User talk:Rusty springs/Archives/Archive 1

Kwara State University‎
Thanks for removing the phone number at Kwara State University‎. Just so you are aware, this was part of a long-running phone-scam, which tries to use our articles on Nigerian subjects, especially Nigerian Universities. This can be seen from the edits of that IP Special:Contributions/197.211.59.140 - the same (mobile) number was also added to University of Abuja and Federal University of Technology Akure. A different number was added to ‎Novena University, as they use multiple phone numbers. If you see any such numbers in the future please look at the editors other edits and/or report them to WP:AIV - Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 11:53, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

RE
I considered these two points.
 * 1) Forged conversations in [User talk:Cdonati/talk page tutorial].
 * 2) The talk page is not a test page.--O1lI0 (talk) 17:07, 7 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Did you notice this template when you reverted it?


 * This user is a WikiEdu student; their 'forged conversations' are part of their course content. The edits you reverted were all on the User's talk and personal sandbox pages - on a page titled Talk Page Tutorial no less - a page you nominated for CSD I see. Rusty Springs (talk) 17:15, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I understand the situation after your explanation.I didn't know that template before, thank's.--O1lI0 (talk) 17:24, 7 October 2017 (UTC)


 * No worries - glad that is all sorted :-) Rusty Springs (talk) 17:32, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Brisbane meetup - Sunday 10 December 2017 at The Edge, State Library of Queensland
If you are in or near Brisbane, please join us on Sunday 10 December 2017 any time from noon to 4pm at The Edge at the State Library of Queensland. For more details and to sign up, please go to the meetup page. See you there! Kerry (talk) 22:39, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Brisbane meetup: Saturday 13 January 2018 at The Edge, State Library of Queensland
If you are in or near Brisbane, please join us on Saturday 13 January 2018 any time from noon to 4pm at The Edge at the State Library of Queensland. For more details and to sign up, please go to the meetup page. See you there!

Not so fast
Please see the image (file) and the reference. US government atmospheric pressure map showing atmospheric pressure in mbar Peter Horn User talk 03:45, 24 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Peter, yes I do realise that, but it really isn't relevant on the page (and certainly not in the lede) describing the Pascal - the SI-derived, internationally preferred unit of pressure. There are links further down on the page to other non-SI units of pressure such as the ATM & bar. Also, Wikipedia's policy is to take a worldwide view rather than a US-centric view, as most people (and most English-speaking people) don't live in the USA and Wikipedia is a global project. If we started inserting every country's preferred barometric weather units in there, the article would arguably start to look quite silly! Rusty Springs (talk) 11:48, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Rusty, What I was trying to say was that there are sources available to back up the statement(s) that you deleted and beyond that it is not necessary to list all the others. The Americans are loathe to adopt the metric system and any other international standards. They are "traditionalists" who are comfortable continuing (muddle along) in their own ways and at times foisting them on others, eg gasoline (petrol to you) is sold, last that I heard, by the US gallon in Guatemala and elsewhere. Peter Horn User talk 14:22, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Damian Barr
Please do not remove reliably sourced information as you did in the Damian Barr article. The Times is a very reliable source and all of the information on the Booker Prize controversy, for which he has been in the news much lately, is taken directly from their reporting. Thank you. Lilipo25 (talk) 12:02, 3 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi Lilipo, I did search for other sources relating to the information you had added and found only the Times article. Just looked again and still only the Times article, however 'very reliable' it may be. This leads to the question - does the content meet Wikipedia's requirements for verifiability and notability for a biography of a living person? Does the content place undue weight on a single source report of historical social media comments? I think there is a valid debate to be held there, whether the reported incident is significant enough to make up half of a seemingly low-notability writer's biography. Remember that Wikipedia is not a news service. Rusty Springs (talk) 03:33, 4 July 2020 (UTC)


 * It's also been covered by the BBC and PinkNews   and the Guardian . I think at this point it would be a stretch, at best, to claim it doesn't meet either verifiability or notablity. It's received as much publicity as he's received for anything else he's done in recent years. Lilipo25 (talk) 04:30, 4 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply. Funnily enough, I had just found the Guardian article just before getting your message. I guess I was wrong about the lack of sources there, but the balance of the Damian Barr article still seems a bit off to me. Possibly because I am not overly familiar with the Booker Prize business; the article as it stands does seem to focus more on the historical social media posts than it does on the Booker stuff though, maybe this is the source of my issue... Cheers, Rusty Springs (talk) 04:56, 4 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I cut down some of the second paragraph. I kept the first tweet-quote intact but paraphrased the others. Lilipo25 (talk) 05:27, 4 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I think that's quite a bit better, thanks for having another look at it :-) Rusty Springs (talk) 23:49, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)