon ! Good work with the tabulation of (anti-)metrication arguments. I had the same idea just yesterday but hesitated actually doing it... you beat me ! --FvdP 12:44 Oct 3, 2002 (UTC)

Khendon, please stop being mean to Easter. He is a new user, and a celebrity in his own right.

I would prefer that you discuss any further changes in the talk pages, about Prince's racial identity, rather than reverting Easter's changes. Let's come to a consensus, based on mutual understanding. --Ed Poor

I only actually reverted the change the first time. The other edits were all rephrasings which I hoped would be acceptable. It certainly wasn't my intention to be "mean", and I still don't think I was being, but I accept your point that it could be interpreted as such. - Khendon 08:24 Oct 10, 2002 (UTC)

What's up Khendon! I hope you work on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict page. It needs serious work. I believe your compassion will help correct the page's poor interpretation. Good luck :) - Peacemaker

Thanks for deleting Two16's "comment" on the village pump. If it wasn't so bizarre it would be really really funny. :-) --mav

Hi, not quite sure what you've done with Military units - have you seen the page Military unit? charlieF 16:55 Mar 24, 2003 (UTC)
 * On a related note - I see you're interested in lots of the military stuff. I've created a new page at British Army/Structure with links to most of the divisions and brigades.  I'm assuming that brigades aren't numbered sequentially because some of them are now defunct - do you know if this is true?  Also, there's a shedload of regiments that aren't listed on this page - if you can think of a `pretty' way of displaying them that doesn't turn the page into another list... :) charlieF 11:01 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)

Good stuff :-) I've moved it to Structure of the British Army since page names with slashes are deprecated AIUI - Khendon 11:21 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)


 * Hmmm, I've got to say that I disagree with the way you shifted the table from Military unit to Structure of the United States Armed Forces. For a start, the table lists Military units, whereas a page on the structure of the US armed forces should describe the various corps, regiments etc, imho (much as Structure of the British Army does).  If you think that the table is overly us-centric, could I suggest that you/I/someone edits it for British (and any other country, if wanted) and puts it back in Military units?  The reason I created the table in the first place was to provide a quick summary of the relative sizes and structure of an army! charlieF 12:22 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)

I think if we want a table for comparing relative shapes and sizes, it'll have to be simplified considerably. - Khendon

Hi there, you have been listed as "inactive" on Administrators. Please remove the notice when it is out of date. Cheers, Cyan 01:36, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)

(sniffle) How sad :-) Hopefully one day I'll be back... -- Khendon 08:15, 10 Oct 2003 (UTC)

FYI, you may be interested in the changes made to SA80 where I moved the better history to Assault rifle. -- Fuzheado 01:10, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

please see
Requests for adminship/Inactive1

(Thanks for the notice ---Khendon 11:00, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC))

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the " " template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:


 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace " " with "  ". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Bombing of Dresden in World War II
There is a straw poll taking place on Talk:Bombing of Dresden in World War II please read what has been written and vote if it interests you. Philip Baird Shearer 20:34, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Rachelle Waterman
The seem to be getting a trifle agitated at Rachelle Waterman! Giano 13:10, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Please see my comment over on Giano's talk page. &mdash; DV 13:35, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

WikiProject Jehovah's Witnesses
I invite you to sign in as a participant to the new WikiProject Jehovah's Witnesses project and add that page to your watchlist. Tom Haws 21:04, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

ReFlag
Your right, it should be removed. Most of the sites that exist about ReFlag is about 5-6 mirrors of the same site, and the last thing that was posted was in Sept. 2003. See. Zscout370 18:45, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Unprotect United Kingdom
Khendon, please unprotect the UK page. I have decided that I shall not edit on that page again.-Heimdal 15:48, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Please see the discussion at requests for protection first. --Jiang 18:50, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'll unprotect it and keep an eye on it, then --Khendon 19:07, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject
Hi!

I wonder if this guild is anything that you may benefit from, and in that case, feel invited to sign in :)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Conspiracy: The World Conspiracy Guild

Have a good day :)

--Striver 01:33, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Strap-on dildo DYK thankies
Just saying thanks for putting un-deleting it from the template... Actually, I'm surprised how few people are complaining about it, so I'd say consensus must be to keep it there. :) Thanks, Bushytails 17:38, 17 October 2005 (UTC).

NCW Update
I disagree with your addition of US military to the NCW page. The term extends beyond the US - see for example the extended international membership in the NCOIC (www.ncoic.org). Unless you have thoughts to the contrary, I'd recommend changing it back. JXM 04:24, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


 * See Talk:Network-centric warfare for reply--Khendon 07:24, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

In response to your abrasive comment...
...did you not read what I said above it?

''A. To prevent duplicate articles from being made by a "bad speller" B. To quickly access links that need fixing because a "bad speller" linked to it. C. Not everybody who uses the English wikipedia is a good speller, or even speaks fluent English.''

Suppose somebody searches for "Barbara Streisand" (the correct spelling is actually "Barbra Streisand")... should we be telling them "forget you, you don't know how to spell"?

Also, I periodically run a bot to check all pages linking to misspelling redirects and change the links to point to the correct page, thereby correcting the spelling errors, hence the category for such redirects. &mdash; F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  09:28, Feb. 14, 2006

Abrasive comment? I don't think I was particularly abrasive. But anyway. What if somebody searches for "Barbra Strisand", "Barbara Strisand", "Barbara Strisend"...? How many combinations will you include? --Khendon 17:17, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Curriculum vitae
I have started a move discussion about CV, Curriculum vitae and Résumé. You have previously participated in this topic, and I would like your input in this discussion if you are still interested. John Vandenberg (chat) 00:59, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 18:42, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 02:01, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. WJBscribe (talk) 23:45, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of change
Hello. You are receiving this message because of a [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Administrators&oldid=526254016#Restoration_of_the_tools_.28proposal.29 recent change] to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome
back to  the club :) As  deletions are probably  the area that  most  of us are most  active at, you  may  wish  to  familiarise yourself with  the WP:BLPPROD, and the new, New Page Patrol interface at  Special:NewPagesFeed,  and WP:Pending Changes. If  there is anything  else you  would like to  be brought  up  to  speed on, don't  hesitate to  give me a yell. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:00, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Khendon (talk) 09:44, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Doubts about existence of Republic of Buenos Aires
Hi Khendon I really appreciate and thank for your contgribution in the article Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute Refered to the Sovereignty dispute in article I have doubts existence of Republic of Buenos Aires. By those year Argentinian Republic where split in two goverments: Confederation of United Provinces and the Province of Buenos Aires. the governor of Buenos Aires, Jose Manuel de Rosas in 1835 was granted (or granted himself) with "sum of power public" and adquiried the right to manage international affairs. As far as I know Province of Buenos Aires did not became Republic. I know It was a difficult time and sovering power was split by internal conflicts and civil wars. I am not happy with the expression "Republic", instead I suggest a middle term an put simply "Buenos Aires" What you think? :Thanks! Javierpf (talk) 14:41, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi! Looking at it again, the section before says Later that year, Manuel Moreno, representing the United Provinces before Britain, protested the occupation, which the British rejected six months later. - I assume this is the same event so perhaps it's redundant anyway? Khendon (talk) 14:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

University of Manchester
Hi Khendon,

If possible, please would you be prepared to email me on socialmedia@manchester.ac.uk ?

Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SocialmediaUoM (talk • contribs) 11:46, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

February 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=596223878 your edit] to Fareham may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:28, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * fareham.gov.uk/planning/new_community/draftwelborneplan.aspx Fareham Council's Draft Welborne Plan . A public consultation is due in Spring 2014, which is expected to lead to adoption of the

Disambiguation link notification for February 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fareham, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages M27 and Ministry of Defence (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Reference errors on 9 July
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Fareham page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=670731653 your edit] caused a cite error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F670731653%7CFareham%5D%5D Ask for help])

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins
Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers
Hi.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins) .MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news
 * A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
 * Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
 * Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news
 * When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
 * Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
 * The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration
 * The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries
 * JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular
   

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:14, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users
Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement
22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Established policy provides for the removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. Your administrative permissions will be removed&#32;if you do not return to the required activity level before the beginning of January 2023.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to engage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for re-engaging with the project are available at WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to re-engage with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. —&thinsp;JJMC89 bot 08:31, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Established policy provides for the removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. Your administrative permissions will be removed&#32;if you do not return to the required activity level before the beginning of January 2023.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to engage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for re-engaging with the project are available at WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to re-engage with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. —&thinsp;JJMC89 bot 00:55, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Established policy provides for the removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. Your administrative permissions have been removed.

Subject to certain time limits and other restrictions, your administrative permissions may be returned upon request at WP:BN.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — xaosflux  Talk 02:19, 1 January 2023 (UTC)