User talk:Richwales/Archives/2013-08

Please comment on Talk:Ashkenazi Jews
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ashkenazi Jews. 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) 21:15, 1 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) 11:45, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

"American diamond" redlink in "See also" section of Cubic zirconia
[first comment originally posted at User talk:Diptanshu.D] Hi. You recently [ added a link] in the "See also" section of the article on Cubic zirconia, to the (currently nonexistent) article "American diamond". Are you about to create an "American diamond" article? If not, this link probably should not be included in the "Cubic zirconia" article — per WP:REDNOT, "Red links are generally not included in ... See also sections". If you believe there is a valid, pressing reason why this red link should be kept, I would be grateful if you could let me know what the reason is. Thanks. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 18:27, 6 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your inputs on the matter. I had already planned to create an article on American diamond but on searching the internet, I could not gather enough matter from authentic sources. I would be glad if somebody creates it or helps me with the expansion of contents on the same.  D ip ta ns hu Talk 07:25, 10 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I have created a redirect page for American diamond till a proper article can be framed for it. It is a fairly popular term but not much information is available on the matter.  D ip ta ns hu Talk 07:51, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello Rich
Hello Rich,

I see no progress in the Georgian alphabet article. Same nationalistic pushing is taking place and users are edit warring between each other. This article really needs to be cleaned as there is a mess in its history part. The text is changing everyday and this should be put to end somehow. Somehow the history content should be cleaned out from that mess and the article needs to be blocked from editing. Not just-semi block but full-block of article I suggest. Any ideas? georgian JORJADZE 18:54, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * There have been two comments so far in response to my RfC on this subject — both of which seem to point in the same direction — but the dispute has clearly not been resolved, no one appears to have changed their mind (or to have expressed any willingness to compromise), and people are continuing to edit-war over the phrasing of the article.


 * I'll take another look and see if some additional steps can be taken. In the meantime, I must urge you to be patient; the worst thing you, personally, could possibly do would be to give up on the discussion / consensus process and resume edit-warring — that would accomplish nothing except probably to get you blocked from the site again.  (I trust you weren't thinking of doing that, but I felt I needed to caution you about it, just in case.)


 * Full protection of a page can be done in extreme cases, where it is necessary in order to stop an edit war. I won't guarantee to you that I will do this, but I will take it into consideration.  Be aware that if an admin decides to impose full protection on an article, the current version at the time is normally what will be protected (unless it reflects serious policy violations, such as vandalism, copyright violations, or defamation of living persons).  Whenever full protection happens, there is almost always a lot of argument over whether the admin expressed favoritism by protecting "The Wrong Version" of the article, so many admins are reluctant to do this even when it is clearly needed.  I did a full protection once, and I got flamed for allegedly choosing the Wrong Version to protect, but I survived the experience and am willing to go through it again if truly necessary.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 19:23, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The thing is the text is changing everyday. I am not even editing yet not even thinking of edit warring for sure. But the thing is that the article is getting more and more confusing everyday. One day the history section is different and on the second day it's totally upside down. The talk page of the article is silent but the edit war and propagandized pushing in the article is still going on. Somehow the consensus should be met and then the full protection would be highly needed. georgian JORJADZE 19:41, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Obitauri
Hi, Richwales. I am not an expert on the rules of the English Wikipedia, I work mainly in Russian. What to do with a colleague Obitauri? All the time he ignores the rule of consensus. Divot (talk) 16:58, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi. I was, in fact, just in the middle of writing something to you when you wrote to me first.  I agree there is a problem at Georgian alphabet; I may not have time to do anything for the next few hours, but the world will not come to an end in that space of time.  I do want to make sure you are aware of the Edit Warring policy — in particular, please keep in mind that you could get blocked for edit warring even if you are sure you are in the right and the other person you have been repeatedly reverting is in the wrong.  I would recommend at this point that you should not revert Obitauri any more for the time being.  When I get some time later today (6-8 hours from now), I will look into filing an appropriate incident report in order to have an uninvolved admin take a look at the problem.  Although I am an administrator, I believe I have become too deeply involved in this particular situation to use my administrative privileges to deal with it myself.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 17:13, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Divot (talk) 17:30, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Once more. Divot (talk) 17:54, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. What about uninvolved admin? Divot (talk) 15:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

P.S. Britannica says " the Old Georgian script must have been derived from the Greek alphabet, on account of the order of the alphabet and the shapes of some of the characters, although the shapes of the majority of the signs appear to be a result of a free creation of its inventor". Does this mean that the Georgian alphabet was created not by Mashtots? Divot (talk) 15:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

What should I do with this? He doesn't understand what the the consensus and reliable sources, using the edit warring. In addition, he falsify sources links. Divot (talk) 09:42, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

It's impossible. What do I do with it? He breaks all the rules as possible. Divot (talk) 12:03, 19 August 2013 (UTC)


 * It appears that an uninvolved admin decided to block Obitauri for two weeks (see his talk page). At this point, I think I would recommend to you that you should wait a day or two and see what some of the other people who have been commenting at Talk:Georgian alphabet may want to try doing to the article.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 14:27, 19 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) 11:49, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kaliningrad
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kaliningrad. 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) 21:15, 31 August 2013 (UTC)