User talk:Mojo Hand/Archive 2011

Independent Greens of Virginia
You have a previous edit on this article or its discussion, so FYI: Talk:Independent Greens of Virginia. Let's try to make the article better. -Colfer2 (talk) 20:03, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Constitution of Virginia
Noticed you wanted to take the Constitution of Virginia to FA. I think it might need a tad bit of work first. Whadda say we work on it together? I am willing to do the footwork and do the massive editing and such. Whatcha say? -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 04:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

User:Johnwalsh17
Thanks for catching my error in userfying this page. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:04, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome - no worries :).-- Kubigula (talk) 05:49, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Bit of advice?
"Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Some of your recent edits, such as those you made to Being Bobby Brown, have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Kubigula (talk) 03:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)"

I quote you. I'm sorry, I know you have no way of believing me, but I am not the contributor at this Brown page. Someone else has been utilizing this IP address. My IP address is in flux, maybe that is the issue. However I am sorry that such edits were made, as much as I am sorry for you that I am not the editor. As an example of "me", see my work at Claddagh ring.75.21.107.151 (talk) 08:07, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I forgot: can you give me any pointers as to how to discover why someone else has been utlizing this IP address of MINE?75.21.107.151 (talk) 08:08, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello, see this is me now:75.21.149.48 (talk) 08:11, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * IP addresses do change - we know that. It's therefore an unfortunate fact that people using an IP address will sometimes get messages that are not intended for them.  The best way around this is to register an account.  Not only do you avoid this issue, but you also have more privacy and more features.-- Kubigula (talk) 04:46, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Kubigula, you are kind, and I appreciate your help. I've been here a LOOONG time- it is best if I keep to my fluctuating IP address and nothing more. Believe me. You seem like a much better, superior worker here...how I wish my old attackers from the days of yore had been more like you. Civil and helpful. I'm sorry to ramble, I'll not take up more space again.75.21.150.44 (talk) 09:11, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Dancing with the Stars (U.S. Season 12)
Hello Kubigula. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Dancing with the Stars (U.S. Season 12), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Is a plausible, useful redirect or is not a redirect at all. Thank you. Ged UK  20:41, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't intend to argue with you; I am genuinely interested if there is a nuance here that I am missing. I don't see how this is a useful redirect - there are no incoming links to the redirect, and there is no chance anyone would use this as a search term.  So, what am I missing?-- Kubigula (talk) 23:11, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe it's me, but the capital S is something that I think plenty of people would search for. It's a moot point, someone else renommed it and another admin disagreed. *shrug* redirects are cheap. Ged  UK  07:58, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
FYI, as a courtesy, because I won't  be offering  my  opinion  on  anything  again  at  WT:UTM. Kudpung (talk) 04:45, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

He once deleted my comments to mock the fliest white guy on the Jamestown article, hope you laughed trust me it was the perect joke to the guy it was for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.238.160.69 (talk) 23:54, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors
Hi! Since you've been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and I know you to be broadly clueful, I wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.

If that sounds like you and you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors during the current term, which started in January and goes through early May. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:16, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

User talk namespace templates
Hi Kubigula, as I have mentioned at WT:UTM previously, I have been working on a draft in my userspace to try and amalgamate the various disparate WP:UTM pages. It was also suggested in discussions that this would be an opportunity to write a behavioral guideline concerning the design of user warning templates (and user talk namespace templates in general). As this work represents a large structural change to the project, I would like to invite you and other project members and trusted contributors to have some input. The work I have done so far can be seen at User:Pol430/Sandbox/User talk namespace, I would very much like to get other peoples ideas for expansion and improvement. Rather than engage in long, unwieldy discussions about what changes I should make, it would be easier if you were to make any changes you see fitting, directly into my sandbox. Please direct any related discussion to my main user talk page. You can take this message as my permission for you to edit the page User:Pol430/Sandbox/User talk namespace and any sub-pages thereof. If you are to busy or would rather not, don't worry. I won't be offended :) Pol430  talk to me 12:29, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Mail

 * Just sent it again. Let me know if your email account has any more problems and I will send it a third time. :)  Don't ya love technology? -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 04:18, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

They unblocked me
Serak unblocked me because someone unblocked Haymaker. I'm working on the Planned Parenthood article and discussing it on the talk page atm, feel free to step in wherever. WMO 20:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I think, even though you are unblocked, you should continued to work with Kubigula. -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 20:59, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * That's why I commented here. WMO 21:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Okie Dokie...just wanted to make sure. :) -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 23:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Boxer & Abortion
How can information from the Congressional record be POV? Just because the facts are cited via Will doesn't mean they're vitiated by POV. This is from Senate debate. If it's just a matter of citing it from a source other than Will, then so be it. If not, then explain further. Megarian1973, 17 February 2011 at 05:15.

Reply
Sorry it took me forever to reply, I am significantly cutting down in the time I put into wikipedia since it has become apparent that there are pov pushing admins who wield their admin powers to fight content battles. At this point, my main strategy to keep from supposedly edit warring is to edit any one article a maximum of once a day and work my ass of trying to get people to be reasonable on the talk page. Also, I'm going to try and see if I can improve some articles in other content areas as I did before getting caught up with all these pov pushers. WMO Please leave me a wb if you reply 07:53, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I still think you would be happier if you walked away from the abortion articles for a while. But, if you don't want to do that, your new approach is sensible.  Aside from that, I'd be happy to work with you if there is some Virginia related article you want to improve.  I'm in Norfolk, but I'm always interested in other areas of Virginia.-- Kubigula (talk) 05:30, 25 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm working on an article for the C-Ville Weekly which I plan to follow up with an article on the Hook, two alternative weeklies in Charlottesville. Beside that, I'm trying to work on Jersey Shore cast member, Jenni Farley's article, but I've never written articles on entertainers so that will take a while. It's quite interesting that on Jenni's article, I can do as many reverts of vandalism as necessary without any worries which would get me hung on political topics. Oh, the polarization. WMO Please leave me a wb if you reply 20:14, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
WMO Please leave me a wb if you reply 05:23, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassador Program
Please take a look at this project page and see if you can be a mentor to one of the many Areas of Study. If you can, please put your name in the "Online Mentor" area of the Area of Study of your choice and then contact the students you will be working with. As the Coordinating Online Ambassador for this project, please let me know if I can be of assistance. Take Care... Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 04:09, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Why did you remove my name from the Independents listing for Presidential Candidates? Both sections I have been removed and more than once this happened. I want to know why?

This is a violation of Federal Election Laws. Every Candidate has the Right to be seen and heard. If other Candidates are listed, you have to allow me to post my info. The same law goes for all types of advertisements. Every Candidate is given equal opportunity to represent themselves to the public. It is against Federal Election Laws to prevent a Candidate to known to the public.

From the desk of Presidential Candidate

Andrew Francis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aceperce (talk • contribs) 17:29, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Candidate for President
I do apologize for posting this twice, I am new to using Wikipedia and not sure how to remove my posting without a title. I was afraid that it would get lost since it looks to much mixed with the above article.

Why did you remove my name from the Independents listing for Presidential Candidates? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012 I have been removed from Both sections that list Candidates for Presidents for 2012 and more than once this happened. I want to know why?

This is a violation of Federal Election Laws. Every Candidate has the Right to be seen and heard. If other Candidates are listed, you have to allow me to post my info. The same law goes for all types of advertisements. Every Candidate is given equal opportunity to represent themselves to the public. It is against Federal Election Laws to prevent a Candidate to be known to the public.

Thank you

From the desk of Presidential Candidate

Andrew Francis Aceperce (talk) 17:49, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Your idea of Federal Election Laws must be skewed. If you called Newsweek, should they be forced to put you in their magazine as a potential candidate?  Announce your candidacy and emerge as a clear front runner; then you can put your name on that page.--Ryan Vesey (talk) 02:31, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Zack Bernstein
Hoax article recreated after your deletion (G1,G3). Time to SALT. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 23:16, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Jayne Mansfield editor
I thought you might like to know that 208.101.233.100 (talk) is an editor that geolocates to the same place as the following IPs (and whose contributions closely resemble theirs as well): 208.101.233.129, 208.101.233.54, 208.101.233.253, 208.101.233.184, 208.101.233.254, 208.101.233.193, 208.101.233.227, 208.101.233.179, 208.101.233.42. All these IP-editors have similar editing patterns of no edit summaries, no references and no known responses to any talkpage messages/notices/warnings/blocks. This editor (or editors) only edits certain glamourous movie-star articles including Jayne Mansfield, Marilyn Monroe, Dorothy Dandridge along with associated articles such as Trax Colton, Too Hot to Handle, Female Jungle, Tamango & The Murder Men (film). *Note: Some of the IPs above were mentioned as part of a blocked user's (Harlow1937) SPI.

I thought that you probably hadn't realized some of the background on this group of IP-editor/s. There's also been a subsequent temporary range-block. --Shearonink (talk) 04:30, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

See George Carlin's Wiki, smart guy
Plus Barracking the Obama was uttered. What do you know about it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.44.109.225 (talk) 04:42, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I believe you. However, it begs the question: so what?-- Kubigula (talk) 04:48, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Question
How do I make good edits? I am not sure — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.28.49.253 (talk • contribs)

User:Blorod
I think it's time for revdeletes and a removal of talk page access for this user.Jasper Deng (talk) 01:19, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Hey, you just blocked Blorod, can we look at maybe revdeling his contributions? Thanks - Happysailor  (Talk) 01:20, 26 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I removed his talk page access per Jasper's suggestion. I'll take a look at his contributions for possible revdels.  Thanks.-- Kubigula (talk) 01:23, 26 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Looks like hes back. (Alread blocked but there we go :) ). User:Banksanger - Happysailor  (Talk) 01:46, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note:Virtually all of both users' edits warrant revdelete, not just the few that have already been revdeleted, as they inserted the exact same thing.Jasper Deng (talk) 02:23, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on May 14, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/May 14, 2011. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tb hotch * ۩ ۞ 20:58, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

 

Virginia is a U.S. state on the Atlantic Coast of the Southern United States. The state population is over eight million. Its geography and climate are shaped by the Blue Ridge Mountains and the Chesapeake Bay, which are home to much of its flora and fauna. The area's history begins with indigenous settlements and the founding of the Virginia Colony in May 1607 by the London Company as the first permanent New World English colony. Virginia was one of the Thirteen Colonies involved in the American Revolution. During the American Civil War, Virginia joined the Confederate States of America, which named Richmond its capital, and the state of West Virginia separated. The state government is home to the oldest legislature in the Americas, and is unique in how it prohibits its Governors from serving consecutive terms. Virginia's economy has many sectors: agriculture in places like the Shenandoah Valley, federal agencies in Northern Virginia, and military facilities in Hampton Roads. The growth of the media and technology sectors have made computer chips the leading export, with the industry based on the strength of Virginia's public schools and universities. (more...)

User:BelloWello, User:Fountainviewkid, and gaming the system
FYI, these users have repeatedly edit warred with each other in the past (see block log for both), and have not got along lately. I have also warned BelloWello about gaming the system per User talk:Kuru. This is an interesting dispute resolution thing that I want an admin to look at. Thanks.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:35, 6 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I appreciate that you've been trying to help the situation. I'll try to help calm things down as well.-- Kubigula (talk) 04:50, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

WP:SDA/Larry Geraty
Thanks for your comments on my talk page. If you have a chance, do you mind looking over this article? I think its ready for mainspace but would like a few more eyes on it to confirm that before I move it. I also plan for a DYK hook out of it. BelloWello (talk) 03:25, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Regarding this, thanks for the catch! I listed him under the Massachusetts and Michigan projects because he went to school at Andrews University (Michigan) and Harvard (Massachusetts) and then taught at Andrews and was president of Atlantic Union College (Massachusetts), but perhaps I'm interpreting it too widely..? BelloWello (talk) 04:03, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't see that - you could legitimately list him for both those projects then. I personally lean towards a narrower focus, with the hope of drawing interest from the more directly involved projects.  However, that's just my preference, and you are free to add the article to more projects if you wish.-- Kubigula (talk) 04:17, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok. I may do that later. For my next project, I'm thinking about a student film. I've listed sources at User:BelloWello/1, do you think that is enough to show notability? It has a few mentions in CNN and an article by the Napa Valley Register, in addition to the school produced and label produced articles. BelloWello (talk) 04:45, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Vaoverland
Hello. I saw your recent comment on Vaoverland's page and wanted to let you know that I started a section for him on the Deceased Wikipedians page. I didn't know him very well; please feel free to add to it / expand it. Thanks, BMRR (talk) 19:42, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Aw, man. That's sucks. :(  Him and I didn't cross paths, but from what I saw he was a good editor and I even gave him one of my "Wikipedian of the Day" awards. :(  Real bummer there. :( -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 20:15, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Bald Head Island Page
Hello, You keep deleting my External Link on the Bald Head Island page as spam. You made the comment that the entire EL section on this page is spam. If so, then please delete the other links as well, as they are clearly spam. Please don't delete my link and leave the others. If you feel these links are spam, then please treat all of them as such. Thank you. Ben Celinski 67.142.175.25 (talk) 00:49, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Seen this and I agree with the removal of the link spam, but I did add the town's official website, so that should be a happy medium. I recommend the anon not add any further websites to the page. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 00:54, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It's funny, I totally agree with Mr. Celinski - that's why I removed the entire external links section from that article a few days ago. However, Homer is right that the town's official website is an appropriate link.-- Kubigula (talk) 02:43, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Mangoman44444444
Could you please re-block as indef? This user is not a "newbie" as he could be our banned editor, you can see Kiss history and see the logs, he continues to try to remove our "homosexual propaganda". Thank you. Tb hotch * ۩ ۞ 05:17, 11 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Done. I was thinking the same thing after I saw the edit he made to his talk page.-- Kubigula (talk) 05:22, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Shameful, thanks again. Tb hotch * ۩  ۞ 05:26, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
BTW, welcome to the project! You've been making some great contributions, it's appreciated! Cheers, -- Ja Ga  talk 04:56, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

 b  W  18:45, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Your phrasing
copied from my talk page This situation has some issues to it; I'm discussing with the blocking admin. Please don't edit war over the tagging - it's not helping.--Kubigula (talk) 01:08, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I added a template to show that this user has been blocked for sockpuppeting. Why did you use the words "edit war"? Mathsci (talk) 01:44, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm confused as well. First the user is blocked indefinitely for sockpuppetry, then unblocked and merely taking a "wikibreak", then re-blocked, then unblocked. Which is it? I've commented on his Talk page but no one with information responded.  Fountainviewkid 2:40, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Not exactly - you reverted my removal of that template. Edit war might be too strong a term, but it would have been better to contact me for an explanation before simply reverting me.  This is not a straight forward case of sockpuppetry, so the tagging is unnecessary and raises other issues.  I expect there's more to come.-- Kubigula (talk) 03:20, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It was not a reversion, since I added a different "confirmed sockpuppet" template (Jclemens placed a checkuser template) and did not blank the talk page. (I had previously created the Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of WikiManOne.) As for CLEANSTART, the two accounts edited 13 common articles . In particular they both separately nominated Samuel Koranteng-Pipim for deletion. There seems to be a general mess here, created mainly by the user in question, with much that is unclear: did WikiManOne stop editing because of possible sanctions (proposed by Floquenbeam) or because of a claimed outing? Mathsci (talk) 04:17, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course it was a reversion - you undid the effect of my edit, while saying that you were restoring the previous content. It irritated me and I shouldn't have said you were edit warring, but it's disingenuous to say you didn't revert me.-- Kubigula (talk) 05:06, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you care to share more? I believe that many of us editors are rather confused about the whole situation. All we know is that we had an editor who was rather disruptive, got in many edit wars, made many accusations against us, and then finally was shown to be a sockpuppet. Next thing we know, that block description disappears from his wall and something about a "wiki-break" pops up instead. I understand the situation must be complex, but it would help if the rest of us had some idea of what is actually happening. Anything you can add is very much appreciated. Fountainviewkid 3:26, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I am trying to be sensitive to a legitimate privacy concern, but I will say this was not a case of simple sockpuppetry. I expect there will be more clarification about the future of BelloWello in the days to come.-- Kubigula (talk) 03:39, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Any update on BW? His suspected meat puppet has returned from the dead. Fountainviewkid 16:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * BW is currently inactive and mulling his future at Wikipedia. I have no information about Tatababy, but please be aware that repeatedly referring to someone as a "meatpuppet" is generally considered uncivil.-- Kubigula (talk) 22:31, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Kubigula, that would be correct if it were unsupported by fact. However in this case, during a prior SPI report, Tatababy himself/herself admitted on-wiki to editing on BelloWello's behalf because of a facebook message, even mentioning BelloWello's real life name, which had to be revdelled. All of Tatababy's edits remove the same content fron the same article; and he accuses others in his edit summaries of lying. I wonder whether you could try to get some sense of proportion in all of this? You appear to be set on rescuing an account of a disruptive user and that could easily rebound on you. As a sign that something is wrong, BelloWello added negative material on an SDA college to Southern Adventist University but not to Pacific Union College, where almost the same type of content is available as a consecutive article from the same source. Looking from the outside, that appears to be problematic editing of a very unhelpful kind. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 04:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank-you Mathsci. Bello himself essentially admitted that Tata was a "meatpuppet" something it seems Tata never really denied. It is interesting because even though Tata is a new user he/she seems to be well versed in the tools of Wikipedia editing. Fountainviewkid 4:33, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Even when supported by fact, I have yet to ever see accusations of meatpuppetry do anything but inflame the situation. That's why the policy discourages use of the term.
 * No question that BW has absolutely been disruptive at times, but he has also made good contributions, and he has also been denounced as a sockpuppet without all the facts being disclosed to the blocking admin. I have tried to draw BW's focus to the positive areas of his contributions, but frankly, I have no interest in "rescuing" him - all of this is a distraction from other stuff I'd rather be doing.  However, as I am here, I will see that he is treated fairly.-- Kubigula (talk) 04:57, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The term is used by members of ArbCom when imposing topic bans related to ArbCom cases, where other users edit on behalf of topic-banned editors. In this particular case Tatababy has just been blocked for edit warring. He/she has accused almost every user with whom he/she has interacted of lying. This editing is clearly disruptive and does not help BelloWello's case. I acknowledge that BelloWello has written one reasonable BLP, but that does not make the many other problems go away. Mathsci (talk) 05:17, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I was referring to Tata rather than BW by actually using BW's statements. I don't know whether BW is a sockpuppet as that has neither been able to be confirmed or even denied. I do know, however, that BW alleged Tata to be a meatpuppet and that BW even told Tata to stop editing, advice Tata obviously ignored. Tata may not have anything else to do with BW. I do know however that BW had engaged in extremely disruptive editing on several articles as well as filed numerous accusation reports against disagreeing editors. Yes BW has done a lot of good (on certain other articles) but that doesn't excuse the other trouble he has created. Hopefully this situation will eventually lead to more productive and peaceful editing from both sides. Fountainviewkid 5:33, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Tatababy is currently blocked for edit warring and I suspect him/her of meating or socking. I agree with Fountainviewkid on this.Jasper Deng (talk) 05:58, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * And I agree with Fountainviewkid that we should aspire to more productive and peaceful editing.-- Kubigula (talk) 14:30, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I think we're getting there. It should remain that way as long as Tata & the editor under discussion are appropriately watched from making more harmful edits. Fountainviewkid 22:24, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

So far there is no indication that BelloWello has modified his editing patterns since his unblock. He is continuing with exactly the same edits on Southern Adventist University that got Tatababy blocked for 3RR this week. Tatababy continues to tag-team with him. Was there any particular reason to think things would change? Mathsci (talk) 17:27, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't know. What I do know is that the indefinite block was based on incomplete information and therefore not appropriate to the circumstances.  We don't indefinitely block all editors who are sometimes disruptive - or Fountainviewkid would be gone too.  If BW gets himself blocked again, then so be it, but it ought to be for the right reasons.-- Kubigula (talk) 17:51, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * After his unblock, BelloWello appears to be tag-teaming with his real life friend Tatababy in an edit war. Mathsci (talk) 22:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Another uninvolved user has reported this mess at ANI. I have disclosed BelloWello's previous account, since that seems relevant. Mathsci (talk) 23:16, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Since Mathsci does not want to discuss http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mathsci&diff=next&oldid=430756505 this] on his talk page, perhaps someone could suggest a better venue to discuss this as he has made the claim about PUC multiple times? I am aware of similar controversies at Walla Walla University but I have not heard of anything at PUC, and I have no interest in Walla Walla.  b  W  23:26, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I gave the links to both articles, which are easy enough to find, in a post on User talk:Hrafn here. Mathsci (talk) 04:21, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I DON'T THINK SO!
The statement on that page is simply false. Please change the template, or whatever it is, to say "This username or account is no longer active on Wikipedia."  Kenatipo   speak! 02:39, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * That would be more accurate, but there is no template like that. Retired is what is normally used and the consensus is that it's acceptable in these situations.-- Kubigula (talk) 22:28, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Kubigula, I just saw your response -- I didn't have your page watchlisted. Good luck in your thankless task of mentoring.  I don't know how you do it.    Kenatipo    speak! 05:02, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

WikiManOne
When a user continues to be disruptive, I don't think it's very helpful for administrators to behave as if user names on wikipedia are real life identities that need some kind of protection. In particular, if these users are involved in disruption, it is unhelpful to conceal that. This redaction by Beeblebrox, which I only discovered accidently because of a checkuser request by Jasper Deng, was not helpful and does not seem to be part of wikipedia policy. Were you aware of this edit? Mathsci (talk) 04:03, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I hadn't noticed that edit. I had been trying to limit connections to WMO based on the privacy concerns, but the proverbial cat is so far out of the bag that it seems rather pointless now.  I'm not sure where the policy would come down on this, but I think the best course is to draw the connection when necessary in an active discussion - as you did - but otherwise let it alone.  Enough people have the information now that there's no question it will come up if there is any further need to discuss blocks or sanctions.-- Kubigula (talk) 04:14, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with you. Anyway hopefully things will now quieten down. Cheers, Mathsci (talk) 04:23, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Tatababy
Hi. Note this revert after your warning. Tatababy's account is a single purpose disruption-only account. Virtually the only edits this editor has made so far have been reverts identical to this, together with unjustified statements in edit summaries about "lies". They apparently took no notice of your warning. Indeed this was their response. This account should probably be blocked indefinitely. Mathsci (talk) 13:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree that Tatababy's looking more and more like a disruption only account. He's on his last thread in my view, and I am keeping an open eye.-- Kubigula (talk) 22:28, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Meanwhile, why is Beeblebrox continuing to redact other users' edits (and possibly to delete their edit summaries)? It all seems a bit odd. Mathsci (talk) 22:50, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Those edits were supressed - I can't see what was removed. I assume someone requested the oversight, but I have no personal knowledge about this.  Looks like Kenatipo is trying to engage Beeblebrox about the same issue.-- Kubigula (talk) 04:26, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I was the one who requested oversight, and those edits constituted an outing of non-public info of Fountainviewkid.Jasper Deng (talk) 02:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

And Tatababy outed Fountainviewkid on his own talk page, BTW, which I had oversighted. The oversighter also fully protected Tatababy's talk page.Jasper Deng (talk) 02:19, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It's pretty easy to out Fountainviewkid when he's said on wiki that he uses Fountainviewkid on every other site he's on. Under previous discussions at ANI, I was under the impression that when a user does that and makes it that simple to identify them, outing doesn't apply...  b  W  02:24, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * However, identifying info is not the same as private posts intended only for certain registered users of a particular site.Jasper Deng (talk) 02:27, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Kubigula, since Tatababy's talk page is protected shouldn't the text of the block notice change, since he or she can't "appeal this block by adding the text "? Maybe list an alternate method, whatever that might be. Maybe I'm assuming more good faith than I should from this new editor, but as I said at the block notice, they were severely bitten and probably couldn't have chosen a worse place to make their first edit. Mojoworker (talk) 07:37, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that it wasn't a coincidence that his first edits were to the SAU article. Apparently he had read about the dispute on BelloWello's Facebook page.  That being said, I commend you on your efforts to get Tatababy on the right path.  Per your comment, I have given him the option to email me to discuss unblocking the account, though I am not very optimistic.-- Kubigula (talk) 16:05, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * There is no reason whatsoever to unblock Tatababay. His/her single purpose account has been disruption-only. Wikipedia is not here to give high school students third or fourth chances on how to conduct themselves properly. Mathsci (talk) 16:44, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No reason under the current circumstances. It is possible Tatababy could reform himself and convince us that his continued blocking does not prevent disruption to WP.  But, I'm not very optimistic.-- Kubigula (talk) 22:28, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

May 2011
 b  W  01:32, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Plestinian -> Palestine
The link should refer to Palestinian people and not to the article about the region of Palestine. Please refrain from doing this change again. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 23:22, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Penis Enlargement
Hi,

My name is Ruben (userid - Armyanchik) and I wanted to check with you why my addition to the Penis Enlargement article has been turned off. We do manage a website that contains and will contain multiple articles, forum, and how to's.

Could you please reconsider your decision? I can modify the article further with research.

Thank you for understanding.

Ruben


 * Hi Ruben. Thank you for asking.  It may be true that your website has useful information.  However, managing excessive external links and avoiding conflicts of interest are big issues in Wikipedia.  Accordingly, the rule is that editors should not add links to websites that they own or control.  I encourage you to use your knowledge to improve Wikipedia, but without adding links or references to your website.  Let me know if you have any other questions.-- Kubigula (talk) 03:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

GingerBread Lane Deletion
Making my last attempt at getting GBL a wiki page here. The delete keep vote was 6-6, but those editors that were for delete in many cases said "no actual arcticles", or "no national media", Martha Stewart Living is national level media, and further there were THREE pieces, THREE, that were print media news stories in major newspapers. Before the wiki piece was desecrated by overzealous editors, it had 5 other sources, but they were on the gingebrread-lane.org webpage, so they were discounted as not viable. Which, makes no sense because at one point they ran in a major news paper. THis wiki piece is getting deleted because some wiki editors were overzealous in wanting to off it. This is my last attempt, but the simple fact is a couple wiki editors were pissed off at me because I paid somone to create the wiki pice, and they were mad as hell over that. Simple facts are that is not presently against wiki policy. And I further contacted someone at wiki to ask. I kindly request you please reconsider. I can tell you almost kept it. I really wish you would reconsider. It draws close to half a million visitors some years, if that isnt wiki worthy, what is? Kcdcchef (talk) 04:17, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your comments and I can assure you that I considered all the arguments carefully. I discounted the arguments, both for and against, that were not based on relevant wikipedia policies or guidelines.  After that, it was a close call, but I read the strength of argument and consensus in favor of deletion.  I recognize that this is disappointing for you, but I believe I made the right analysis of the discussion.-- Kubigula (talk) 22:32, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Your deletion of 1 Information
CSD A1 was not applicable to this article (which has now been recreated by the original editor). It was quite obvious that the subject of the article was the regeneration of Salford Quays. The only speedy deletion criteria that I can think of that might apply to the article is A10.James500 (talk) 17:41, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree that this editor is apparently trying to do a new version of Salford Quays, which is why I deleted the second part - 2 overview under A10. It looks like they are creating new pages for each section of the larger article they are trying to create.  So, 1 Information was finished - and it was a very short article with very little content or context.  So, I think it's perfectly appropriate to delete that under A1 or A10.-- Kubigula (talk) 17:49, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * A10 might have been applicable to 1 Information. A1 was certainly not applicable. It only applies where it is impossible to identify the subject of the article.James500 (talk) 18:35, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I disagree. I believe it more appropriately an A1 deletion - in fact it was an almost textbook application of A1.  By itself, this page was not duplicative of any other content (so A10 doesn't really apply); the real problem with the page was that it virtually no content or context - it was intended as some sort of introductory section to a larger article.  However, by itself it was basically meaningless.-- Kubigula (talk) 21:11, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Bebe Zeva
Can you reinstate this article?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/fashion/the-blogger-bebe-zeva-is-featured-in-a-video.html?_r=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palayla (talk • contribs) 10:14, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Festival of Nations
Hi, I noticed the Festival of Nations is celebrated in more than 1 city. The previous article with the topic "Festival of Nations" was specific to Minnesota. I added another article with the title, Festival of Nations (St. Louis) that is specific to St. Louis. I wanted to rename the "Festival of Nations" article to "Festival of Nations (Minnesota)" and create the links of both Festival of Nations (Minnesota) and Festival of Nations (St. Louis ) in the "Festival of Nations" page. Can I go ahead and move Festival of Nations to Festival of Nations (Minnesota)? and update the Festival of Nations page with these two links? Wiki magnet (talk) 15:04, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Even though the Festival of Nations is celebrated in other cities such as Albany - NY, Red Lodge - Montana, Portland - Maine etc., Minnesota's does seem to be the biggest. Minnesota celebrates for 4 days whereas other cities celebrate for 2 days or less. Wiki magnet (talk) 02:28, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * In that case, it could make sense to leave it the way it is - the Minnesota festival as the primary topic with the otheruses template at the top linking to the St Louis festival (or later to a disambiguation page if more Festival of Nations articles are created). There isn't really a wrong way to do it, so I defer to your editorial judgment.  If you want to make Festival of Nations a disambiguation page, I can help you with that.-- Kubigula (talk) 02:41, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, I will keep it as it is. Wiki magnet (talk) 18:57, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Virginia Assessment of Hurricane Isabel Article
I noticed that you responded to my April 15, 2011 question regarding WikiProject Virginia assessment of the Hurricane Isabel article. If I understand your response correctly, that article should automatically be given an FA-class assessment because it was Wikipedia's "Featured Article" on the same day I added it to WikiProject Virginia. --TommyBoy (talk) 06:30, 25 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Right. We can always follow a succesful GA or FA review because those are structured evaluation processes.  You can also typically follow an assessment from another Wikiproject, although those can be a little more hit or miss.-- Kubigula (talk) 03:10, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Porn Wikileaks
Hi, I seen that you semi-protected the PWL article. Since this has a lot to do with confidential information, do you think we should contact an oversighter and see if any serious BLP vios should be WP:REVDEL'd? -- w L &lt;speak&middot;check&gt;

Thank you
for watching my back. Geoff Who, me?  01:56, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Southern Adventist University
There is a discussion about sourcing occurring and your opinion would be appreciated.--Fountainviewkid (talk) 03:48, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Southern Adventist University - IPs
Hi Kubigula! As you are well versed in the past turmoil at SAU, I was wondering if you had an opinion regarding the recent IP activity over there. – Lionel (talk) 10:07, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Fountainviewkid
Hello Kubigula. My close of the AN3 report was all drafted and ready to go when you made your new offer, which would certainly be worth considering. If FVK returns to his computer to rethink the situation, it may be worth pursuing the discussion on his talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 01:16, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the note. My thought came late, and it really was time to close the report.  So I thought your close was about perfect.-- Kubigula (talk) 02:35, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

User talk:174.6.114.132
You seem to have a strange timestamp in your block notice on User talk:174.6.114.132. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:26, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * That is strange. Thanks for letting me know - seems to be a bug with Huggle, and I have reported it there.-- Kubigula (talk) 02:56, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

SDA Template
Could you set protection on this template as we have somebody making changes with no discustion on the talk page or explanation, Thanks.Simbagraphix (talk) 09:00, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Here is the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Seventh-day_Adventism
 * At least one of those reverts, by the edit sum, is quacking. Hi Simba!!!!! How's tricks? – Lionel (talk) 10:49, 3 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree that the edit to the template looks familiar. Looks like things died down right away, so not enough for a block or protect at the moment. I will keep an eye on it - feel free to poke me if you see anything else suspicious in the SDA arena.-- Kubigula (talk) 05:40, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Check it again Kubigula if you could,Thx. I dont know if its a sock puppet, but it needs to be locked down for a bit. Hey Lionel, it never gets old with these sock puppets popping up all over the SDA spectrum...Simbagraphix (talk) 11:54, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Simba, I have followed through on your concern for the SDA template. Also, the protection is what is needed for a while, IMO. I think a careful and well-rounded discussion would help. There should be no rush to make changes; a template serves many WP readers and editors. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 06:01, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Don for your assistance, I see the careful balanced way you proceed on the articles, and a good hand on the tiller always helps.Simbagraphix (talk) 17:11, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Sock Puppet for BelloWello
Kubigula, just FYI, I would keep a eye on Wercvbnmghkjb (talk | contribs)‎, seems as if BelloWello just cant keep from creating sock puppets.Simbagraphix (talk) 17:14, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * That editing pattern does look familiar. There's almost enough to go straight to WP:SPI, or I will keep an eye on it.-- Kubigula (talk) 02:33, 15 October 2011 (UTC)


 * certainly seems to be Bello Wello who also appears to be editing using IPs at Pacific Union College and in the Bay Area, Another likely sockpuppet account is, who forged another user's signature on DGG's talk page. That person  had nominated one of the SDA BLPs created by Eraoihp for deletion. Mathsci (talk) 09:35, 12 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I suspect you are probably right as to both, but I'm not certain there's quite enough for a DUCK block. Why not open an SPI?-- Kubigula (talk) 05:25, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Tommy Norment
Regarding your question on the "point" of the conflict of interest portion of Tommy Norment's page.

This is an important piece of objective information about Mr. Norment. The request, opinion, and news release were all done by Republicans. All is factual, neutral, and I am wondering why it was taken down. In southeastern Virginia this is not new information. It just needs to be documented in a factual objective manner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.176.0.89 (talk) 14:41, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I actually had no problem with the content you added about Ken Cuccinelli and the AG opinion - that content was removed by a Bot on technical grounds. That particular Bot prevents new users from adding certain types of links because those links are typically not constructively used.  In your case, I would say it was a false positive.


 * The content I did object to was the stuff about the budget amendments Mr. Norment submitted on behalf of the College. The information may be factual, but the way it was presented suggested that there was some kind of improper quid pro quo between Norment and the College.  Making that kind of inference is not permissable - we could only repeat it if a reliable source made the inference.  We have very strict policies when it comes to articles dealing with living people, even politicians, and the upshot is that any negative information or inferences need to be impeccably sourced.-- Kubigula (talk) 04:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

WP:UWTEST members update
Hi, you're getting this message because you signed up to receive updates at WP:UWTEST, the task force on testing of user warnings and other notifications.

Here's what we're up to lately:


 * Huggle: There are tests still running in Huggle of level 1 templates, including a new template written by DGG. A full list is available here
 * SDPatrolBot: There is a new test running on the talk page messages of SDPatrolBot, which warns people who remove CSD templates. (Documentation of the test is here.)
 * Twinkle: We've proposed a test of AFD and PROD notifications delivered via Twinkle, which has been positively received. (See: 1, 2) This test should start this week.
 * Shared and dynamic IPs: Maryana's proposal to test the effect of regularly archiving shared/dynamic IP talk pages is in its final stages. There are also two relevant bot flag requests: 1, 2
 * XLinkBot: the herders of XLinkBot have approved a test of its warning messages concerning external links. Test templates are being written and help is most welcome.

Thanks for your help and support, Steven Walling (WMF) &bull; talk   02:38, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

 * Yum! Thank you.-- Kubigula (talk) 05:08, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

WP:UWTEST update
Hi Kubigula,

Just giving you a heads-up about the latest update on our template testing. Please peruse when you have a minute. Thanks! Maryana (WMF) (talk) 05:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!
I appreciate your cleaning up of my talk page and history from the vandal. 72Dino (talk) 05:39, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

A Suggestion
Heyas, might I suggest an article that I created (shameless promotion) that might help with any "please stop deleting my page" and "why did you delete my page" posts you might have received. It's User:Neutralhomer/WWMAD. What I do is just post it as ~ and it creates the section header and signs it itself, just a copy/paste job. It might help so you won't have to constantly answer those posts. Just slap the template on their talk page. Feel free to tinker with the page at User:Neutralhomer/WWMAD, if you like. -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 01:50, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Old Dominion University Article Assessment
I noticed that you previously commented on the WikiProject Virginia assessment of the Old Dominion University article back in January, 2008, and wanted to let you know that I have recently proposed that the article might need re-assessment. --TommyBoy (talk) 05:28, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your assistance. Normally I would have upgraded the article assessment myself, but in this case wanted a second opinion due to the contentious nature of the debate regarding the article's quality at Talk:Old Dominion University. --TommyBoy (talk) 20:07, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Anytime - I'm glad to help.-- Kubigula (talk) 19:16, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

WP:UWTEST update
Hi Kubigula,

We're currently busy designing some new tests, and we need your feedback/input!


 * 1) ImageTaggingBot - a bot that warns users who upload images but don't provide adequate source or license information (drafts here)
 * 2) CorenSearchBot - a bot that warns users who copy-paste text from external websites or other Wikipedia articles (drafts here)

We also have a proposal to test new "accepted," "declined," and "on-hold" templates at Articles for Creation (drafts here). The discussion isn't closed yet, so please weigh in if you're interested.

Thanks for your help! Maryana (WMF) (talk) 01:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Issue of "iPod touch second generation"
Because iPhone's generations have their own pages, then why not iPod touch's generations having their own pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jawadreventon (talk • contribs) 00:38, 26 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure why you are asking me this question. As far as I can tell, I had nothing to do with the speedy deletion of the article on the second generation iPod.-- Kubigula (talk) 04:22, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

deletion query
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Karen_Pang

Hi. I'm just wondering why this page was deleted. The reason given in your post was A7, but the person in question is an Australian actress, who is a current presenter on the Australian version of Play School - is it possible to retrieve the page, or would it have to be started from scratch? I'm not well versed in the rules of Wikipedia, so I apologise if this isn't an appropriate question. Thanks.Bikeshopgirl (talk) 23:20, 29 December 2011 (UTC)bikeshopgirl


 * It's a perfectly approriate question - thank you for asking.


 * The entire content of the article when I deleted it was, "Karen Pang is one of the current play school presenters". So, your question actually had more content about the person that what was in the article.  However, I found an older version of the article, deleted in 2007, that was much better.  I think what I will do is restore the older version of the article, which appears to have been deleted in error.  I hope you will work on the article and make it better.-- Kubigula (talk) 04:16, 30 December 2011 (UTC)