User talk:SlimVirgin/December 2015

Would you lend your voice to a discussion?
SlimVirgin, Based on some discussions you were involved with several years back I was hoping you might lend your voice to a recent RSN topic. The short version is material from a reliable but non-scholarly source is being removed from an article because it contradicts material from a scholarly source. The non-scholarly material is from respected, mainstream sources and cited by scholarship but is not published via an academic source. My reading of the archived thread is WP:RS does not support that type of removal of sources. I would appreciate your thoughts and or other discussions that might provide more insight. Springee (talk) 19:46, 30 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, I can't promise to get involved, but I'll try to find time to look. SarahSV (talk) 17:38, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Sadly the conversations are not all assuming good faith so I don't blame you for not wanting to join in.  However, if you have some suggestions as to what/where/etc I might look to find a consensus view on how WP says we should handle scholarly vs non-scholarly sources that would be very helpful.  Springee (talk) 17:56, 1 December 2015 (UTC)


 * , there's no need, in the article Southern strategy, to stick to academic sources. In some topics there is (such as medical topics, for the most part), but here not, though you'd want to make sure they were high quality. That's just a general comment. I can't comment on this case because I haven't read the arguments or looked at the sources.


 * If you need to know that the guideline says, see WP:RS: "When available, academic and peer-reviewed publications, scholarly monographs, and textbooks are usually the most reliable sources. ... Reliable non-academic sources may also be used in articles about scholarly issues, particularly material from high-quality mainstream publications." SarahSV (talk) 18:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Well if you are interested in lending a voice to the RSN page I would appreciate. The other primary editor seems to feel that there was not consensus regarding the idea that non-scholarly works could be held up to scholarship in this case [].  Thanks again! Springee (talk) 22:17, 1 December 2015 (UTC)


 * , can you post here what the two sources are? SarahSV (talk) 02:25, 2 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Sure, Lou Cannon, President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime 1991, Simon & Schuster and Jeremy Mayer Running on Race: Racial Politics in Presidential Campaigns, 1960-2000 2002 Random House Inc. Cannon's book has a long list of citations on Google Scholar.  Using a research library database I found over 100 peer reviewed articles/books that cited this book.  I also found four reviews of Cannon's book in peer reviewed journals.  Mayer is a scholar in the field but for what ever reason didn't publish this work via the scholarly press.  The work has been reviewed in a peer reviewed journal. Springee (talk) 04:36, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks,. I can't see a reason in principle not to use those books as sources on Ronald Reagan. It does depend what they're being used for. For example, they might be inappropriate because outdated; perhaps they made errors that someone has since corrected. SarahSV (talk) 01:29, 3 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks again. That was my feeling.  I do have more questions related to this topic but I think at this point they would be getting into the specifics of the edits.  In any case I think you answered my primary question and I thank you for it.  If you wish to wade in I would welcome it but I think in this case the water is choppy and cold.  Springee (talk) 01:59, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

I left some comments for you at the Meta harassment consultation
Hi SV. I'm not sure if you're actively watchlisting your proposal on the Meta Harassment Consultation, so I just wanted to let you know that I left some comments/questions for you (and others) there. If you have the time, I would really like to try to flesh out some details there for how your proposal could work! Kbrown (WMF) (talk) 16:33, 1 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know, . SarahSV (talk) 17:40, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

FYI
I just created an article on the Tianjin animal cloning center. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 00:11, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry to bug you
How does one go about reporting harassment by an IP? Is it the same for IPs as it is for registered users? The talk page of Sexism in the technology industry article has an IP user who keeps adding their agreement with an editor who used the C word, and I keep reverting it but I'm not sure where to go from here. Ongepotchket (talk) 19:44, 2 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, I see it has been going on for awhile. I've semi-protected the talk page for two weeks. I left the article unprotected because it has been fine for a few days, but I've put it on my watchlist. Hope that helps. SarahSV (talk) 20:10, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Gender disputes?
There's activity at talk:manspreading and talk:bra that I'm not too happy about. It's certainly nothing abusive, but I prefer to be proactive so that it doesn't escalate.

Would you mind taking a look at it? I'm asking because of the discretionary sanctions applicable to Gamergate, gender issues and the GGTF. I dunno if they're applicable to these articles, but they certainly seem related.

Peter Isotalo 19:54, 7 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Peter, I'll take a look shortly. SarahSV (talk) 21:23, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * This looks like canvassing. So an editor is not too happy about something, and calls on you to intercede, and you did in a way that conforms to what he's asking for in a content dispute.  As an administrator, I thought you'd know better.Mattnad (talk) 00:52, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I do know better. For example, I know that this isn't canvassing; see WP:APPNOTE. SarahSV (talk) 01:15, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Except that the context wasn't any of the issues described in APPNOTE. Call it what you want, but you've been notified.Mattnad (talk) 01:26, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Then you need to read it more carefully., for the avoidance of doubt, I'm asking to be kept informed, per WP:APPNOTE, of any discussion related to gender that you want to tell me about in future, whether you're seeking admin action or input from me as an editor. SarahSV (talk) 02:23, 11 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Noted, Sarah.
 * Mattnad, in my view, Sarah has considerable experience with gender issues, including a lot of activity at WP:GGTF. My request was specifically related to concerns about discretionary sanctions, which is pretty clearly stated. And shortly after I posted here, there was this exchange, which is pretty much exactly what I wished to avoid. I do request input on content discussion now and then and I am familiar with pitfalls of canvassing.
 * Peter Isotalo 08:32, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * So you cite your own intemperate language as something you wanted to avoid? When a woman proposes a photo, and you and other editors accuse her of putting a porn actress in the article, or creating a picture for "ogling males" just because she thought we should have something representative of what she and her friend wear (according to her), that's not a gender dispute.  That's editors with a very narrow POV of what's acceptable ganging up on a female editor who doesn't subscribe to the view that pictures of women in underwear should be banned.  Is the photo perfect?  No, but it's the only one in the article that actually shows a non-sports bra clearly on a woman (and that's all it shows).  I'm sorry, but on this one you're on the wrong side of GGTF and common sense.Mattnad (talk) 16:12, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Signpost exit poll
Dear Wikipedian, you recently voted in the ArbCom election. Your username, along with around 155 other usernames of your fellow Wikipedians, was randomly selected from the 2000+ Wikipedians who voted this year, with the help of one of the election-commissioners. If you are willing, could you please participate (at your option either on-wiki via userspace or off-wiki via email) in an exit poll, and answer some questions about how you decided amongst the ArbCom candidates?

If you decide to participate in this exit poll, the statistical results will be published in the Signpost, an online newspaper with over 1000 Wikipedians among the readership. There are about twelve questions, which have alphanumerical answers; it should take you a few minutes to complete the exit poll questionnaire, and will help improve Wikipedia by giving future candidates information about what you think is important. This is only an unofficial survey, and will have no impact on your actual vote during this election, nor in any future election.

All questions are individually optional, and this entire exit poll itself is also entirely optional, though if you choose not to participate, I would appreciate a brief reply indicating why you decided not to take part (see Question Zero). Thanks for being a Wikipedian

The questionnaire
Dear Wikipedian, please fill out these questions -- at your option via usertalk or via email, see Detailed Instructions at the end of the twelve questions -- by putting the appropriate answer in the blanks provided. If you decide not to answer a question (all questions are optional), please put the reason down: "undecided" / "private information" / "prefer not to answer" / "question is not well-posed" / "other: please specify". Although the Signpost cannot guarantee that complex answers can be processed for publication, it will help us improve future exit polls, if you give us comments about why you could not answer specific questions.
 * Q#0. Will you be responding to the questions in this exit poll? Why or why not?
 * Your Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#1. Arbs must have at least 0k / 2k / 4k / 8k / 16k / 32k+ edits to Wikipedia.
 * Your Numeric Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#2. Arbs must have at least 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7+ years editing Wikipedia.
 * Your Numeric Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#3. Arbs...
 * A: should not be an admin
 * B: should preferably not be an admin
 * C: can be but need not be an admin
 * D: should preferably be an admin
 * E: must be or have been an admin
 * F: must currently be an admin
 * Your Single-Letter Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#4. Arbs must have at least 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7+ years of experience as an admin.
 * Your Numeric Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#5. Completely optional, as all these questions are completely optional:  which candidates did you support this year, and why?
 * Your List-Of-Usernames You Supported:
 * Your Comments:


 * The Quick&Easy End. Thank you for your answers.  Please sign with your Wikipedia username here, especially important if you are emailing your answers, so we can avoid double-counting and similar confusion.
 * Your Wikipedia Username:
 * General Comments:


 * Q#6. Completely optional, as all these questions are completely optional:  which candidates did you oppose this year, and why?
 * Your List-Of-Usernames You Opposed:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#7. Are there any Wikipedians you would like to see run for ArbCom, in the December 2016 election, twelve months from now?  Who?
 * Your List-Of-Usernames As Potential Future Candidates:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#8. Why did you vote in the 2015 ArbCom elections?  In particular, how did you learn about the election, and what motivated you to participate this year?
 * Your Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#9. For potential arbs, good indicators of the right kind of contributions outside noticeboard activity, would be:
 * A: discussions on the talkpages of articles which ARE subject to ArbCom sanctions
 * B: discussions on the talkpages of articles NOT subject to ArbCom restrictions
 * C: sending talkpage notifications e.g. with Twinkle, sticking to formal language
 * D: sending talkpage notifications manually, and explaining with informal English
 * E: working on policies/guidelines
 * F: working on essays/helpdocs
 * G: working on GA/FA/DYK/similar content
 * H: working on copyedits/infoboxes/pictures/similar content
 * I: working on categorization e.g. with HotCat
 * J: working on autofixes e.g. with AWB or REFILL
 * K: working with other Wikipedians via wikiprojects e.g. with MILHIST
 * L: working with other Wikipedians via IRC e.g. with or informally
 * M: working with other Wikipedians via email e.g. with UTRS or informally
 * N: working with other Wikipedians in person e.g. at edit-a-thons / Wikipedian-in-residence / Wikimania / etc
 * O: other types of contribution, please specify in your comments
 * Please specify a comma-separated list of the types of contributions you see as positive indicators for arb-candidates to have.
 * Your List-Of-Letters Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#10. Arbs who make many well-informed comments at these noticeboards (please specify which!) have the right kind of background, or experience, for ArbCom.
 * Options: A: AE, B: arbCases, C: LTA, D: OTRS, E: AN,
 * continued : F: OS/REVDEL, G: CU/SPI, H: AN/I, I: pageprot, J: NAC,
 * continued : K: RfC, L: RM, M: DRN, N: EA, O: 3o,
 * continued : P: NPOVN, Q: BLPN, R: RSN, S: NORN, T: FTN,
 * continued : U: teahouse, V: helpdesk, W: AfC, X: NPP, Y: AfD,
 * continued : 1: UAA, 2: COIN, 3: antiSpam, 4: AIV, 5: 3RR,
 * continued : 6: CCI, 7: NFCC, 8: abusefilter, 9: BAG, 0: VPT,
 * continued : Z: Other_noticeboard_not_listed_here_please_wikilink_your_answer
 * Please specify a comma-separated list of the noticeboards you see as important background-experience for arb-candidates to have.
 * Your List-Of-Letters Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#11. Arbs who make many comments at these noticeboards (please specify!) have the wrong kind of temperament, or personality, for ArbCom.
 * Options: (same as previous question -- please see above)
 * Please specify a comma-separated list of the noticeboards you see as worrisome personality-indicators for arb-candidates to have.
 * Your List-Of-Letters Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#12. Anything else we ought to know?
 * Your Custom-Designed Question(s):
 * Your Custom-Designed Answer(s):


 * The Extended-Answers End. Thank you for your answers.  Please sign with your Wikipedia username here, especially important if you are emailing your answers, so we can avoid double-counting and similar confusion.
 * Your Wikipedia Username:
 * General Comments:

Detailed Instructions: you are welcome to answer these questions via usertalk (easiest), or via email (for a modicum of privacy). Processing of responses will be performed in batches of ten, prior to publication in the Signpost. GamerPro64 will be processing the email-based answers, and will strive to maintain the privacy of your answers (as well as your email address and the associated IP address typically found in the email-headers), though of course as a volunteer effort, we cannot legally guarantee that GamerPro64 will have a system free from computer virii, we cannot legally guarantee that GamerPro64 will resist hypothetical bribes offered by the KGB/NSA/MI6 to reveal your secrets, and we cannot legally guarantee that GamerPro64 will make no mistakes. If you choose to answer on-wiki, your answers will be visible to other Wikipedians. If you choose to answer via email, your answers will be sent unencrypted over the internet, and we will do our best to protect your privacy, but unencrypted email is inherently an improper mechanism for doing so. Sorry! :-) We do promise to try hard, not to make any mistakes, in the processing and presentation of your answers. If you have any questions or concerns, you may contact column-editor GamerPro64, copy-editor 75.108.94.227, or copy-editor Ryk72.  Thanks for reading, and thanks for helping Wikipedia.  GamerPro64  14:37, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * If you wish to answer via usertalk, go ahead and fill in the blanks by editing this subsection. Once you have completed the usertalk-based exit poll answers,, leave a short usertalk note, and click save.  The point of leaving the usertalk note, is to make sure your answers are processed and published.
 * If you wish to answer via email, create a new email to the Signpost column-editor by clicking Special:EmailUser/GamerPro64, and then paste the *plaintext* of the questions therein. Once you have completed the email-based exit poll answers,, leave a short usertalk note specifying the *time* you sent the email, and click save.  The point of leaving the usertalk note, is to make sure your answers are processed and published (not stuck in the spam-folder).

2015 Affiliations Committee call for candidates
''This is an update from the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee. Translations are available.''



The Affiliations Committee – the committee responsible for guiding volunteers in establishing Wikimedia chapters, thematic organizations, and user groups – is looking for new members!

The main role of the Affiliations Committee is to guide groups of volunteers that are interested in forming Wikimedia affiliates. We review applications from new groups, answer questions and provide advice about the different Wikimedia affiliation models and processes, review affiliate bylaws for compliance with requirements and best practices, and advise the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees on issues connected to chapters, thematic organizations and Wikimedia user groups.

The committee consists of twelve members, six of whom are selected every twelve months for staggered two-year terms.


 * Key skills

Being a part of the Affiliations Committee requires communication with volunteers all over the world, negotiating skills, cultural sensitivity, and the ability to understand legal texts. We try to get a healthy mix of different skill sets in our members. The key skills and experience that we look for in candidates are:


 * Excitement by the challenge of helping to empower groups of volunteers worldwide.
 * Willingness to process applications through a set, perhaps bureaucratic process.
 * Readiness to participate in political discussions on the role and future of affiliates, models of affiliations, and similar questions.
 * Availability of up to 5 hours per week, and the time to participate in a monthly ~2 hour voice/video meeting.
 * International orientation.
 * Very good communication skills in English.
 * Ability to work and communicate with other languages and cultures.
 * Strong understanding of the structure and work of affiliates and the WMF.
 * Knowledge of different legal systems and experience in community building and organising are a plus.
 * Effective communication skills in other languages are a major plus.
 * Experience with or in an active affiliate is a major plus.
 * Willingness to use one's real name in committee activities (including contacts with current and potential affiliates) when appropriate.

We are looking for people who are not afraid of the workload and are motivated by helping other volunteers to get organized and form communities that further our mission around the world.

As a reflection of our commitment to openness, transparency, and bilateral engagement with the Wikimedia community, the 2015 member selection process will include a public review and comment period. All applications received by the committee will be posted on Meta (at Affiliations Committee/Candidates/2015), and the community will be invited to provide comments and feedback about each candidate.
 * Selection process

At the end of the public comment period, the applications will be voted on by the members of the committee who are not seeking re-election, taking into account comments put forward by the committee's members, advisors, WMF staff and board liaisons, and the community. A final decision will be made by mid-January 2016, with new members expected to join later that month.

If you are interested in joining the committee, please send an application to affcom@lists.wikimedia.org by 31 December 2015. You will get a confirmation that your application was received.
 * How to apply

Your application should include the following: Your statement will be published for community review and feedback, so please do not include any information that you are not comfortable sharing.
 * Your full name
 * Your contact information (including e-mail address and username)
 * A statement describing your relevant experience, skills, and motivation for joining the committee.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to email me and/or the committee as a whole. We are happy to chat or have a phone call with anyone about our work if this helps them decide to apply. Please distribute this call among your networks, and do apply if you are interested!

Best regards,

Carlos Colina

Chair, Affiliations Committee

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the Affiliations Committee, 16:52, 9 December 2015 (UTC) • m:Special:MyLanguage/Affiliations Committee/MassMessages/Call for candidates - December 2015 • Get help • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

Mansplaining
Thanks for setting the record straight. I don't know if anyone listened to you, but I appreciate it. Drmies (talk) 02:00, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * No one ever listens to me,, but you're welcome anyway. SarahSV (talk) 03:26, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I do, Sarah, and lots of others do as well. Hey, these are exciting times. My oldest daughter told me today that the boys are sexists--they were going "easy" on the girls during flag football. My oldest daughter is the tallest person in fourth grade and can almost kick a grown man's ass. I'd love to see them try taking it easy on her. But those boys, yeah, it starts early, doesn't it. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:31, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I listen to you, Sarah. In fact I wish you were on the Arbcom alongside . My oldest granddaughter is the shortest person in 8th Grade and does Judo. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:59, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Ha, ha, well, thank you both. And I'm glad to hear the girls are standing up for themselves. SarahSV (talk) 06:16, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Girls are silly. This morning I was telling my youngest daughter to NOT take four reading quizzes on one single day (she read Rosa Parks, Young Cam Jansen and the Ice Skate Mystery, Bad Dog, Dodger!, and my favorite title, An Ant's Day Off). Her sister even agreed with me. So what does she do? She takes all four in the first twenty minutes of school and gets 100s on all of them. Just to spite me, I'm sure, and to thumb her nose at patriarchy. Drmies (talk) 15:39, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , she must be like her dad, taking on seemingly impossible tasks. Congratulations, by the way. It's looking like a pretty solid committee. SarahSV (talk) 19:43, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The amount of gendering they do in schools here is truly terrifying. They get handed different sets of library books. Anyway, thanks, yes, and I was happy to see Keilana and Opabinia regalis in there. Let me know if you ever get in trouble; I'll spring you for $20. Drmies (talk) 22:31, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * One of the first things that happens when people get on ArbCom is that their prices go up. :) SarahSV (talk) 17:04, 12 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Sarah - you might be surprised how many people value your opinion; in fact - I just mentioned you earlier today at Dave/Worm's talk page. (here). I can only speak for myself, but I DO have a GREAT deal of respect for you and your work here. — Ched :  ?  22:46, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks,, I appreciate that. I'm inclined to agree with you about the rpa template; I've thought for a while that it's often better leaving things or just removing the words. The template makes people look to see what's missing. SarahSV (talk) 17:04, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree - and thank you Sarah for your input. I know there are times my thinking may be a bit cloudy, so I very much appreciate when people give me some feedback. — Ched :  ?  18:26, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 14
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 14, October-November 2015 by, , ,

 Read the full newsletter The Interior, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:13, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * New donations - Gale, Brill, plus Finnish and Farsi resources
 * Open Access Week recap, and DOIs, Wikipedia, and scholarly citations
 * Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref - a citation drive for librarians

Orphaned non-free image File:Hermann Goering 2.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Hermann Goering 2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:25, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Well that's a new one!
I didn't even know it was possible to editconflict while placing protection on a page, haha. Kevin Gorman (talk) 19:29, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , it happens a lot at RfPP, so no worries. I hope you're doing okay and not worrying too much. SarahSV (talk) 19:40, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Sam Pepper
Hi Sarah, you may or may not remember me as the user who wanted to create the page for Sam Pepper earlier this year. The main issue with it at the time was that there was only one event for which the person was particularly notable, therefore making it unlikely to have content outside the context of that event. However, recently this same person has garnered significant media attention a second time for something different, which inclines me to believe that he has a shot at an article (since BLP1E no longer applies). I've created the page again in my userspace (User:Eventhorizon51/Sam Pepper) with information about the second incident and I think it should pass if I brought it to AfC. I just wanted to check with you again since you were the one to discuss this with me in the past. Would you mind having a look at it and giving your opinion?

Also, I'm aware that the Early life and Education section of the article only has one citation at the end,, but that's because all the information from that section comes from that one source. That source was created by the subject himself, which leads me to believe that the biographical information is accurate. However, if citing only one source for that section is not compliant with policy, then that section can be taken out entirely, as the article can survive without it.  Event horizon51  (talk) 08:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, if I were writing this, I would leave it as a section of the Big Brother article. But I see the BBC and Washington Post have written about the latest video, so BLP1 no longer applies. If you do create a bio, be sure to leave out the allegations we discussed before, per WP:BLPCRIME. Also, the early-life section is too detailed, so consider tightening it, especially if there's just one source.


 * To get input from others, I would suggest putting this through AfC rather than creating it directly. SarahSV (talk) 16:06, 17 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks Sarah, I'll probably take it to AfC after I work on it a just bit more. I also don't think this would work if it was placed into the Big Brother article, since that page is meant to only list the relevant people with only a brief background of each person. The most important part is how they did in the show. Discussing the two incidents in that article would make it a WP:COATRACK, so the person should probably have his own article. Event horizon51  (talk) 19:12, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Excellent analysis
I had not thought of doing that. Thank you. I am probably standing too close by feeling that I was the trigger for the unfortunate set of events. Fiddle  Faddle  18:15, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , you're welcome. It seems like a storm in a teacup that could be dealt with by motion: "Kevin is reminded, etc." SarahSV (talk) 18:51, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It appears to be bizarre that this has arrived at ArbCom at all. And wrong. Fiddle   Faddle  18:54, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

GMO articles
Hi Sarah, I'm not sure if you watched what went on at ArbCom regarding GMOs, but the fallout is now absolutely ridiculous. Please look at this diff. It shows an editor labeling edits made by editors prior to the ban as "This editor was subsequently topic banned by ArbCom" or the equivalent. This is wrong on so many levels, but the worst is that the banned editors including myself are totally unable to defend themselves in this matter as it would in-itself be a breach of the ban. This would even include us mentioning it on the editor's Talk page. I would be very grateful if you would be willing to convey this to the thread, and I leave it in your hands as to whether any further comment or action is required or necessary. Thanks for considering this. DrChrissy (talk) 03:36, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Proactiv sidebar


A tag has been placed on Template:Proactiv sidebar, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator.  DGG ( talk ) 22:30, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Bra
Thank you, thank you, thank you!! That article has been out of control for the longest time. Well done on the restructure! :) - A l is o n  ❤ 23:31, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * You're welcome,, and thanks for the feedback. I may try to do more over the next few weeks or months. Anyway, all the best to you and yours for Christmas and the New Year. SarahSV (talk) 04:50, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Veganz logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Veganz logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:00, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

It's that time of the year

 * Many thanks . A very Merry Christmas back to you, and I hope next year is a good one for you. SarahSV (talk) 04:52, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

 * Ha, ha, a year of no trolls or vandals would indeed bring me joy. :) All the best to you,, for Christmas and 2016. SarahSV (talk) 04:58, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Kitten is a baby of cat

Rawmesh rajbanshi (talk) 10:03, 20 December 2015 (UTC) 

A kitten for you!
Kitten is a baby of cat

Rawmesh rajbanshi (talk) 10:03, 20 December 2015 (UTC) 

Today is my last day so I am say life is noमेरो आज साथो आयना
 * 1) Subscript text
 * Numbered list item
 * --Rawmesh rajbanshi (talk) 10:10, 20 December 2015 (UTC)Bulleted list item--Rawmesh rajbanshi (talk) 10:10, 20 December 2015 (UTC)--Rawmesh rajbanshi (talk) 10:10, 20 December 2015 (UTC)--Rawmesh rajbanshi (talk) 10:10, 20 December 2015 (UTC)--Rawmesh rajbanshi (talk) 10:10, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
 * --Rawmesh rajbanshi (talk) 10:10, 20 December 2015 (UTC)Bulleted list item--Rawmesh rajbanshi (talk) 10:10, 20 December 2015 (UTC)--Rawmesh rajbanshi (talk) 10:10, 20 December 2015 (UTC)--Rawmesh rajbanshi (talk) 10:10, 20 December 2015 (UTC)--Rawmesh rajbanshi (talk) 10:10, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings
To You and Yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:35, 20 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you, . All the best to your and yours for the holidays and 2016. SarahSV (talk) 22:47, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

It's that season again...
Hi, thank you, and Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and yours too. All the best, SarahSV (talk) 22:58, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho


Doc James (talk · contribs · email) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

Thanks for all you have done this year :-) Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 22:53, 21 December 2015 (UTC)


 * , Merry Christmas to you too, and above all thank you for everything you've done on Wikipedia and for the wider movement. There's evidence of your good work in so many areas now. It's wonderful to have you around. SarahSV (talk) 21:32, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

 * Thank you, . Wishing you and yours all the best for Christmas and 2016! SarahSV (talk) 21:35, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy Christmas!

 * , thank you, and all the best to you and yours for Christmas and New Year. SarahSV (talk) 21:37, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

 * Hi, thanks for everything you've done this year. Wishing you and yours a Happy Christmas and wonderful New Year. Best, SarahSV (talk) 21:39, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Animals, Property, and the Law
Hate to be a pain, but since you've made it clear you're interested in the subject... I can't find any sort of decent sources for this that would establish notability, but the "smell test" says that it ought to be notable, if the claims made are true. Can you have a look? I'm going through the Vegetarianism template, since there's a number of dodgy articles in it, but my purpose is to clean up so that the notable things are properly focused on, not to remove the notable things, after all. Happy Christmas! Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:27, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

 * Many thanks, . I hope it's a wonderful Christmas and New Year for you. All the best, SarahSV (talk) 23:42, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Warmest Wishes for Health, Wealth and Wisdom through the Holidays and the Coming Year! Lingzhi &diams; (talk) 01:17, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, best wishes to you for 2016. SarahSV (talk) 01:11, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy Holidays to you, your family and friends. May you have happy editing!

 * Hi, thank you. Wishing you and yours all the best for the New Year. SarahSV (talk) 01:17, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

 * Thanks,, I hope you had a good day. Wishing you and yours all the best for the New Year. SarahSV (talk) 01:22, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you even though I didn't ask for one. Callmemirela 🍁  &#123;Talk&#125;   &#9809;  06:54, 28 December 2015 (UTC)


 * , you're welcome. If you need it to be extended or lifted sooner, just let me know. SarahSV (talk) 17:01, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Psychology of eating meat
Was there a reason why you just re-created this? I don;t much mind, but I asked for to to be deleted to I could accept Draft:Psychology of eating meat Fiddle   Faddle  16:48, 28 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks, I didn't see that. Unfortunately the discussion about this has taken place on several pages going back months. I've left a note on Talk:Carnism. , do you have any views on this? If everyone wants it, I don't want to stand in the way, but I wonder whether it's only going to cause more arguments. SarahSV (talk) 16:59, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * May we move to Boing's talk page on this one, please. I added a reply there? I have no views on the Carnism discussion. I'm omnivorous and have no thoughts about the psychology. Fiddle   Faddle  17:03, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm in the process of starting one on the draft talk page, if that's okay. SarahSV (talk) 17:04, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It sounds as if MfD is more the way you ought to be heading with it. I have no opinion save that the draft as a draft is acceptable. The topic per se is not one I have any thoughts on. Fiddle   Faddle  17:10, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year 2016!

 * Many thanks,, and a Happy New Year to you, too. All the best, SarahSV (talk) 23:10, 31 December 2015 (UTC)