User talk:Useight/Archive18

unprotect
done. Dloh cierekim  01:13, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks. Useight (talk) 01:14, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello
Welcome back! Dloh cierekim  01:30, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I couldn't stay away any longer. Useight (talk) 01:35, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Welcome back, and I'm glad you've decided to unretire. The biggest change since you originally retired would be pending changes. It would be a bigger plus for the encyclopedia if you regained your admin and crat bits. Once again, welcome back! ~  Nerdy Science  Dude  01:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I saw something about that when MBisanz made me a reviewer while I was gone, but I didn't really look at it, thanks for the link. There's a bit of reading material on it, and from what I've seen, seems like a useful concept. As for my bits, I wonder what would happen if I requested the 'crat bit but not the admin one. Useight (talk) 02:07, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well just requesting your admin bit back doesn't oblige you to use it. It would be odd being able to make someone an admin but not grant rollback, though! ;) Welcome back, anyway! HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   04:10, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I did a double take when I saw your name at WT:RFA. Anyhow, it's nice to see you back :) Airplaneman   ✈  04:52, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Technically, you don't have to be an admin to be a crat. :) ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WikiProject Japan ! 20:36, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've toyed around with the idea of shucking my admin bit to just be a 'crat but I think I would miss the viewdeleted group of rights for evaluating RFAs and the suppressredirect right which really comes in handy for usurp requests. – xeno talk 20:40, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Welcome back, nice to see you again! :) Connormah (talk) 23:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I aim to please, my good fellow. I meant what I said, though I'd prefer a crat "undo" my additions ASAP... Courcelles 02:25, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * FYI: Village pump (proposals). – xeno talk 19:34, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * wb. Although that was due several weeks ago ;)  — fetch ·  comms   22:40, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Welcome back! ;) You were a great bureaucrat (and I wish you had the tools back!) — I-20 the highway  16:02, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I must apologize for not being familiar with you right off the bat. Have we crossed paths much before? Useight (talk) 21:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup. — I-20 the highway  23:44, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hey, welcome back! The Utahraptor&#39;s sock (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Welcome back! I hope you had a fantastic few days 3 whole complete months where you did not edit even once ;) NW ( Talk ) 22:41, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

2006-07 Detroit Pistons season
Articles on Wikipedia must be categorized. Please don't remove the uncat tag from 2006-07 Detroit Pistons season until you've actually added at least one content category to it. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 00:36, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * My mistake; I'm still trying to get into the swing of things. I thought I had pasted in the category, when I had in actuality pasted in the templates. Since you emphasized "must", I should also point out that WP:CAT states, "Every Wikipedia article should belong to at least one category." (emphasis mine). Useight (talk) 16:11, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's no less ambiguous: an article might well belong in a category but not have been actually added to it.  :-)  &mdash; Coren (talk) 17:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, the difficulties of the English language. Useight (talk) 18:48, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

RfA thanks spam


Hello Useight, thank you for supporting my RfA! I was promoted with a final tally of 65/4/3. I hope I can live up to everyone's expectations, do my best for Wikipedia, and take to heart the constructive criticism. Always feel free to message me if I'm around. Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:18, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Please Adopt me:)
Hi my name is Fabiola and i am in a school proyect. it would be awesome if you adopt me.FabGalvez (talk) 03:17, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: See the conversation at User talk:Natquintana.

Thanks
Privileged :) Kind regards  Wifione    .......  Leave a message  18:52, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:52, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Adopt-a-user reminder
Hello, I have completed a general cleanup of the adopter information page for the adopt-a-user project, located here. During my cleanup, I have removed several inactive and retired users. In order to provide interested adoptees with an easy location to find adopters, it is essential that the page be up-to-date with the latest information possible. Thus:


 * If you are no longer interested in being an adopter, please remove yourself from the list.
 * If you are still interested, please check the list to see if any information needs to be updated or added - especially your availability. Thank you.


 * You are receiving this message because you are listed as an adopter here.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Netalarm (talk) at 05:50, 23 September 2010 (UTC).


 * omg you totally robbed my joke! – xeno talk 19:50, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but I didn't expect to get caught so quickly! Useight (talk) 19:51, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hah. Obsessive-watchlist-refreshing (OWR) pays off! – xeno talk 19:57, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You may want to examine Watchlistitis, but I don't know if there's a support group. Useight (talk) 20:01, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Back?
Good to see you. :)  bibliomaniac 1  5  23:53, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks. And, yeah, I'm back. I had a very pleasant break. Useight (talk) 18:54, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Ties in records
Whats the big deal, i'v always do it as 0-0-0 & i don't see anything wrong with it. Tim103093 (talk) 22:32, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Replied on his talk page. Useight (talk) 23:57, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

An update from adopt a user
Hi there ! You may be wondering, what have I done to sound the alarm this time? Nothing. I'm messaging you in regards to the adopt-a-user program, which currently has a backlog of users wishing to be adopted. This doesn't make much sense, as we have a considerable list of users offer adoption, so there shouldn't be any backlog. I've begun to eliminate this backlog myself through a matching program, but I need your help to make it work. Of course, adoptees and adopters don't have to go through there, but I believe it helps eliminate the backlog because someone is actively matching pairs.

On the list of adopters, I have modified the middle column to say "Interests." It's easier working with other users that have similar interests, so if it's not too much to ask, could you add your interests in the middle column? For example, if I was interested in hurricanes, computers, business, and ... reptiles? I would place those in the middle column. Counter-vandalism and the like can also be included (maintenance should be used as the general term). The more interests, the better, since adoptees can learn more about you and choose the one they feel most comfortable working with. The information about when you're most active and other stuff can go into the "Notes" section to the right.

Finally, I've gone around and asked adoptees (and will in the future) to fill in a short survey so adopters can take the initiative and contact users they feel comfortable working with. We all know that most adoptees just place the adopt me template on their user page and leave it - so it's up to us to approach them and offer adoption. So, please take a look at the survey, adopt those that fit your interests, and maybe watchlist it so you can see the interests of adoptees and adopt one that fits your interests in the future.

Once again, thank you for participating in the adopt-a-user program! If you wish to respond to this post, please message me on my talk page.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Netalarm (talk) at 05:28, 11 October 2010 (UTC).

Themes for my Article
Hi, I have to write an article for my English Class and I was thinking if you could help me find an interesting/not-used article so I can write for this assignment. Thank you for your helpNatquintana (talk) 00:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * What are some topics you are interested in? Useight (talk) 18:58, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Rename
Is a rename request for my user name to all capital letters (to match my long time signature) a reasonable one, or just something I should deal with as the signature is in all caps...not a big deal if it isn't changed. C T J F 8 3 chat 00:09, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Given your impressive edit count, it's probably softer on the servers and job queue if you would just leave it. Lest some of your contributions get left behind =] – xeno talk 00:13, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * HAHA, ok, I definitely don't wanna lose any of my 35,969+ edits, so the all caps sig is good enough for me, thanks xeno, C T J F 8 3  chat 00:17, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the delayed response, I was on the phone talking with a client. But, yeah, with "35,969+" (I like how specific it is, yet still uses a plus sign), it would likely take awhile for them all to move over and some might get stuck for good, without developer intervention. Although, I've heard that if you log out before the rename is done there is a much greater chance of everything moving over smoothly. Useight (talk) 00:27, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * LOL, the + is for all the edits between the post and when you viewed my post...which was a few...anyways, thanks for the response, I'll just leave it, the change is no big deal at all. Thanks again, C T J F 8 3  chat 01:00, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

1973 Buffalo Bills season
Thanks for your editorial contributions. You may want to post this on your user page somewhere. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:06, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm. After nearly four years, I now sort of have a GA to my credit. Useight (talk) 21:20, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Sly Cooper
Hi, around a year ago you deleted Sly Cooper's character article to make way for the series article. Could you restore the content of the page to Sly Cooper (character)? Note that I don't mean actually restore the article, but restore the content history into where it belongs. Thanks, Blake (Talk·Edits) 19:02, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Could you clarify what you're asking me to do, exactly? It sounds like you want me to grab the deleted material of Sly Cooper and paste it into Sly Cooper (character), but I don't think that's what really want me to do. Thanks. Useight (talk) 17:13, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Sly Cooper used to be about the character. Then it got deleted, and the series was made there. I want the deleted revisions to be restored into Sly Cooper (character), but it remain a redirect. Blake (Talk·Edits) 17:58, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. The 1,079 deleted edits have been moved into the history for Sly Cooper (character) and it remains a redirect to Sly Cooper. Sorry for the delay, I've been having computer problems. Useight (talk) 17:06, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It's alright. It wasn't urgent or anything. Its just if I decided to try and make Sly notable, it would help to have some of the content from the previous article. Blake (Talk·Edits) 19:19, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy first edit day!
« CA » Talk 20:38, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup/2011 signups
Hey, just to let you know that main space edits will not be awarded points this year. You are of course still welcome to participate in the Cup if you would still like to. J Milburn (talk) 00:46, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * In light of the comment you left on the signup page, I am not going to list you. Signups will remain open for some time during the first round, and so if you still want in, just drop me a bell. J Milburn (talk) 01:01, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking care of that for me, that was the right call. I will not be participating this time around, but I'm always willing to help out with dispute-resolution or whatever if needed.  Useight (talk) 02:36, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011
Hello. You are being contacted because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup but have not yet signed up for the 2011 WikiCup, which starts at midnight. It is not too late to sign up! The competition will remain open until at least January 31, and so it is not too late to enter. If you are interested, simply follow the instructions to add your username to the signup page, and a judge will contact you as soon as possible with an explanation of how to participate. The WikiCup is a friendly competition open to all Wikipedians, old and new, experienced and inexperienced, providing a fun and rewarding way to contribute quality content to Wikipedia. If you do not want to receive any further messages about the WikiCup, or you want to start receiving messages about the WikiCup, you may add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the WikiCup talk page or contact the judges directly. J Milburn and The ed17 06:53, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Random Smiley Award
For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award. (Explanation and Disclaimer) ♠  TomasBat   02:20, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Too good :):)
I'm still on the floor :):):)  Wifione    .......  Leave a message  16:46, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Golf clap
I inwardly groaned when I saw the edit summary of ; "oh god, haute-nerd Wikipedia humour incoming", but your remark was actually rather droll. Congratulations for raising the estimation of the bureaucrat caste! I award you two points. Skomorokh  16:48, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors
Hi! Since you've been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, I wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.

If that sounds like you and you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors during the current term, which started in January and goes through early May. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:52, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll consider it, but I'll have to look into it further. Useight (talk) 00:31, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool. If you have any questions, leave me a message or send me an email.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 00:41, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Your deletion of WikiProject_Gender_Studies_Award?
You removed this here here. Was there some good reason for that? It's still on wikiproject awards page, the only one with red link, which looks a bit questionable given current emphasis on getting more women into wikipedia. Want to find out before propose any other related barnsters. Thanks. CarolMooreDC (talk) 16:36, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * It was marked as deprecated by Skier Dude. It was replaced by the one here. I'm not familiar with any emphasis to "get more women into Wikipedia." I wasn't aware that we were taking initiatives to entice individuals of particular classes to create accounts. Could you link to this "current emphasis"? Useight (talk) 00:55, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Reading Deprecated_and_orphaned_templates, it seems if it's still linked at Awards by WikiProject it's not deprecated, so maybe it could be undeleted? Thanks. Per your question, see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_Gap CarolMooreDC (talk) 05:06, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I have undeleted the template. Useight (talk) 02:17, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Have alerted two relevant talk pages it's fixed. CarolMooreDC (talk) 16:50, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

RfA reform
Hi Useight. Following Jimbo's recent  comment  about  RfA  being  broken, a task  force is growing to evaluate suggestions for reform of the process. The project development  is intended to  be the absolute antithesis of the kind  of long  drawn out consensus confusion that  getting  BLPPROD off the ground was. Some interesting discussions have started but the immediate effort is to  get  the work  group  together. That's the background.

Would you have time, and would you  be interested in  being  on  the list  of proposed task force members? The page is here. --Kudpung
 * I went ahead and signed up. Hopefully it'll get me active again. Useight (talk) 20:29, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
I do appreciate being corrected when speaking from ignorance. I didn't intend harm, but rather to extend the same tolerance to all groups equally. This guy liked Pop Culture and it shouldn't matter if I like it or not. Only that his contributions produced good results in the chosen area. I had assumed the "T" in LBGT was Transvestite. Bad assumption, as it turns out to mean Transgender. So it was an unintended error and I appreciate you correcting me for making that error. My76Strat (talk) 02:26, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

RfA reform
Hi. I have now moved the RfA reform and its associated pages to project space. The main page has been updated and streamlined. We now also have a new table on voter profiles. Please take a moment to check in and keep the pages on your watchlist. Regards, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:06, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

RfA reform
Hi Useight. I've been accused of ABF on this project. Can I ask advice from  your perspective as a 'crat? It's things like this that could make me recuse from  the project, and in  the worst  case scenario,  hand my  newly  acquired T-shirt back. Cheers, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:46, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought your comments at the linked RFA were valid, cordial, and well put. I saw nothing wrong with it. I thought Mkativerata's extrapolation between that comment and the RFA Reform wasn't a great link. I do not think you displayed bad faith in your RFA comment, nor do I think you have any ulterior motives. I also don't think that was really an ABF accusation, maybe an implied one, but very thin. As a 'crat, I wish more people would write such detail regarding the reason behind their comments at RFA. Please keep doing what you're doing. Useight (talk) 23:38, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:45, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

That RfA reform thing
Kudpung has asked me to 'nudge' some people .. as I'm an idle get, I'm just going through the entire Task Force list so my apologies if you didn't need a nudge! You can slap me about over on WP:EfD if you like :o) Straw polling various options: over here - please add views, agree with views, all that usual stuff. Pesky  ( talk ) 12:44, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up; I have posted my opinion there. Useight (talk) 23:39, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

WP:RFA2011
Task Force news: Recent updates include basic minor changes and condensing at the main  page, additional  comments on  the main  page talk  page, a new project  sub  page and talk for Radical Alternatives, and messages at Task force talk. A current priority is to reach suggested criteria/tasks for clerks, and then to establish a local consensus vis-à-vis clerking. Please remember to keep  all  the project  and its talk  pages on  your watchlist. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:26, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Task force WP:RFA2011 update
Hi. As of 20 June: More stats have been added on candidates and !voter participation. Details have been added about qualifications required on other Wikis for candidates and RfA !voters. Some items such as clerking, !voters, and candidates are nearing proposal stage. A quick page`link template has been added to each page of the project. Please visit those links to get up to speed with recent developments, and chime in with your comments. Thanks for your participation.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 07:56, 20 June 2011 (UTC).

Your input is requested
Greetings!

As a member of the RfA improvement task force, your input is requested at the possible proposals page, which consists of ideas that have not yet been discussed or developed.

Please look though the ideas and leave a comment on the talk page on the proposal(s) you would most like to see go forward. Your feedback will help decide which proposals to put to the community. And, as always, feel free to add new suggestions. Thanks!

Swarm, coordinator, RfA reform 2011

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 07:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC).

WP:RFA2011: RfA on other Wikipedias
A detailed table and notes have now been created and posted. It compares how RfA is carried out on   major Wikipedias (English, French, German, Italian, Spanish). If you feel  that other important language  Wikipedias should be added, please let  us know. This may however depend on  our/your language skills!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 22:47, 3 July 2011 (UTC).

WikiProject Disney Role Call
-- Groovy Sandwich  00:35, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

RfA Reform update
Hi. It's been a little while since the last message on RfA reform, and there's been a fair amount of slow but steady progress. However, there is currently a flurry of activity due to some conversations on Jimbo's talk page.

I think we're very close to putting an idea or two forward before the community and there are at least two newer ones in the pipeline. So if you have a moment:
 * Have a look at the min requirement proposal and familiarise yourself with the statistics, I'd appreciate comment on where we should put the bar.
 * Any final comments would be appreciated on the clerks proposal.
 * Feedback on the two newer proposals - Pre-RfA & RfA reform 2011/Sysop on request. Both are more radical reforms of RfA and might run along side the current system.

Thanks for reading and for any comments that you've now made.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 21:43, 6 September 2011 (UTC).

Research into the user pages of Wikipedians: Invitation to participate
Greetings,

My name is John-Paul and I am a student with the University of Alberta specializing in Communications and Technology.

I would like to include your Wikipedia user page in a study I am doing about how people present themselves online. I am interested in whether people see themselves in different ways, online and offline. One of the things I am looking at is how contributors to Wikipedia present themselves to each other through their user pages. Would you consider letting me include your user page in my study?

With your consent, I will read and analyze your user page, and ask you five short questions about it that will take about ten to fifteen minutes to answer. I am looking at about twenty user pages belonging to twenty different people. I will be looking at all user pages together, looking for common threads in the way people introduce themselves to other Wikipedians.

I hope that my research will help answer questions about how people collaborate, work together, and share knowledge. If you are open to participating in this study, please reply to this message, on your User Talk page or on mine. I will provide you with a complete description of my research, which you can use to decide if you want to participate.

Thank-you,

John-Paul Mcvea

University of Alberta

jmcvea@ualberta.ca

Johnpaulmcvea (talk) 21:30, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

News and progress from RfA reform 2011
(You are receiving this message because you are either a task force member, or you have contributed to recent discussions on any of these pages.)

The number of nominations continues to nosedive seriously, according to  these monthly figures. We know why this is, and if the trend continues our reserve of active admins will soon be underwater. Wikipedia now needs suitable editors to come forward. This can only be achieved either through changes to the current system, a radical alternative, or by fiat from elsewhere.

A lot of work is constantly being done behind the scenes by the coordinators and task force members, such as monitoring the talk pages, discussing new ideas, organising  the project  pages, researching  statistics and keeping  them  up  to  date. You'll also see for example that  we have recently  made tables to  compare how other Wikipedias choose  their sysops, and some tools have been developed to more closely examine !voters' habits.

The purpose of WP:RFA2011 is to focus attention on  specific issues of our  admin  selection  process and to develop  RfC proposals for solutions to improve them. For this, we have organised the project into dedicated sections each with their own discussion pages. It is important to understand that  all Wikipedia policy changes take a long  time to implement whether or not the discussions appear to  be active - getting the proposals right before offering them for discussion by the broader community is crucial to the success of any RfC. Consider keeping the pages and their talk pages on your watchlist; do check out older threads before starting a new one on topics that have been discussed already, and if you start a new thread, please revisit it regularly to follow up on new comments.

The object of WP:RFA2011 is not  to make it  either  easier or harder to  become an admin -  those criteria are set by  those who  !vote at  each  RfA. By providing  a unique venue for developing ideas for  change independent  of  the general discussion  at  WT:RFA, the project has two  clearly  defined goals: The fastest way is through improvement to the current system. Workspace is however also available within the project  pages to  suggest  and discuss ideas that are not  strictly  within  the remit  of this project. Users are invited to make use of these pages where they  will  offer maximum exposure to  the broader community, rather than individual  projects in  user space.
 * 1) Improving the environment  that  surrounds RfA in  order to  encourage mature, experienced editors of the right  calibre to  come forward, pass the interview, and dedicate some of their  time to  admin  tasks.
 * 2) Discouraging, in the nicest  way  possible of course, those whose RfA will be obvious NOTNOW or SNOW, and to  guide them towards the advice pages.

We already know what's wrong with RfA - let's not clutter the project with perennial chat. RFA2011 is now ready to propose some of the elements of reform, and all the task force needs to do now is to pre-draft those proposals in the project's workspace, agree on the wording, and then offer them for central discussion where the entire Wikipedia community will be more than welcome to express their opinions in  order to  build consensus.

New tool Check your RfA !voting history! Since the editors' RfA !vote counter at X!-Tools has been down for a long while, we now have a new RfA Vote Counter to replace it. A significant improvement on the former tool, it provides a a complete breakdown of an editor's RfA votes, together with an analysis of the participant's voting pattern.

Are you ready to help? Although the main engine of RFA2011 is its task force, constructive comments from any  editors are always welcome on  the project's various talk  pages. The main reasons  why  WT:RfA was never successful in  getting  anything  done are that threads on different aspects of RfA are all mixed together, and are then archived where nobody  remembers them and where they  are hard to  find - the same is true of ad hoc threads on  the founder's talk  page.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 16:05, 25 September 2011 (UTC).

Thank-you for agreeing to participate in my study
Thank-you for agreeing to participate in my study, entitled “Online Self-presentation among Wikipedians.” As you requested, I will send you a copy of the finished product, about November of this year.

As I indicated in my last message, here are five short questions about your user page that I would like you to answer. These will help me to understand your motivations for creating a user page such as yours. Please be as brief or as thorough as you like.

5 QUESTIONS

1. Are you a member of social networks such Facebook or MySpace?

2. In addition to maintaining a user page in Wikipedia, have you also written or edited articles? If so, about how many times?

3. What are the key messages about yourself that you hope to convey with your user page?

4. Have your Wikipedia contributions ever received feedback, such as being edited by others or commented on? Have you received a message from another Wikipedia user? If so, do you think your user page positively or negatively affected what other people said and how they said it?

5. Do you see your “online self” as being different from your “offline self?” Can you elaborate?

Please indicate your answers to these questions on your talk page, or on mine. Please respond by October 1st so that I have time to properly read your responses. If you like, you can email your answers to me instead (jmcvea@ualberta.ca).

Thank you again : )

Johnpaulmcvea (talk) 16:43, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

ADDITONAL INFORMATION

Background

•	I am asking you to participate in a research project that is part of my MA degree.

•	I am asking you because you have created a user page in Wikipedia that other people can use to learn about you.

Purpose

•	My research is about how people present themselves online.

•	I will look at how people present themselves when presenting themselves to the Wikipedia community.

Study Procedures

•	With your consent, I will analyze the language of your user page and gather basic statistics such as the count of words, the frequency of words, the number of sections, and so on.

•	I will also read the text of your user page, looking for elements in common with ads posted by other people. I will note whether you include a picture, or links to other content on the internet.

•	I ask you to answer my five questions, above. This will take about ten to fifteen minutes to complete. I will ask you to answer the questions within a week, and send your answers to me.

•	Throughout my research, I will adhere to the University of Alberta Standards for the Protection of Human Research Participants, which you can view at http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/gfcpolicymanual/policymanualsection66.cfm

Benefits

•	There is no direct benefit to you for participating in this research. You may, however, find it interesting to read my perspective on how you present yourself online.

•	I hope that the information I get from doing this study will help understand how technology affects the way people come together into a society.

•	There is no reward or compensation for participating in this research.

Risk

•	There is no direct risk for participating in this research.

Voluntary Participation

•	You are under no obligation to participate in this study. Participation is completely voluntary.

•	You can opt out of this study at any time before October 10, 2011, with no penalty. You can ask to have me withdraw any data that I have collected about you. Even if you agree to be in the study, you can change your mind and withdraw.

•	If you decline to continue or you wish to withdraw from the study, your information will be removed from the study at your request.

Confidentiality

•	This research will be used to support a project that is part of my MA degree.

•	A summary of my research will be available on the University of Alberta website.

•	Your personally identifiable information will be deleted and digitally shredded as soon as I have finished gathering data about you.

•	Data will be kept confidential. Only I will have access to the computer file containing the data. It will be password protected. It will not be sent by email or stored online.

•	I will always handle my data in compliance with University of Alberta standards.

•	If you would like to receive a copy of my final report, please ask.

Further Information

•	If you have any further questions regarding this study, please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Stanley Varnhagen, my research advisor for this project. If you have concerns about this study, you may contact the University of Alberta Research Ethics Committee at 780-492-2615. This office has no affiliation with the study investigators.

INDICATING CONSENT

By answering these questions, you indicate your agreement with the following statements:

•	That you understand that you have been asked to be in a research study.

•	That you have read and received a copy of the Information Sheet, attached below (“Additional Information”).

•	That you understand the benefits and risks involved in taking part in this research study.

•	That you have had an opportunity to ask questions and discuss this study.

•	That you understand that you are free to refuse to participate, or to withdraw from the study at any time, without consequence, and that your information will be withdrawn at your request.

•	That the issue of confidentiality been explained to you and that you understand who will have access to your information (see “Additional Information”).

•	That you agree to participate.

Thank-you again!


 * Replied via e-mail. Useight (talk) 23:18, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Need Admin help w possible vandalism
Hello, I search the list of Admins and found you to be "around" in the Mountain Time. A user with only an IP address has been making several edits that appear to be vandalism. 69.2.179.247 . All of his/her edits are about the number of African American, vs. White. I first noticed the edits when an article about a town I used to live in was changed with totally crazy numbers...... And none of his/her edits have any sources to back up his/her edits.

What can I/we do? Thanks for your time. Rocket maniac  RT 17:47, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I'm pretty inactive these days. I'd recommend undoing those edits because they were added without a source. Send a message to the IP asking him/her not to add information without citations. I'll take my name out of that list - I'm rarely around anymore. Useight (talk) 00:52, 21 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your help. Ive undone all of the edits and sent a message to the IP. Rocket  maniac  RT 14:26, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

MSU Interview
Dear Useight,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the communityHERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:
 * Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
 * Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
 * All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
 * All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
 * The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your nameHERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar