User talk:Richwales/Archives/2013-10

Declined CheckUser request
Hi there. You declined my CheckUser request at Sockpuppet investigations/RidjalA. I am not very familiar with Sockpuppet investigations, but is it possible to do a CheckUser just for the other 3 accounts, AbuRuud, Cgarzanew, and BaSoroka? I feel there is a very strong connection between these accounts. Ajax F¡ore talk 23:24, 28 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but no, it's not possible, regardless of the reasons (or, for that matter, regardless of who might ask or insist on it). The reason I said a CheckUser check was impossible in this case is that there's nothing available to compare any of the new accounts to.  The technical database which the CheckUser team have access to stores information for only 90 days before it is discarded.   hasn't edited since February 2013, and his only presumed sockpuppet so far  hasn't edited since January 2013 — so all their editing activity is now "stale" (more than 90 days old), making it impossible to do a CU against them.  As for the IP addresses, CU's are prohibited by policy from publicizing results that would link an account to an IP address (since doing so could violate the policy against "outing", a prohibition which we are generally required to respect even if it interferes with sockpuppetry or conflict-of-interest investigations).  Since a CU action simply cannot be done in this case, we had no choice but to decline your CU request, regardless of how useful the results might theoretically have been.  This SPI case will need to be dealt with on the basis of (hopefully strong) similarities in (mis)behaviour between these new accounts and the old ones (what is commonly known as the "duck test").  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 01:15, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think I explained myself very well. I meant to say that, disregarding RidjalA and the IP addresses, could a CheckUser be performed just on the three accounts listed above? Ajax F¡ore talk 02:02, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I believe the answer is still no — but just to be sure, I'm seeking other opinions from the checkusers off-wiki, and I'll get back to you with what will hopefully be a definitive answer. —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 04:20, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay. Thanks. Ajax F¡ore talk 22:56, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * After discussion, it appears that some other CU's would in fact be open to doing checks involving just the new batch of suspected sockpuppets, even without any possibility of technical comparisons to the suspected sockmaster. So I've withdrawn my rejection of your request for CU attention.  At this point, it will be up to other SPI clerks, and/or the CU team; to decide what to do next.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 21:47, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help. A CheckUser has completed a check. Ajax F¡ore talk 02:33, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

ACERFC
Just a heads up, I started the WP:ACERFC, wanted let you know in case you wanted to formally propose your change from the talk page. Monty 845  00:37, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 00:47, 1 October 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) 11:39, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:House of Mukhrani to Category:Bagrationi dynasty of Kartli
Rich, can you please move this for me? GJ. Jorjadze (ჯჯჯ) 23:05, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't. David X of Kartli's descendants are not Mukhranians. House of Mukhrani is a much more legitimate term than Bagrationi dynasty of Kartli.--The Emperor&#39;s New Spy (talk) 02:23, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * There are procedures that are supposed to be followed when renaming categories — please read the "categories for discussion" instructions (WP:CFD). Depending on the nature of the naming issue, the category should either be tagged for "speedy renaming" (if it falls under one of the narrowly defined criteria), or else a discussion needs to be started to see if a consensus can be reached for the renaming.  The instructions for doing this are in the "How to use CFD" section, about 1/3 of the way down the page.  If you are confused by these instructions and need help, I may be able to help you frame the proposal to rename the category in the proper way; in this case, write me back and explain why you believe a renaming of the category would be appropriate.  However, it would not be proper for me to unilaterally rename the category; if that is to be done at all, it should be done only in accordance with the established CFD procedures.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 02:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Logging of discretionary sanctions
Thanks I did not know that. -- PBS (talk) 09:39, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Proposing to rename the page Nontrinitarianism to Non-Trinitarianism
Since you are a contributor to the Nontrinitarianism page, please share your thoughts regarding renaming the page in order to try to reach consensus. You can find the discussion here: Talk:Nontrinitarianism

Many thanks in advance... Dontreader (talk) 02:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:John Calvin
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:John Calvin. 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) 00:05, 17 October 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) 12:03, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Precious again
  law and massacre

Thank you for quality articles, such as United States v. Wong Kim Ark and Katyn massacre, for gnomish work and your belief in civility, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:56, 19 October 2012 (UTC) A year ago, you were the 278th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:29, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Enlighten me about edit history page
Mr Wales-  on the Jung myung seok edit page  I posted a series of edits on July 28, 2013. In August Harizotoh9 made an edit and then undid it 1 minute later. After that edit was made and "undone" I noticed two things. Firstly the content of my explaNATIONS for my edits was changed in four cases to " Jung's teaching"  and the color of the font was changed to light grey. This was NOT my doing and I do not know how someone altered what I posted without an apparent record of it on the edit page. Secondly and related, the content of the main body of the last posted version by me on July 28,2013 has also been altered without any apparent trace that the version was edited. I am appalled that someone changed the content of my edit in a surreptitous way and credited an altered version to my doing. THis is sock-puppetry by proxy. Do administrators have special priveleges of reverting edits (be they on the edit page or aRTICLE PAGE) without a trace of the changes they make? If not, something very disturbing has happened here at Wikipedia! How can I know the difference between contributors and administrators by looking at their usernames? Please enlighten me and move response to talk page of aforementioned article.MrTownCar (talk) 15:51, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I have replied to your questions / concerns [ here], on the article's talk page. —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 22:05, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Please help with formatting
Mr Wales I responded to your comments in the Jung Myung Seok talk page but the formatting was thrown off and I can t seem to fix it. Can you help fix the formatting error? I tried to repsond under the section Recourse at Wikipedia but the response was pushed to the very bottom of the page and is difficult to read. thanks MrTownCar (talk) 15:23, 26 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I fixed the formatting of your comments in the "Please remember to log in when editing this article" section. The key point which you missed is that the correct way to indent a paragraph is to precede it with one or more colons .  If you indent material with an initial space, this causes the text to be shown in a fixed-width font (like text produced by a typewriter), in a box, and as one long line without line breaks) — totally unreadable for normal text, as you have already seen.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 17:25, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:19, 27 October 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) 11:40, 31 October 2013 (UTC)