User talk:Monty845/Archive 4

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Op Privilege Policy
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Op Privilege Policy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 11:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:22, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Captions
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Captions. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 17:15, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:30, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:31, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2013
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2013. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 11:22, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:17, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:17, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 July 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 00:41, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:51, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 July 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 10:07, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!!
'''For all you do Monty. We need more Wikipedians like you :)'''



Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

ANI Notice
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — T13  ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended )

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:47, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 July 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 22:33, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Vietnamese)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Vietnamese). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 00:15, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Protection policy
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Protection policy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 00:16, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:15, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 04:48, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Block of User:Psgm
How come you only blocked them for a day? Every single edit they've made has been vandalism and/or disruptive. Every single one. They should be indeffed, with talk page access removed (since they rant about things there as well) as a vandalism-only account - because that's what they are. Luke no 94 (tell Luke off here) 15:03, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, User:Psgm doesn't seem like a vandal, but instead, at least to me, looks like someone who has strongly held beliefs. Their edits are disruptive, and they have been edit warring, but I do not believe they are editing in bad faith, which I think is a perquisite to indef them at this point. In all likelihood, they will resume their disruption after the edit warring block, and will likely escalate to a long or indef block, but I think we need to go through the motions on this account. If you would like to start a discussion on one of the notice boards about going for a longer block now, feel free, but I'm not inclined to extend it. Monty  845  15:15, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, as their edits are clearly targeting the group they don't like, and are trying to belittle them regularly, I'd say that's textbook bad faith. I'm not going to file an ANI case now; I just hope that when they do resume their disruption, that they get indeffed then. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 15:32, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:16, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

List of incidents/List of violent incidents
Hi Monty,

there was a mistake. "List of incidents .." and "List of violents incidents.." were the wrong names. "List of violent incidents .." is the correct name. Thanks anyway. --Best regards, Keysanger (what?) 07:20, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Overdue closures of FFD debates
Thanks so much for closing some of the old FFD debates at Files for deletion/2013 May 23. Well done. Only two left, and we'll be caught up through mid-June! (The Redshirt and PatternForce ones are legitimately tough ones to call, and I'm kind of glad I can't do it myself, having voted there already.) All the best, – Quadell (talk) 13:51, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

AIV: Thoriq Azka Rahmat
Hi. Just FYI, regarding this case at AIV: The username given was the sockmaster. I should have highlighted the fact that one of the puppets – User:Thoriq Dhiyaan Azka Rahmat – was the account that was currently active (though I did mention the time of the last edit was 7 hours prior). In any case, the SPI case was processed, the socks indefd, and the master blocked for 2 weeks, so problem solved (for now). —&#91; Alan  M  1 (talk) &#93;— 16:41, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2012 Delhi gang rape case
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2012 Delhi gang rape case. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 02:16, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Munier Raychouni
Could you please re-delete this article. Less than twenty-four hours after your deleting it, the article was recreated by a user who I suspect of being a sockpuppet. The article is not substantively different from the version you deleted, and is still unsourced. Thanks in advance. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:55, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Deleted it G5, interestingly, there doesn't seem to be a CSD criteria for a recreated BLPPROD with the same problem, I'm not sure what the result would have been if it wasn't a very likely a sock. Monty  845  13:43, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:50, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 02:14, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Closing discussions
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Closing discussions. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 03:15, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Civility
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Civility. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 04:16, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

A discussion you closed has been reopened
Groan. Beeblebrox (talk) 06:09, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 05:15, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 12:23, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 05:15, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:No legal threats
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:No legal threats. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 05:16, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:05, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Music
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Music. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 06:15, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 09:23, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Consensus
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Consensus. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 06:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Recent protection
I noticed you recently protected the Cash Money Records page for a few days and I do appreciate it. However, the fact that it has been protected nine times since 2010, and earlier this year for a month, just a short while ago. I believe the article warrants a longer protection than just a few days. But, that is just my humble opinion.  STATic  message me!  03:46, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Your probably right about a longer term protection, I was really only looking at the one editor. Do you think long term PC after the semi-protection expires would be sufficient? Monty  845  04:02, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That would seem to be okay since the vandalism has not been too crazy recently, but I just would not want it to get to the point where every IP edit is getting rejected, and it becomes tedious to reject them all.  STATic  message me!  00:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Category talk:Wikipedians
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Category talk:Wikipedians. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 07:16, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 16:47, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:13, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 September 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 01:00, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

2014 FIFA World Cup qualification – CAF Second Round
No, you are absolutely wrong I were not involved in any edit war!!--Muj745 (talk) 17:48, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * 1 revert 2 reverts 3 reverts of the same content in under 20 minutes. I didn't even count your initial revert, which as there was an ongoing edit war involving other editors, rightfully would count as well. How is that not an edit war? I'm issuing warnings to put a stop to it. Just don't edit to add live scores there again till the dispute is resolved on the talk page, and you will be fine. Monty  845  17:53, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank You!
Hello, Thank You for the heads up about three revertings. I didn't know about that rule. Skyblueshaun (talk) 17:48, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Your warning
I have been warned by you that I will be blocked if I dont stop edit warring. I have been live updating this page 2014 FIFA World Cup qualification – CAF Second Round, and even though I have repeatedly asked those that doesnt agree it should be lived updated to post their arguments here, nothing have happened before I get this warning: User talk:Jack Bornholm#September 2013]] Is this fair? As I have stated before I started live updating: "Also see Template:Match in progress. Since consensus have not yet changed this template have not been erased" My comments are to be found on the talkpage Talk:2014 FIFA World Cup qualification – CAF Second Round. I and others have been updating live scores for years to FIFA and UEFA tournaments. Why should Africa be different? We should have the same rights as anyone else. Jack Bornholm (talk) 17:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * With very few exceptions, edit warring is not an acceptable solution, even if your right on policy. In this case, there isn't even a clear policy outcome. Your right that the template is still there, but there are also strong WP:NOTNEWS arguments on the other side. I don't personally have an opinion on the underlying matter, other then that the edit warring needs to stop. Monty  845  18:01, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit War
If you have proof of me edit warring then go ahead, however as you know full well i have not edit warred so its inappropriate for you to post such a message on my talk page. One edit is not an edit war and is not in use of three revert rule. Inserting live scores is not allowed on this site. Blethering  Scot  17:59, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm just trying to stop the edit war from continuing. Certainly you wouldn't get blocked for that one edit, however, as I just got the previous person who had been extensively edit warring to remove live scores from the article to stop, I was trying to stop it from resuming with you in their place. It may seem like mincing words, but while you may not have been edit warring, you did become involved in the edit war by continuing the course of it. Monty  <sub style="color:#A3BFBF;">845  18:04, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Whatever. Blethering  Scot  18:15, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Evidence phase open - Manning naming dispute
Dear Monty845.

This is just a quick courtesy notice. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 19, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Seddon talk 23:31, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Delete Request Userpage: Nico Situma
I can confirm receipt of your message via private email and wish to confirm that I DID request deletion of my userpage. Regards, NS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.155.58.197 (talk) 18:40, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
 * If you did get the email, then you can do a password recovery on the account, and add a db-u1 tag to the userpage using the recovered account. That would save some time. Monty  <sub style="color:#A3BFBF;">845  18:44, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Recent move
Want to thank you very much for your help to move Trema (dab...) over the Trema redirect. Joys! –  Paine Ellsworth   <b style="font-size:x-small; color:blue;">C LIMAX !</b> 05:40, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Orthodox Christianity in Taiwan dispute
Thank you, Monty. I have left a note on the article's talk page. Perhaps whoever is considering locking the site would be interested. I have more material (including Greek sources), but will hold off on adding them. Dawud (talk) 05:59, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 September 2013
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 08:34, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Hadene065
This user continues to make unconstructive edits and deletions to BLP and the worst part is that they have a lot of edits to check. Maybe it's time for another time-out? Liz <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 19:17, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Scott Alexander (politician)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Scott Alexander (politician). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 01:25, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

UTRS Account Request
I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. Monty <sub style="color:#A3BFBF;">845

The Alexis Reich move discussion closure
In your explanation of the move closure you stated, "Both sides of the argument have policy based justifications for their positions." I am wondering if that assessment is based on the fact that both sides have claimed policy based justifications and you just assumed that those claims are valid or if you actually checked out those policy based claims. Since you closed the discussion 15 minutes after becoming aware of it, it seems to me unlikely that you did check. But if some editors are misrepresenting what policies actually say then to give the mere mention of a policy weight is not to make a proper assessment of the arguments.

BLP was often mentioned and you said "the BLP arguments are not in favor of moving", but no one in the discussion could quote a single sentence from BLP that supported their position despite repeated requests that they do so. It is easy to say "policy X, Y, and Z all support my view", but when evaluating the arguments someone has to actually check to see if this is correct or else any discussion can be derailed by people randomly dropping an alphabet soup of policy names, regardless of whether or not they speak to the matter. 99.192.89.57 (talk) 16:55, 18 September 2013 (UTC) (=99.192....)
 * I'd actually been following it since yesterday morning. I didn't close it then as it was new enough that I felt it needed more time to see if it was headed towards a consensus. Be assured, I spent more then 15 minutes looking at it. WP:BLP is a broad policy, and there is plenty in there that could be used to support the don't move side. Editors made specific references to the dignity argument, which is specifically mentioned in the BLP policy. There are varied interpretations on how BLP is supposed to apply in this sort of situation, the arguments made in the RM are definitely one of them. In this context, it is not for me to say whether they are interpreting BLP policy correctly or not, that their arguments are rooted in an interpretation of policy with significant support is enough to not discount them when evaluating the move consensus. Monty  <sub style="color:#A3BFBF;">845  17:10, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. I apologize for my assumption that you only spent 15 minutes on the decision. I based that on noticing how long it was between the formal request being posted on the admin noticeborad and the closure. 99.192.89.57 (talk) 17:31, 18 September 2013 (UTC) (=99.192....)
 * No problem, I totally understand how you could have come to that interpretation. Monty  <sub style="color:#A3BFBF;">845  17:37, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:27, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Edit warring
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Edit warring. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Edit warring
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Edit warring. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Redundant warning?
I'm assuming you overlooked this notification which came before the report was filed, but this was rather unnecessary given that a warning had just been placed on my talk page, which was removed and therefore acknowledged. The edit-warring notification, the edit-warrior noticeboard notification, and then another edit-warring notification is a bit of overkill, especially in the span of only a few minutes. - Aoidh (talk) 04:40, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I wanted to make sure that you got a full, unambiguous edit warring warning. Though your right, getting reported to the noticeboard does let you know someone thought you were edit warring. If you think my extra warning was overkill, I apologize. My chief concern is only that the edit warring stop. Monty  <sub style="color:#A3BFBF;">845  04:46, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't intend to edit war further regarding the tag (I didn't realize it had happened that much until it was pointed out), but it appears that the report was made as an attempt to game the system, as the filer then immediately proceeded to continue to edit war to place the reorder the AfD. Now notifying me of edit-warring clearly demonstrates that they themselves are aware of it, so I can't see any other reason to file an edit warring report and then immediately continue to edit war other than to try to game the system to get their way. - Aoidh (talk) 04:57, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Now the editor is attempting to use that as some kind of badge of shame at the AfD. I've removed it because it's entirely inappropriate and has no purpose at AfD and is disruptive more than anything. - Aoidh (talk) 05:01, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree that had no place in the AfD. I will try to keep an eye on it, though I wont be on much longer tonight. Monty  <sub style="color:#A3BFBF;">845  05:03, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Please help. Reverts continue.
Monty, User:Aoidh has reversed my edits (now on the Chakra talk-page) again. Please assist. Relevant links: [], ,

In dealing with User:Aoidh I may not have been a Saint but I have—as the records will show—made repeated attempts to engage other editors throughout. I invited other editors to offer feed back on the Chakra talk-page both directly on the page and on the pages of the relevant WikiProjects (i.e. WikiProject Linux. WikiProject Free Software, WikiProject Software, WikiProject Computing). While User:Aoidh was composing a submission to WP:AfD, I was adding WP:RfC tags to the talk-page in an attempt to draw in broader community feedback.. Yes I eventually started getting snarky. Yes I've made some quick reverts of reverts. Yes I'm human. But I've tried. I've tried to encourage a collective process in the face of repeated unilateral actions by a single editor.

At this point if you want to just lump it all together and ban both of us (kevjonesin and Aoidh) for a bit, I'll accept that. I can't say that I'd consider it completely fair, but at least it would be pragmatic and allow the current Chakra discussions to proceed unmolested for awhile.

Sincerely,

--Kevjonesin (talk) 07:37, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * This comment seems to sum up why Kevjonesin is continuing to insert this anywhere he can; not because it's relevant to the article, but rather so that "anyone else who finds themselves feeling bullied by you, User:Aoidh, should have documentation of the edit warring complaint readily available so as to avoid future ambibuity as to whether you are aware of WP:3RR." Articles talk pages do not exist so that editors can "document" the behavior of others under the guise of, ironically, "feeling bullied".  As I told Kevjonesin multiple times, there are appropriate venues for such concerns (WP:ANI and WP:RFC/U for example), but an article's talk page is not one of them.  Continuing to reinsert this irrelevant "notice" on an article's talk page is bordering on harassment, and should not be tolerated. - Aoidh (talk) 11:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 September 2013
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 10:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Edit warring
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Edit warring. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Redundant warning?
I'm assuming you overlooked this notification which came before the report was filed, but this was rather unnecessary given that a warning had just been placed on my talk page, which was removed and therefore acknowledged. The edit-warring notification, the edit-warrior noticeboard notification, and then another edit-warring notification is a bit of overkill, especially in the span of only a few minutes. - Aoidh (talk) 04:40, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I wanted to make sure that you got a full, unambiguous edit warring warning. Though your right, getting reported to the noticeboard does let you know someone thought you were edit warring. If you think my extra warning was overkill, I apologize. My chief concern is only that the edit warring stop. Monty  <sub style="color:#A3BFBF;">845  04:46, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't intend to edit war further regarding the tag (I didn't realize it had happened that much until it was pointed out), but it appears that the report was made as an attempt to game the system, as the filer then immediately proceeded to continue to edit war to place the reorder the AfD. Now notifying me of edit-warring clearly demonstrates that they themselves are aware of it, so I can't see any other reason to file an edit warring report and then immediately continue to edit war other than to try to game the system to get their way. - Aoidh (talk) 04:57, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Now the editor is attempting to use that as some kind of badge of shame at the AfD. I've removed it because it's entirely inappropriate and has no purpose at AfD and is disruptive more than anything. - Aoidh (talk) 05:01, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree that had no place in the AfD. I will try to keep an eye on it, though I wont be on much longer tonight. Monty  <sub style="color:#A3BFBF;">845  05:03, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Please help. Reverts continue.
Monty, User:Aoidh has reversed my edits (now on the Chakra talk-page) again. Please assist. Relevant links: [], ,

In dealing with User:Aoidh I may not have been a Saint but I have—as the records will show—made repeated attempts to engage other editors throughout. I invited other editors to offer feed back on the Chakra talk-page both directly on the page and on the pages of the relevant WikiProjects (i.e. WikiProject Linux. WikiProject Free Software, WikiProject Software, WikiProject Computing). While User:Aoidh was composing a submission to WP:AfD, I was adding WP:RfC tags to the talk-page in an attempt to draw in broader community feedback.. Yes I eventually started getting snarky. Yes I've made some quick reverts of reverts. Yes I'm human. But I've tried. I've tried to encourage a collective process in the face of repeated unilateral actions by a single editor.

At this point if you want to just lump it all together and ban both of us (kevjonesin and Aoidh) for a bit, I'll accept that. I can't say that I'd consider it completely fair, but at least it would be pragmatic and allow the current Chakra discussions to proceed unmolested for awhile.

Sincerely,

--Kevjonesin (talk) 07:37, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * This comment seems to sum up why Kevjonesin is continuing to insert this anywhere he can; not because it's relevant to the article, but rather so that "anyone else who finds themselves feeling bullied by you, User:Aoidh, should have documentation of the edit warring complaint readily available so as to avoid future ambibuity as to whether you are aware of WP:3RR." Articles talk pages do not exist so that editors can "document" the behavior of others under the guise of, ironically, "feeling bullied".  As I told Kevjonesin multiple times, there are appropriate venues for such concerns (WP:ANI and WP:RFC/U for example), but an article's talk page is not one of them.  Continuing to reinsert this irrelevant "notice" on an article's talk page is bordering on harassment, and should not be tolerated. - Aoidh (talk) 11:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 September 2013
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 10:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)