User talk:Unionhawk/Archive 2

GA Sweeps June update
Thanks to everyone's dedicated efforts to the GA Sweeps process, a total of 396 articles were swept in May! That more than doubles our most successful month of 163 swept articles in September 2007 (and the 2 articles swept in April)! I plan to be sending out updates at the beginning of each month detailing any changes, updates, or other news until Sweeps are completed. So if you get sick of me, keep reviewing articles so we can be done (and then maybe you'll just occasionally bump into me). We are currently over 60% done with Sweeps, with just over a 1,000 articles left to review. With over 40 members, that averages out to about 24 articles per person. If each member reviews an article a day this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. I know that may be asking for a lot, but it would allow us to complete Sweeps and allow you to spend more time writing GAs, reviewing GANs, or focusing on other GARs (or whatever else it is you do to improve Wikipedia) as well as finish ahead of the two-year mark coming up in August. I recognize that this can be a difficult process at times and appreciate your tenacity in spending time in ensuring the quality of the older GAs. Feel free to recruit other editors who have reviewed GANs in the past and might be interested in the process. The more editors, the less the workload, and hopefully the faster this will be completed. If you have any questions about reviews or the process let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 18:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Request for help on Lukaszyk-Karmowski metric
Hi, I saw you on WP:EA. I was wondering if you could help us in a debate. I think the page is not notable, nor well cited. The author wrote a paper and I see the page as a promotion. Also I have doubts about his expertise. Thank you. --Memming (talk) 19:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC) == Wikipedia Signpost : 1 June 2009 ==


 * From the editor: Browsing the archives
 * Book review: Review of The Future of the Internet
 * Scientology: End of Scientology arbitration brings blocks, media coverage
 * News and notes: Picture of the Year, Wikipedia's first logo, Board elections, and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Tamil Wikipedia, Internet Watch Foundation, and more
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 23:12, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

ADHD evidence page
Please show proof (or even reasonable evidence) that I am a sock of someone or retract your baseless accusation. Thanks, Skinwalker (talk) 18:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Confirm
User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow IRC cloak request: I confirm that my freenode nick is Unionhawk.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 01:29, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Estonia–Luxembourg relations
Hello, I've recently tried to restore this page to a version which can be improved upon (a non-protected, non-disambiguation page) and I wondered if I could get your opinion about whether it is currently up to the quality which we expect of every Wikipedia article. I would appreciate your comments on the article at User:Cdogsimmons/Estonia–Luxembourg relations on the talk page there, and further improvements that would get it closer to inclusion status are always welcome. Thanks.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 22:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC) == Wikipedia Signpost : 15 June 2009 ==


 * Book review :Review of Cyberchiefs: Autonomy and Authority in Online Tribes
 * News and notes: License update, Google Translate, GLAM conference, Paid editing
 * Wikipedia in the news: In the Google News, London Review of Books, and more
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject Chemistry
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:30, 16 June 2009 (UTC) == Wikipedia Signpost : 22 June 2009 ==


 * Special report:Study of vandalism survival times
 * News and notes: Wikizine, video editing, milestones
 * Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia impacts town's reputation, assorted blogging
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (Q2 2009)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  15:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps July update
Thanks to everyone's dedicated efforts to the GA Sweeps process, a total of 290 articles were swept in June! Last month was our second most successful month in reviewing articles (after May). We are currently over 70% done with Sweeps, with just under 800 articles left to review. With nearly 50 members, that averages out to about 15 articles per person. If each member reviews an article every other day this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. This may sound difficult, but if everyone completes their reviews, Sweeps would be completed in less than two years when we first started (with only four members!). With the conclusion of Sweeps, each editor could spend more time writing GAs, reviewing at the backlogged GAN, or focusing on other GARs. Again, I want to thank you for using your time to ensure the quality of the older GAs. Feel free to recruit other editors who have reviewed GANs in the past and might be interested in the process. The more editors, the less the workload, and hopefully the faster this will be completed. If you have any questions about reviews or the process let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 18:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC) == Wikipedia Signpost : 6 July 2009 ==


 * News and notes: Commons grant, license change, new chapters, usability and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia and kidnapping, new comedy series
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject Food and Drink
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/ADHD

 * Discuss

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above.

For the Committee  MBisanz  talk 00:10, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

thank you for fixing my error but you have no right to undo my work
Youy say the mointage is not wanted. Yet that is not good enough, I followed all the rules and therefore you do not have the right to just undo my work. such doings can be considered vandalism and you will be warned if you do it agian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffmeck22 (talk • contribs) 18:00, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * All right, that's it. I'm taking this to ANI...--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 18:02, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * er... maybe EAR...--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 18:03, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry if I did something wrong but why should I get in trouble for it.What does ANI or EAR mean. I never meant be rude I just worked for an hour on that picture and I was a little frustrated you quickly undid it. You have more experice here so could you tell me what I did wrong I thought I followed everything pretty much right but if I didn't I am sorry. Thank you for your time!>User talk:Jeffmeck22

L.A. has a montage why can't cincinnati? I understand they are different pages and different pages have different needs but why? Thanks!!!!User talk:Jeffmeck22


 * You know what, you're probably right. I overreacted myself a bit. Just so you know, WP:ANI is where incidents requiring administrator intervention are posted. WP:EAR is where general assistance requests can be posted. Neither are appropriate forums for this little dispute. I think this should probably be directed at the article talk page, so other editors can have their say on it, as opposed to us making an agreement, and another editor removing it anyway.
 * I have concerns with the top and bottom images. I don't have much experience in the way of "fair use" judging, but, I'm almost certain that both of those pictures are non-free, and possibly exceed fair-use.
 * I'm going to cut it short there - to prevent Edit Conflicts. And please sign your posts with four tildes ( ~ )--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 18:14, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Twitter
I applaud your WP:BOLD move at twitter. HyperCapitalist (talk) 01:11, 26 July 2009 (UTC) == Wikipedia Signpost : 27 July 2009 ==


 * From the editor: Welcome to the build-your-own edition of the Signpost
 * Board elections: Board of Trustees elections draw 18 candidates for 3 seats
 * Wiki-Conference: Wikimedians and others gather for Wiki-Conference New York
 * Wikipedia Academy: Volunteers lead Wikipedia Academy at National Institutes of Health
 * News and notes: Things that happened in the Wikimedia world
 * Wikipedia in the news: Assorted news coverage of Wikipedia
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject Oregon
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe Delivered by --  Tinu  Cherian BOT  - 14:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps August update
Thanks to everyone's dedicated efforts to the GA Sweeps process, a total of 215 articles were swept in July! We are currently nearly 80% done with Sweeps, with under 600 articles left to review. With 50 members, that averages out to about 12 articles per person. Once the remaining articles drop to 100, I'll help in reviewing the last articles (I'm currently taking a break). If each member reviews an article every other day this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. Again, I want to thank you for using your time to ensure the quality of the older GAs. Feel free to recruit other editors who have reviewed GANs in the past and might be interested in the process. The more editors, the less the workload, and hopefully the faster this will be completed. If you have any questions about reviews or the process let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 19:36, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

== Wikipedia Signpost : 3 August 2009 ==


 * News and notes: WMF elections, strategy wiki, museum partnerships, and much more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Dispute over Rorschach test images, and more
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 06:46, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Photo request
Hi! Do you submit photographs for Wikipedia use? If so, would you mind photographing the headquarters of Comair (on Comair Boulevard) in Boone County, KY by the Cincinnati airport? Thank you! WhisperToMe (talk) 22:33, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I do not take and submit photos... Sorry. Try eleswhere (sent from my Verizon Wireless mobile phone)--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 20:17, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

== Wikipedia Signpost : 10 August 2009 ==


 * Special story: Tropenmuseum to host partnered exhibit with Wikimedia community
 * News and notes: Tech news, strategic planning, BLP task force, and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Shrinking community, GLAM-Wiki, and more
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 06:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:07, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC) == Wikipedia Signpost <span style="color:#666; font-variant: small-caps; font-size:80%; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">: 17 August 2009 ==


 * From the editor: Where should the Signpost go from here?
 * Radio review: Review of Bigipedia radio series
 * News and notes: Three million articles, Chen, Walsh and Klein win board election, and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Reports of Wikipedia's imminent death greatly exaggerated, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests
The Redirect Question has been updated. Thanks for your interest, PSY7 (talk) 22:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

A Place With No Name
I was just recently involved in the debate for this article's deletion and noticed that you made the ultimate decision to merge the content. I would like to express my opinions about how the debate was carried. First of all, I was the creator of the article and was not notified of any changes, which i find preposterous, additionally, the nominator of the article took it upon himself to merge the content on his own. He spoke of consensus, yet there was no consensus reached to merge the content, or close the article. I would like to ask you kindly to re-evaluate the decision you made based on how the nominator handled the discussion. He used the fact that the content was merged as an excuse to get rid of the article, however, the content was only merged because he did it himself, without reaching consensus from others involved in the debate. Please do re-evaluate your decision, thank you very much. --JDelo93 (talk) 15:55, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Not happy? See an admin. Admins have the power to override non-admin closures, and would be the ones consulted in the event of a deletion review. The way I read the discussion, the consensus was to redirect as all substantial content had been merged. You may also want to take a look at WP:OWN, as some of your comments lead me to believe that you thought you were in charge of all changes to the article.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 16:03, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Reconsidering your comment, I shall re-open the debate on my own.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 16:09, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Striking out of Historicist !vote
You noted that you struck out Historicist's !vote in the AFD on Articles for deletion/Holsworthy Barracks terror plot. So long as he isn't ballot stuffing, how is the fact that he's been confirmed as a sockpuppeteer relate to that AFD? Andjam (talk) 14:13, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm... I guess it really doesn't have anything to do with it... Oh well... I'm only human... The circumstances would be entirely different if it was a proven Sock making the !vote, not the sockpuppeteer (unless they !voted on the same AfD).--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 15:21, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Cincinnatti
Sorry about the Cincinnatti.I didn't look carefully.RuneScape Adventure (talk) 01:20, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's K, I understand completely. I've done it before (probably)--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 02:46, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

August 22, 2009
Thank you for your post on my talk page. I do not feel that I own the pages that I edit and I have read the WP policies extensively. I do take issue with the fact that a single user does not consult with the community or prompt constructively as to what should be done to strengthen an article. The edits in question were to immediately delete entire chunks and articles without any constructive contribution.

I sincerely feel that both the individuals whose pages were deleted met the notability standards. One was a publicly elected official prior to her work with the National Hispanic Institute and the other was a senior adviser on two separate US mayoral administrations prior to his work. They both tour on speaking engagements throughout K-12 schools as well as colleges and universities in the US, Mexico, Puerto Rico, Argentina, and Spain. They are not the primary officers of the organization, but they do stand in their own right. I took time to research these individuals and post my gatherings and labeled them as stubs as I hoped others would contribute to strengthen not delete.

I must say that this whole experience has been discouraging as the NHI articles along with its related articles were my first big project on WP. Why begin something if its just gonna be deleted in the future? I do not mind changes and constructive collaboration, but this was not that at all.

What would you recommend I do to collect the needed info to revive these pages in their own right? Fr222 (talk) 18:19, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You might want to check out all the notability-related guidelines. WP:BIO, and WP:GNG would apply the most in this case. Also, don't use phrases like "primary editor" or "did not consult me before nomination," as that's what set off the WP:OWN alarm in my head... If the article demonstrates notability, it'll survive an AfD or not be nominated.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 05:39, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Please take a minute to sign your name
I am really glad that you added the Article rescue squadron template to your user page. I don't think we have woked together before, but hopefully that changes.

Please take a minute to sign your name to our list of 270+ Article rescue squadron members:
 * ARSM

You are welcome to leave some comments there too...

Good news, we are building our first newsletter and should sent out this weekend, keep an eye out for it! Ikip (talk) 21:44, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm... Ah. My sign up was broken... That explains it...--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 05:40, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Runescape
Ok, now listen here:

First off, my refference:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/specials/rich_list/rich_list_2009/article6131979.ece

--

Now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_of_warcraft

"With more than 11.5 million monthly subscribers,[11] World of Warcraft is currently the world's most-subscribed MMORPG[8][12][13] and holds the Guinness World Record for the most popular MMORPG.[14] In April 2008, World of Warcraft was estimated to hold 62 percent of the massively multiplayer online game (MMOG) market.[15]"

So, World of Warcraft has 11.5 million active accounts. And that 11.5 million is 62% of the MMO market, which includes Runescape.

So, how can 11.5 million accounts be 62% of the market, and then 140 million active accounts fitting into less than 38% of that? Come on, use your brains you silly boy. It's not rocket science.

The source is clearly incorrect. You know it's incorrect, step back now before you make a total e-idiot out of yourself. Do you even know what MMO stands for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dpdr (talk • contribs) 22:19, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * First off, cut the personal attacks. I'm going to bring this to the article talk page. One of these sources are wrong, and I have a theory on the figures of the both of them...--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 22:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * "Subcribed" accounts, as in, accounts people PAY for. That number encompasses 100% of WoW's playerbase (because there's no free version). What % of Runescape players have Member accounts? --King Öomie 12:56, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

More Maths :-)
Once again, enough with the personal attacks. How many of those people also play RuneScape? Did you consider that market share could only include paying members? Obviously one of the two sources is wrong (or maybe not. Maybe they're only counting paying members). Pretty much, in order to play WoW, you have to be a subscriber (thus the highest subscribed MMORPG), but that's not the case with RuneScape. I'm going to do a little investigation, but, I have a feeling that 104m active-ish players is about right (± a couple million)--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 23:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Here's some more maths for you (Yes I took into account F2P players as well):

What your saying is that there are 140 Million active Non-paying and paying subscribers on Runescape, yes?

Runescape has 171 Servers as of August 25th 09. Each with a capacity of 2000 players a server.

171 x 2000 = 342000 players maxium playing the game.

Now to be active on the game, you must play regularly (Weekly?).

How are you proposing 140 Million people (Or half of the United States) manage to ration the 342000 places available to play? What? Do the other 139.7 million wait eagerly at their computers?

You didn't care about the reference, you ignored the first Mathmatical evidence so now i'm interested to see how you cope with your third "Accept you are wrong" statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dpdr (talk • contribs) 00:55, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm saying that there are 104 active players. Based on the RSC cutoff, I would assume that Jagex's definition of active is plays once/six months.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 01:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Besides, based on the fact that the ref you are suggesting is a wealth ranking, it is safe to assume that that count does not include players that do not make Gower money.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 01:04, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

And the Maths? You've yet to comment on that.

Yeh, I mean lets take your 4.5 million paying subscribers you said Runescape had. Now times that by the median membership fee. 5 x 4500000 = £22.5M. Andrew is worth £99M. Hmm, where does the other £76.5m come from then? Non-Subscribers clicking on adverts is their biggest source of income. Want a reference from your main man Andrew for that? Here you go:. --Dpdr (talk) 01:27, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, now how about a more reliable source? (ie, an interview with the current CEO)--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 01:31, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Please be careful and don't go on edit war with others =) <b style="color:#0000FF;">OhanaUnited</b><b style="color:green;">Talk page</b> 04:45, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * That's why I didn't revert again...--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 13:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Custon Edit Intro
Can somebody tell me how people like X! make their own custom edit intro on their talk page?--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 00:33, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It is an Editnotice, and hopefully that link will answer your question.  Chzz  ►  00:39, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

The Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter (September 2009)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikip (talk • contribs) 07:06, 24 August 2009

Re:Warning
Sorry about that, it's just that I find the BLP issue quite difficult to put under control. Blake Gripling (talk) 12:57, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, it's kind of what caused your last RfA to fail (along with incorrect CSD tagging)--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 13:00, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I admit. I dunno, I tried doing my job, but I just sucked at trying to be an admin here. Blake Gripling (talk) 02:21, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Discussion and poll on reviewer usergroup criteria
You may be interested in a discussion and poll I've started to decide the criteria that will be used for promoting users to the reviewer group at Wikipedia talk:Reviewers - please put your comments there. AndrewRT(Talk) 17:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC) == Wikipedia Signpost <span style="color:#666; font-variant: small-caps; font-size:80%; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">: 24 August 2009 ==


 * News and notes: $500,000 grant, Wikimania, Wikipedia Loves Art winners
 * Wikipedia in the news: Health care coverage, 3 million articles, inkblots, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 07:09, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 September 2009

 * Opinion essay: White Barbarian
 * Localisation improvements: LocalisationUpdate has gone live
 * Office hours: Sue Gardner answers questions from community
 * News and notes: Vibber resigns, Staff office hours, Flagged Revs, new research and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Stunting of growth, Polanski protected and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject National Register of Historic Places
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 October 2009

 * New talk pages: LiquidThreads in Beta
 * Sockpuppet scandal: The Law affair
 * News and notes: Article Incubator, Wikipedians take Manhattan, new features in testing, and much more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia used by UN, strange AFDs, iPhone reality
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: New developments at the Military history WikiProject
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 05:35, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (Q3 2009)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  04:26, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: RuneScape armour
Hello Unionhawk, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I contested the speedy deletion of RuneScape armour - a page you tagged - because: Not a recently created redirect - consider WP:RfD. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Tim Song (talk) 13:33, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

ADHD arbitration case amendment request
Regarding this, I am pleased to say that Scuro has been assigned/found a mentor. In addition, following discussion in other locations, one of the parties to the request has indicated that they are happy for it to be closed. As one of the other parties to that request, could you indicate whether you are happy for it to be closed? Carcharoth (talk) 02:33, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Spotlight newsletter
Hi there. Just a really quick, short note. You're currently listed as a spotlight participant, here, but you are not on the list of people who want to get the newsletter. If you want to receive updates about spotlight, then please add your name on this page. If not, no further action required, and I won't bug you about it again. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  15:35, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 October 2009

 * From the editor: Perspectives from other projects
 * Special story: Memorial and Collaboration
 * Bing search: Bing launches Wikipedia search
 * News and notes: New WMF hire, new stats, and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: IOC sues over Creative Commons license, Wikipedia at Yale, and more
 * Dispatches: Sounds
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject Tropical cyclones
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 04:32, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Earl of Clare
Not to be stupid, but how did you go wrong with 3rr? You only made three edits to the page, one your reversion of Mugginsx's fourth reversion of the day; a modification of your edit; then your final reversion to Mugginsx's version. I see no violation problem there. I think you've over-reverted, been too sensitive. Regardless, i'm going to bed, as i decline to be dragged into an edit war, which i'm beginning to think Mugginsx may want. Cheers, LindsayHi 20:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, something tells me I need to read WP:3RR thoroughly... If anything else, I didn't want to become involved in an edit war...--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 22:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Spotlight Newsletter - October
 ChzzBot  ►  23:06, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Get Well Quick!
Nice of you to refrain from being here, giving us all the bug. :-) Hope you're back at it shortly. - Hordaland (talk) 13:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks!--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 23:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Get well soon
Hope you feel better soon!-- Literature geek |  T@1k?  15:33, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 23:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:25, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 October 2009
<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:49, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * News and notes: WikiReader, Meetup in Pakistan, Audit committee elections, and more
 * In the news: Sanger controversy reignited, Limbaugh libelled, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

RFA spam

 * &mdash;Kww(talk) 19:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 October 2009
<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Interview: Interview with John Blossom
 * News and notes: New hires, German Wikipedian dies, new book tool, and more
 * In the news: Editor profiled in Washington Post, Wikia magazines, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Unlink Button?
What does the 'Unlink' button do in Twinkle?--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 13:55, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I looked in the documentation, and it looks pretty straightforward, but when I click it, is asks for a reason. Does unlinking have to be requested for non-admins?--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 13:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


 * As far as I know the reason is added as an edit summary for the pages unlinked. I'd suggest you try it out in a personal sandbox, e.g. create a sandbox and link from it to another sandbox and then choose unlink from that sandbox. Regards  So Why  14:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Fort Hood Massacre
Dear user, the name of the article is Fort Hood Massacre. Please see other examples:


 * Covina massacre
 * Virginia tech massacre

Thanks! --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 08:13, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 November 2009
<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 05:15, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Sebwhite's RFA
Sorry if it seemed like I was being pointy, I wish I could have better explained my gut concern there. Oh well, no big deal I suppose. Doc Quintana (talk) 00:02, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

A question for you...
See discussion at User:MacMed/RFA note.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 23:49, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Stewardship
I see that they also can desysopp any administrator, and have any other privileges related to the ArbCom. Do you think that there is a place anywhere on Wikipedia which provides the requests for stewardship?Boeing7107isdelicious 03:58, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You would do this at meta, but, stewardship is an elected position. I don't know when the next stewardship elections are. See Stewards/Elections. Unless you have a bunch of contributions on a unified account, I don't exactly see you as a stewardship candidate...--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 12:49, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 November 2009
<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 02:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Seconded. Let me know when it's up for a !vote. (I usually don't follow those RfAs.)  - Hordaland (talk) 07:14, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Expert request sorting
I saw your name on WikiProject Expert Request Sorting. Sometimes, the expert specified in the expert-subject and article issues templates refers to an existing WikiProject, but the category for articles needing attention from that WikiProject has not been created. Do you think it's a good idea to change the templates so they put such articles into a separate category? Specific categories can then be created, and the articles will then move into those by themselves. I'm not sure how many articles this could include, but I ask anyway. Iceblock (talk) 22:19, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and create them. Definitely add hiddencat to the category, so that the category is not shown on its member pages, as well as including it in Category:Articles needing expert attention. There's no real format for the expert sorting categories.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 03:28, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I was thinking about pages that are already tagged with a subject. There might exist some pages tagged with the right expert subject, but no category has been created, so they still reside in Category:Miscellaneous articles needing expert attention, together with all pages not tagged with an expert subject. I thought that if pages tagged with an expert subject but without a category would have been sorted in a separate category, then we always know which categories to create. (Some users may not know that a category should be created as it does not show on member pages and one is not notified.) And the first time, maybe we can sort a number of articles by just creating categories for them.


 * Example: A page is tagged with or  . WikiProject Goa exists, but not Category:Goa articles needing expert attention. So the page is categorized in Category:Miscellaneous articles needing expert attention instead.


 * The page Marie Louise Marcadet is a live example – Category:Sweden articles needing expert attention does not exist.


 * In other words, I think of: IF WikiProject exists THEN (IF expert category exists THEN put it there ELSE put it in a separate category) ELSE put it in the miscellaneous category.


 * Do you think it's a good idea to sort out articles similar to the one in this example and put them in a category for tagged articles that just need a category? Iceblock (talk) 21:00, 18 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello again. I found another approach than changing the expert templates. The tool CatScan 2.0 is able to, among other things, search a category and find pages with a specific template (in this case WPBannerMeta, which is the WikiProject banner) on their talk page. Here a link to a run on the unsorted expert category: . The achieved effect is not exactly the same, but it I'm sure it's still useful. Iceblock (talk) 14:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Look, I'm going to be honest, I'm not an expert in this (no pun intended). It would probably be better to ask somebody else. Sorry.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 15:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)


 * OK. Thanks for your time. Iceblock (talk) 15:49, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 16 November 2009
<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 16:36, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of International Society of Military Sciences (ISMS)


The article International Society of Military Sciences (ISMS) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Unlikely redirect not recently created. Anyone typing in the full org. name isn't likely to also type in a parenthetical acronym.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DJ Bullfish  09:13, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 23 November 2009
<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 13:34, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Editor review: done
Hi Unionhawk! Sorry for the delay, but I have finally got round to doing your review! I know that I said a couple of weeks that I'd do it, but got distracted!

Anyway, I've left the review for you at Editor review/Unionhawk (2), hope it's OK. --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 16:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

nyctohylophobia
Article was deprodded. I have nominated for WP:AFD. Bwrs (talk) 10:06, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 30 November 2009
<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 14:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 December 2009
<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 06:18, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Just checking up
How's it going? Anything new? -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 06:33, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Pretty good. Pretty busy too. Then again, Christmas break (I go to a Catholic school, so, they're allowed to call it Christmas break) is just around the corner, so, that's good.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 13:59, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 December 2009
<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 16:46, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Just a thought re Chris Henry
Right now, we as a whole are erring on the side of caution. Is a reliable source reporting it? I see a Dallas Morning News reporter has it.. on twitter. I don't think we can take that. I think it's probable, even likely, but we have to come down on the side of caution. I would remind you of the Edward Kennedy and Robert Byrd situations, where they collapsed, rumors were they died, someone put it in their articles, and when it came out that they were not.. we looked bad. So a bit of patience does help the situation... SirFozzie (talk) 00:26, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Good point. Plus, now I'm seeing conflicting reports (some say died, others say fighting for life...)--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 01:40, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * And the twitter account of the reporter has been proven to be a fake. *sighs*. Fun fun fun. SirFozzie (talk) 03:15, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * *blushes a little* Ok, I admit to sheer laziness/thinking I was kinda being helpful... my bad. Definitely should have checked a matter like that out a little more than a couple of Facebook statuses with one semi-credible-looking, yet still unreliable source...--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 03:28, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Notification: Proposed 'Motion to Close' at Wikipedia:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC re: a 'Motion to close', which would dissolve Cda as a proposal. The motion includes an !vote. You have previously commented at WikiProject Administrator. Jusdafax 23:40, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 December 2009
<div 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 &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:53, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Funny
Looked like I was the one being attacked, and accused of things I did not do. Be very careful! 206.124.6.222 (talk) 21:11, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Um... can you tell me what the heck you are talking about? I have no idea, honestly. I just got off a couple weeks wikibreak, so, please help me understand.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 23:33, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh. I see now. Duh. Let me grab a couple diffs here... and .--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 23:38, 23 December 2009 (UTC)