User talk:Worm That Turned/Archive 12

RfC
Can you or somebody  close and archive this now before it  gets any  more out  of hand? It's no longer needed. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:59, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Certainly not. For one thing, I'm involved there - I've participated in the RfC, it would be inappropriate for me to close it. For another, I don't think an indefinite block with no way back is appropriate at all. In my opinion, closing and archiving now would be premature. Waiting a few days (not hours) at least seems prudent.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I forgot that you had also commented there. Anyway, it's appears to have been closed already. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:36, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Calling like it is
WTT,

Please notice that you are in the highest circle of candidates that I oppose, and indeed you are the highest of those firmly opposed.

Sincerely, Kiefer .Wolfowitz 15:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Replaced good faith removal. KW is welcome at this page, whether or not I keep out of his way elsewhere.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 15:38, 5 December 2011 (UTC) I noticed KW. I was surprised by it and noted it at the time. You are indeed a man of many parts.   WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 15:38, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * In other words, S., it was not surprising that Worm behaved honorably today. Kiefer .Wolfowitz 15:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Green Museum Messages
Dave - you're a star; thanks for watching over my team. Greenmuseum (talk) 12:55, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Dave - can you please check in the eduation section. One of the students has moved her piece to the main page, but not properly. Thanks Greenmuseum (talk) 13:32, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Thanks for working with our class! Cdl32 (talk) 22:05, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, I look forward to our many discussions!  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 01:56, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello Dave, just testing. Thanks for helping the class. Mostly I believe they will add sections to TGM but I defer to you and we will adjust project goals as necessary. Greenmuseum (talk) 19:32, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Discusions with Anna Simmons
Hello Mr. Worm That Turned!

My name is Anna Simmons, and I am very excited to work with you on the Green Museum Wikipedia project. For my wiki contribution, I would like to discuss what museums are doing with their outdoor spaces to be more green. Most museums have some sort of landscaping or outdoor space for their visitors. Many institutions are using this space as a place to teach about storm water runoff, water savings, re-use of materials, and the importance of native plants. I could discuss several specific case studies that are mentioned in the literature we have been reading for our class. I look forward to your hearing your thoughts. Amsimm (talk) 23:56, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Good morning Anna! That sounds like a very interesting piece of work, and I'm sure it could be made a good addition to the encyclopedia too. There's a few ways you could handle it, by writing to the general case, the general case for a country or about specific cases.


 * If you were to write about the general case - possibly an article on say, Outdoor spaces at museums, you should have the largest amount of information available to pull together for an article. It would be worth remembering that the article would have to be written from an international point of view, which may be difficult.
 * Perhaps this means writing about a more specific area - Outdoor spaces at USA museums - would be a better idea. It could give the article focus.
 * More specifically would be to add a little information to lots of museum articles, a section on their outdoor space, culminating in a List of outdoor spaces at museums, which could have a few paragraphs at the top, and links to all the museums you've investigated. This would probably be the most precise method, but lists are often forgotten at wikipedia - they don't have the same prestige
 * Whichever route you choose, it will be important to remember that everything on wikipedia needs to be verifiable. This means that any new information cannot be put directly on to wikipedia - everything has to come from outside sources. Unfortunately, that can mean that comments like "Many institutions are using this space..." would need some sort of citation to back it up. What constitutes "many" for example?
 * I'll let you have a little think about what you'd like to achieve from wikipedia - do let me know if you have any more questions, would like some clarification or indeed would like to know how to get started!  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 01:56, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Your words of advice are very helpful! Now that you know a little more about our specific assignment (i.e. each student is to contribute to the already existing Green Museum Wiki pages), do you think I should still choose one of your 3 approaches listed above? I like the larger scope of - Outdoor Spaces at Museums - you mentioned, but I realize that opens the doors to researching international museums as well as museums in the United States. I am interested in outdoor and landscaped spaces for a variety of reasons... 1)They contribute to healthy water systems 2)Beautify the museum footprint 3)Provide a space for outdoor/environmental education and 4)Inspire community involvement. Now... I realize this list may appear to be my personal opinion, and I would have to provide verifiable resources to back them. In my article contribution, I would like to discuss a new "green" landscape certification system created by the U.S. Botanic Garden, Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center and the University of Texas at Austin, called - Landscapes for Life -. The idea behind Landscapes for Life is similar to the USBC's LEED Certification system, but designed for Landscapes instead of building structures. What do you think about all of this? As soon as I hear from you, I'm ready to get started :) 75.103.224.2 (talk) 23:12, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, it's really up to you - if one solution appeals to you more, then that would be the best to go for. Remember, that there is no deadline, if you want to write the larger scoped article, you can always add international bits at a later date. It may be that someone marks the article as needing expansion in the international areas - but it's unlikely to be lost for being too centered on one area.
 * Or you could possibily write an article on Landscapes for Life, that's also a great topic, assuming that the certification system has sufficient reliable sources discussing it. I'd probably suggest starting something in a sandbox (say User:Amsimm/Outdoor spaces at museums or User:Amsimm/Landscapes for Life?) and get a feel for writing a wikipedia article.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:28, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Discussions with JcMusEd

 * Green Museum Topic Choices
 * Hi Dave, I am a student in the George Washington University's Green Museum class. I am hoping to add to the Green Museum wiki page with information on the Toledo Zoo's use of solar and wind power. Do you see any potential problems with this topic?
 * Thanks,

JcMusEd (talk) 03:36, 30 September 2011 (UTC)JCMusEd
 * Hi JcMusEd. I've moved your question down here, so all the discussions for Green Museum are together. Sounds like an interesting topic and I can't see any major pitfalls with adding the information to Wikipedia. The only question is "where" the information should go. Unfortunately, I'm not sure that the use of solar and wind power by a single zoo will be sufficiently notable to create a new wikipedia article - but I would suggest expanding the section on Toledo Zoo or creating a new section in that page. Let me know if you've got any further questions.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:58, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Further to the comments below - I think discussing Toledo Zoo's specific use on the the green museum page may cause a bit of difficulty, it would be better if you could write on a more general topic. Perhaps museum renewable energy sources in general?  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:27, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Discussions with Aebeisch
Green Museum Topic Choice

Hi Dave, I am also a student in GWU's Green Museum course. We are actually just adding to the Green Museum page not making an entirely new wiki page. I just thought I would clarify your conversation with JcMusEd. I wanted to add to the education section of the Green Museum page with Disney's Animal Kingdom Conservation Education best practices. Do you foresee any issue with that? If you do, I could also just do best practices in general regarding education- Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aebeisch (talk • contribs) 21:48, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much for clarifying that. The other courses I've worked on focussed on the students creating new articles, rather than updating existing ones. However, if the article is about green museums in general, you may find that adding specific information about Disney may be too specific. Unless you can show that it was particularly significant in the field of green museums. On the flip side, adding green museum information the Disney's Animal Kingdom page would make sense. It may be better to write about best practices in general.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:22, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Discussions with Dani2424
Hello Dave, I am also in GWU's Green Museum course. New to Wikipedia, I'm just testing out the talk page...making sure I know what to do before writing a long message about my contribution to the Green Museum page. I am planning to add a "green exhibits" section. Does that topic seem too broad? Thanks & have a great day! Dani2424 (talk) 10:07, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Dani, and welcome to my talk page, make yourself at home :) Now that I have a better understanding of what you're trying to do, I think a green exhibits section sounds just about right for a green museum page. Don't forget you'd be writing about a general topic, and whilst you can mention specifics, you need to keep the section broad.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:22, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello Dave! My portion for the Green Museum article is ready to move from my sandbox. Problem is, I misunderstood the instructions on this page to add my Green Exhibits portion into the Green Museum article. I think the The Green Exhibits page has become a separate article(?)...not good! However, when I do a search on Green Exhibits, it still appears in my sandbox with a new message in red bold that reads "This sandbox has been placed in the article namespace. Move this page into your userspace." What does this mean? I just want to move it into Green Museum. Please help...thanks much. --Dani2424 (talk) 03:39, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Dani. I've moved the article from Green Exhibits to the Green Museum page, leaving a redirect behind. I've also made a few tweaks to bring it closer to wikipedia policy - the only one which there was a bit of an issue over was the External links. They should only be included at the end of the article, where they lead readers to further encyclopedic information, but not within the article where it could be regarded as advertising.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:15, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Discussions with Ezafiris
Hello Dave, I'm another student in the Green Museum class. My plan for the Green Museum page is to expand on the History section of the page by giving a time line of the Green Museum movement- which museums were the leaders in greening their institutions, who else is considered green, and listing some specific institutions that are innovators in the field. I would love to hear your thoughts! Ezafiris (talk) 23:23, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Ezafiris, apologies in the delay in replying, I'm quite slow sometimes - sorry! I just want to say that expanding the History section of the Green Museum movement would be an exceptionally good idea and would add terrific encyclopedic value. If you can find reliable sources which state who is leading the field and so on, that sounds like a great way to expand the article  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:28, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Great, and no worries about a delay. I'll keep in mind the need for reliable sources in stating the leaders in the field of Green Museums Ezafiris (talk) 21:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

TreasuryTag
I've been contacted by TreasuryTag regarding a possible return. I was a little surprised, as I've had very little interaction with him, but I guess it was prompted by my conditional support here. My conditions involve you, so before I invest any more time in review, does your offer still stand?-- SPhilbrick  T  15:53, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That might be difficult as I'm standing for ArbCom. If I am lucky enough to be elected, I am unlikely to have sufficient time to dedicate to the mentorship. If I'm not successful (and it is borderline), then I would be glad to help out there. I should point out that I have specifically told TT that he should not attempt to return before the New Year and I find it very telling that he's gone looking for someone else to help him come back sooner.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 15:57, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understand that Arbcom would be a significant time commitment. I'm curious at your comment that your success is borderline - I thought it was not possible to see interim results. Am I misunderstanding your point, or are you simply commenting on the voters guide comments?


 * Re TT, in his defense, he hasn't identified a time, so it may simply be that he is in the early stages of a process. I do understand that the hope was for complete disengagement for some time. As the ArbCom elections close in a few days, let's put this on hold until then.-- SPhilbrick  T  17:01, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No, I've got no inside knowledge, I was mostly commenting on Monty's voter guide. I would say I'm one of the more borderline candidates, possibly because I've got so much respect for the other candidates. Putting things on hold until after the election results seems sensible to me. Even if I do get in, I would be willing to help out with mentorship, but I wouldn't be able to lead it as I was hoping to.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 11:44, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Bacon Challenge 2012 Update
Hey! It's been a good few months since the Bacon Challenge 2012 kicked off in June, and I'm pleased to say that decent progress has been made. While we were a bit slow to start, bacon-related contributions have been picking up again, and scores have been rising in the Bacon WikiCup. Here's a quick rundown of the overall positions as they stand: Currently, only a handful of participants have reported contributions: to those who haven't, remember, there is still plenty of time left to contribute and rise up in through the positions, as the Challenge and WikiCup run up until March. Just like last year, all participants will receive a shiny medal which they can place on their userpages, or use as a self-esteem booster if need be (just joking...sort of). If you need ideas for what to work on, a list is available here.
 * 1st : Silver seren
 * 2nd : Worm That Turned
 * 3rd : Rcsprinter123
 * 4th: Doh5678
 * 5th: Cirt

One last thing! Per request, we are bringing back territory representation into the WikiCup! Editors can now represent nations, states, or provinces, just to add a bit of fun and Olympic-flair to the event. Simply reply to this message with the territory you wish to represent, if you choose to do so.

Thanks for reading! Good luck! ~Super Hamster  Talk Contribs 02:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Whatever I had last year :)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 11:48, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Referencing a source
Hi Dave. Can i ask what the "accessdate" is when i reference in the more detailled way? Is that when it was added as a reference or when published? Thanks  J e n o v a  20 10:09, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's when you last looked at it (in case it's been changed since then).  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:11, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * So if i just read it, it's today?
 * Thanks  J e n o v a  20 10:12, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Exactly. It's to confirm the last time that source definitely matched what was said, and is very important for internet based sources as it helps us use things like Wayback machine to find it if the link goes dead.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:15, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Carrier IQ my reference (28) isn't working properly, have i missed something or done it wrong?
 * Thanks  J e n o v a  20 10:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * cite news is a template, you forgot to close the template syntax... (you forgot '}}' on the end). Otherwise, very good job.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:30, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm finding it a bit too technical to use, you know i'm crap with templates if i can't copy and paste  J e n o v a  20 10:59, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Let the software do it for you. Press edit, see "B I | Pix blah blah blah >Cite" Press "Cite". Use the drop down. OR read more at refToolbar 2.0  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 11:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That seems much easier! =]
 * I'll try that next time instead of copying and pasting.
 * Thanks Dave  J e n o v a  20 11:56, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

BD / TPC
I'm disappointed by the asymmetry of your reactions to BD/TPC. You're defending TPC as though she was the victim here, and then putting the same patronising stuff that BD objected to from TPC onto BD's page. So how about you take "let's just back off" seriously? William M. Connolley (talk) 16:26, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That's simply because I do see the situation with BD/TPC as asymmetrical. TPC has a history of edits which are positive and civil shouldn't have posted the message which sparked this off and the tone was condescending. However, she has apologized for it, specifically cited why she did it (regarding a line in WP:CIVIL) and yet has been hit by a large number of people having a go at her. BD on the other hand has a history of positive but uncivil edits along with personal attacks, but with noticeable improvement in the past few weeks. I'm not saying TPC is a victim, but I do object to BD being painted as one.
 * You are however totally correct that constantly telling people to "back off and let things die down" isn't actually going to make anyone do so and I could do with setting a better example there. I'll be dropping things now.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 17:42, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Considering an RFA
I've had two in the past and haven't been as active as I'd like too...yet I'm feeling masochistic and considering running again. What do you think? Would you consider a nomination or slap some sense into me?-- SKATER  Is Back 16:33, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll have a look as soon as I can and get back to you on that! :)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 17:35, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Skater. I'd say it's probably not the best time at the moment. You've got some very long gaps in your contribution history, I think users like to see at least 6 months to a year of solid contributions. Effectively, 500 edits go back to May last year, which is far too far. Much of the work you've done since you've been back has been automated vandal fighting, which is of course very helpful for the encyclopedia. However, the amount that you've done wouldn't be treated as prolific, I've known editors who do similar numbers in a week (or in some scary cases, in a day!) Whilst it is possible to become an admin through vandal fighting, it would be a lot better to show yourself to be a well rounded and trusted member of the community.
 * To do this, you want to work in a few areas where admin related tools would be helpful and do the work well. For example, working in New page patrol, only tagging for speedy deletion when you are certain that it should be deleted and tagging for cleanup or AfD in other situations. Maybe commenting regularly on WP:XfD discussions or working in WP:AfC. Also, some more content creation is always a positive step. Basically, at the moemnt, you've got a bit of a way to go, but I think you'll make a fine admin in the future.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 15:13, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your advice, I knew that my gaps in editing would be a cause for oppose for some users. I would like to point out my content creation is more expansion of articles, you can see my DYK's on my page...they're the best i've got personally. I've also been known for NPP, as image patrolling as well. Regardless, I thank you for taking the time to review me. :) Thanks,-- SKATER  Is Back 15:21, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I did see you DYKs and I meant to congratulate you about them, but got rambling. You've done a great job on the stuff you've been doing, and if you carry on doing them consistently for 6 months or so, I'm sure I'd be happy to nominate you.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 15:40, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Gotcha, until then. Good luck in the arbcom voting!-- SKATER  Is Back 15:45, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! Let me know if you come unstuck on anything and need a hand :)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 15:46, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Reference

 * Hi Dave.
 * I got that detailled referencing to work just for Ford Focus but i can't get it to work this time for Nissan Primastar.
 * This is what i have:
 * Can you tell me why? I've done exactly the same as last time i think. Thanks  J e n o v a  20 10:37, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Can you tell me why? I've done exactly the same as last time i think. Thanks  J e n o v a  20 10:37, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Looks fine to me... Won't work on my page without a reflist which I've added below. but it looks absolutely fine... The Nissan Primastar article doesn't currently have reference in the article though... you haven't added it yet? WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:42, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's supposed to be an external link i'm trying to add.
 * Thanks  J e n o v a  20 11:06, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * In which case, you shouldn't be using the ref tags, nor the cite template. Just a url with one square bracket. So it'd look like Description of url  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 11:09, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, stupid mistake in that case then.
 * | Nissan UK website?
 * Thanks again Dave  J e n o v a  20 11:13, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Bish bash bosh.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 11:14, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

CSD
Hey Worm, I'm a little rusty on my speedy deletion criteria. Do you know if there is another editor or area of Wikipedia with example pages for me to explain how I would tag them and why? Ryan Vesey Review me!  15:40, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, there's always the adoption course for you to review . Otherwise, the most obvious place to read up is WP:CSD or the Field guide to proper speedy deletion. Other admins to chat to would be Kudpung (who does a lot of deletions) or Salvio Giuliano (who I've seen at CSD many times).  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 15:45, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks worm. I hadn't actually seen the field guide before so that is nice.  Ryan Vesey  Review me!  17:55, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Do you still take adoptees?
Hello,

I'm a newly registered editor though I have edited as an ip for a long while. I find that it's harder being registered and that I need a mentor to understand what's going on and why this one guy is after me and how to deal with it. Do you still take adoptees? Best wishes,  MathewTownsend (talk) 03:09, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/AwesomeSponge
Do you think thins should be closed or the tranclude removed before it starts properly? User only has 15 (fifteen) edits. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:11, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

User:TreasuryTag unblock request
FYI. 28bytes (talk) 19:30, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Saw it. Not really in a position to comment ATM. Will be back near computer tomorrow or later tonight. Thanks for the heads up though.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 19:32, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

OK, I admit it, I LOL'd
User:Worm that turded? - "Shit58" (talk) 12:05, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It did make me chuckle, especially after a long list of Worm That Turned 1, 2, 3 etc...  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:43, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

YGM
--Slon02 (talk) 02:22, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Would you have any problems with me moving & transcluding the RfA, or is there something else you'd like to add? Or would you like to do the honors? (And once again, thank you)--Slon02 (talk) 02:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I was just waiting for the person who told you it was there in case he wanted to co-nom. however, if you are happy, and are sure you can move and transclude... go for it  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 07:29, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Another RfA
Hello, Worm, I am the beginner in Wikipedia, but would like to become an admin sometime, so your kind assistance would be very useful to me. I hope to count on your nomination as I reach the level of edits required by Wiki rules (soon, hopefully) - have only 1500+ edits in English Wiki. --Orekhova (talk) 10:10, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Orekhova. Whilst there is no actual requirement for level of edits to run for adminship, it's worth keeping in mind that the average number of edits for a successful application is about 10k, and no one has passed in the last 3 years with under 3000 edits, so you've got a bit of a way to go yet. I can give you some suggestions on the sorts of areas you might want to work in, but for now, the most important thing is to work on is getting more experience. Have a read of this guide, which gives you some ideas about the whole process.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 12:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Worm That Turned,

well, I've been aware there's much to do, but anyway, thank you for your comment, I appreciate any advice now. I hope to address you again with the same request, sometimes later, when I match the requirements to a greater degree. --Orekhova (talk) 13:00, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed there is. It's difficult to know what will get you to "adminship" because it is different for each individual. Basically, you need to show yourself to be trustworthy to the community, some people do this by evaluating different articles which are likely to be deleted at WP:AfD, others by patrolling new pages at WP:NPP, maybe even doing anti-vandalism work at WP:RCP. A large portion of the community wants to see that you've created / expanded, so you should try to do some actual writing work. If you keep working in any of these areas, you're likely to run into some difficulty sooner or later, remember that discussion is key and show that you can resolve disputes. Keep doing this and you will find that someone will likely nominate you for adminship, you won't need to go looking for a nomination! As a rule of thumb though, aim for 6000 edits and 1 year experience before you go too much further.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 13:12, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I fully realize, that in the first place it looks like random trying my luck, but actually I was trying to get familiar with administrators who were indicated as willing to nominate for adminship, and to see, how many out of them are active; obviously, it is too early to request for adminship, and I guess, I pointed it out in each of my request for assistance. Anyway, please, consider this as seeking for friendship and advice :) --Orekhova (talk) 13:57, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

"Question "at AN

 * Sorry about that... I did have a question for you when I started typing (were you willing to commit to closing the RFC?)... but half way through typing it I saw that you had already answered (in your previous post) the question I was going to ask ... I changed my comment to a "thank you",  but forgot to change the edit summary to match before I hit "save".   Blueboar (talk) 14:24, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries :)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 14:28, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

V
Hi Dave, I've compiled my thoughts and a draft close for the WP:V RfC at User:HJ/V. Could yo take a look and add any of your own thoughts or comments. There's no great hurry, but it would be nice, if at all possible, to get it closed today. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  20:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I left my notes at work... so today's not likely I'm afraid. First thing tomorrow I'll add some notes, but I've still got a lot to get through.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 21:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks like I've still got quite a bit of reading, because as it stands, I don't agree with your proposed close. You may have to give me a day or two more...  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:57, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm done. User:RegentsPark/Verifiability RfC. Now to see what HJM has been up to. --regentspark (comment) 15:39, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pan Am (TV series)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pan Am (TV series). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Something interesting
Have you ever seen this? It's pretty good. Ryan Vesey Review me!  05:41, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No, I hadn't, but it's very interesting!  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:37, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That's been going for a few years now - still in "beta" -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:50, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Ryan. I didn't  know about  this -  it's truly  amazing. I've set  it  up  on  a spare monitor and have it running  all  the time just  for fun. Fascinating.  --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Glad I'm not the only one who hadn't seen it before! Strange idea of fun though Kudpung ;)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 11:34, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ZOMG! Yet another compulsively-hypnotic time-consumer ...  Pesky  ( talk  …stalk!) 13:23, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Only until the novelty wears off :) --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:00, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Not quite as hysterically funny as "this week's task" for mother to play with - making paper chains, assisted by three cats ... reminds me, must have video available :P Pesky  ( talk  …stalk!) 14:10, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Benjamin Good
What do you think of the AFD I started on this page? Do you think it should have been speedy deleted? I wasn't aware of the fact that it had been recreated when I initiated the AFD but I do like the opportunity to decide to salt the page now. Ryan Vesey Review me!  19:10, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * So the article was modified after I tagged it so I pushed for a Speedy, but can you use your awesome admin skills to take a look at it at the moment I added the AFD tag and tell me what you think? Ryan Vesey  Review me!  19:51, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry I missed this, looks like it's all resolved though.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:13, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Copyright question
Would you mind taking a look at the conversation here and making a statement? Ryan Vesey Review me!  22:26, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Worm
Hey Worm, it's me again :)

I'm hoping you are elected to be an arbitrator for 2012 :) — ah, the suspense before the results come out! :P

Also, would you mind chiming in on my FLC? I'm excited to finally have nominated it ;)

Best,  HurricaneFan 25  14:33, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Love you to bits, dear :P
Hey Worm, my response here is definitely not intended to be a dig at either you or the other closers (I personally would not have wanted to go anywhere near attempting to close that! You haz balls :P) So, please don;t take offence, and let your colleagues know that no offence is intended (and, I hope, none taken) here. Adding: this is my own personal "main concern" with the thing. Cheers, Pesky  ( talk  …stalk!) 09:39, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It does appear to fly in the face of logic, doesn't it? But when I read through everything, I didn't see consensus that the rfc should be implemented. It does appear that the community wants change though, so I hope there will be another RfC after a bit more thought. I know you don't mean anything by it and won't be worrying about your comments ;)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:45, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * (>**)> Hugz :o) I was pretty sure you knew me well enough.  I'm just going to clarify my comment on my own talk, though, to avoid misunderstandings.  Pesky  ( talk  …stalk!) 10:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings
Hey WTT, just a quick message of good will; not sure if your still watching my edits but may of noticed that i havent been as active as i usaully am over the past work, i guess ive just been pretty busy lately ^^ hope all is well your end and i wish you a warm seasons greetings for you and your family :) User:Goldblooded (Talk/Discuss)(Complain) 12:32, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, life can get in the way of Wikipedia very easily and should always be regarded as the priority. I don't generally have the time to actively watch edits, but I've still got your talk page watched in case anything goes wrong. Season's Greetings to you too :)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 12:34, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Administrators' noticeboard
Hi Worm That Turned. You participated in Administrators' noticeboard/Archive228, in which a one-month topic ban on creating new articles and making page moves was imposed on. The closing admin has asked for community input about whether to remove the topic ban or make it indefinite at Administrators' noticeboard. Cunard (talk) 08:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I stuck my neck out here. While the odds are against it going that way, if it does, I'll need a crash course on mentoring.-- SPhilbrick  (Talk)  20:25, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Request for RFA Nomination
Hello, I would like it if you could review my rfa nomination page over here. Comments: I know I only have 100 or so edits, but I am hoping that I made a number of quality edits to make up for that. Rubinkumar (talk) 23:31, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Further to our natter,
http://xkcd.com/810/  Chzz  ► 19:45, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Userpage
Hi Dave, can i ask who designed your userpage? Thanks and have a nice evening  J e n o v a  20 21:22, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's based on Jimbo Wales old one, but I did the redesign. :)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:00, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool
 * Sorry about the wait for reply, had a few days off for a social life =]  J e n o v a  20 11:15, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you Kiefer. I've got a few plans for this coming year, and I'm sure not being on Arbcom won't hurt! To anyone who wanders over here, thank you for your support, I'm amazed that I got over 50% and hope the committee do well.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 22:02, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

That close
You were →← that close to getting on ArbCom. I was truly looking forward to you being an Arbitrator as I think you've proven yourself to be a good and wise Wikpedian. I'm very sorry you didn't make it. However, I am thankful that several hundred of my fellow Wikipedians did see your value to ArbCom and voted for you. I expect that many, many others will join our ranks and agree that you should be on ArbCom if you decide to run in the future. Thanks for all you help and support of our project. You're a very good Wikipedian. Best regards. - Hydroxonium (T•C• [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&limit=1&amp;username=Hydroxonium V] ) 23:59, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Proper photo finish, wasn't it! Maybe next year :)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:21, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Impressive
I reiterate the above messages, Worm. I'm disappointed it wasn't a successful run, but it was seriously an impressive (and very close) showing that speaks volumes about your reputation in the community, and I hope you realize that. I trust you'll run again next year as well.  Swarm   X 00:18, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, you made a fine impression there, mate. Naturally, I'm pleased you can relax more over the coming twelve months as there's plenty of work to do in the North-West while we build networks through Wikimedia UK. You'll find running next year much easier with the experience you've gained. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 00:30, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Congrats at such a fine performance. Not being  elected is no  big  issue as the places are limited - more important  is the confidence that  the community  demonstrated. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:19, 19 December 2011 (UTC) -  Now if admins were to  be elected through  a similar process...--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:09, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, that was impressive. Next time, maybe :o)  Pesky  ( talk  …stalk!) 06:41, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you all for your comments. I must say, I'm waivering between mildly gutted and very relieved that I didn't get in, but the support I've been shown by the community is astounding. Here's to the next 12 months!  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:20, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Yep, that was pretty close - I reckon you'll be a shoo-in next time (unless you've regained your sanity by then and don't want to do it :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:03, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 10:15, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Retirement
I originally planned to retire because of real-life issues, but I've changed my mind to just take a short wikibreak. I should be back at full editing capacity by Friday. BTW, when do you plan to hop on IRC? :)  HurricaneFan 25  —  15:39, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Glad to hear you're not giving up all together, and a wikibreak may do you the power of good. I'll be on IRC all day tomorrow (UK hours)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 15:47, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

re: adopton
I have thrown around a few messages - no response, though. Would YOU mind adopting me?

--Thehistorian10 (talk) 17:20, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd be glad to. I'll leave a note on your talk page since this thread has been hijacked

Per this message, I was going to ask you what the protocol for adoption requests was. I had noticed the backlog a few weeks ago, and was surprised to find that it was actually harder to find an active editor looking to be adopted then an inactive one. Who's in charge of that? I know there's a project, but sometimes that doesn't mean anytihng... I was thinking about being bold and removing a few really old requests, but I saw you beat me to it. Anyway, thanks for cleaning out this, and have a Merry Christmas.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  00:27, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Also about the adoption program...
 * There is no protocol. Never has been, either. There's a pretty well structured project, but it's completely devoid of any trace of leadership or coordination, governance, protocol, etc. The project certainly needs someone to take control, as Worm and I have discussed before, but it's lacking ATM. The project used to be a "hidden gem" of sorts, and its decentralized nature was entirely manageable. Our supply of adopters easily exceeded the demand for them. I'm not sure why exactly it changed, (probably a combination of the program becoming more advertised to new users coupled with a decline in active adopters) but it did&mdash;the project gradually evolved into its current state, in which the backlog grows to an unmanageable point until one or two motivated users sift through it, removing the old requests and making offers to the more recent ones (I believe this is the third occasion in which the backlog's been "cleaned out" as such).


 * In any case, Worm, my resounding thanks for doing this as well. I knew I would eventually have to roll the sleeves up and do a backlog grind, but you've taken care of most of it (though why you didn't ask me for help, I have no idea).  Swarm   X 07:21, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * @Nolelover, just as Swarm says, there's no protocol, though it makes it easier to manage the backlog if the template is removed. No one is in charge of anything, but I might have a go at clearing down the project and seeing what happens.
 * @Swarm, I didn't ask for help because it was an easy enough job, just one I'd been putting off. I could do with some help though on the next few phases - I'll drop a message at WT:ADOPT to lay out my plan moving forward.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:50, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, I'll keep an eye out.  Swarm   X 10:37, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, you already did.  Swarm   X 10:38, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the 'jacking, just didn't want to create another header...anyway, thanks for the replies. I do agree that a project like that needs some prodding; its an easy one to join, but not so much to be active in. Ah well, I'll do my best to help out when I can, although that probably means I should create a 'real' adoption page, and not just follow the "lots of discussions" plan I had before.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  15:25, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Bias
Hi Dave, can i ask if there's a tag for a biased article? (Like there is for cleanup) I checked WP:BIAS but it's an essay, so not much use. Thanks, merry xmas  J e n o v a  20 10:58, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * POV would be the obvious one, but there's also COI for conflict of interest, puffery for too much promotion or even too few opinions if it's only looking at one area.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 11:11, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * And i can use more than one of these in an article and i put them at the top of the page?
 * I am learning Dave, just pushes old stuff out my head when new stuff goes in =P
 * Thanks, merry xmas!  J e n o v a  20 11:21, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * You can, yes. You might even want to use WP:TWINKLE to make things easier for you. Just enable it at Special:Preferences it's a gadget, then use the TW dropdown and select Tag.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 11:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I got twinkle after you suggested it for referencing =]
 * I haven't got to use it much though as my laptop died and Android isn't well suited for editing Wikipedia.
 * If we don't speak again before, have a nice xmas Dave!  J e n o v a  20 12:08, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't know if I mentioned it before, certainly not for references, which it doesn't do ;) but if you've got it, you've got it. Happy Christmas :)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 12:16, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Darn, i was going good til then!
 * I switched it on a while back but haven't used it.
 * I confused it with your last advice on referencing. My bad.
 * Happy Christmas Dave =]  J e n o v a  20 12:25, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Adoption
I am a relatively inexperienced user who tends to concentrate on minor edits, spelling corrections, etc. and have recently applied to use WP:AWB to speed this up. I would like to improve the quality and effectiveness of my contributions to WP. I found out about the adoption programme a few weeks ago, and decided to put myself forward for adoption. I saw from your box on the adoption page that you regard yourself as a WikiGnome. Would you be willing to adopt me? Thanks-- Gilderien Talk|Contribs 14:32, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Gilderien. Thanks for being pro-active enough to actually ask for an adopter, you'd be amazed how many people don't even bother to do that. Unfortunately, I'm quite possibly busy next year, as I've just run for Arbitration Committee and if I get in there, I doubt I'll have time to take on new adoptees. However, my talk page is always open for questions - I've got a few friendly faces who keep an eye on things when I'm not around too. Depending on what happens over the next few days, I might come back to you about adoption.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 14:38, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Gilderien. I mentioned that I might come back to you regarding adoption, and since my circumstances have changed I'm now in a position to help you out if you are still interested. Let me know.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:59, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I was sorry to hear that you didn't get onto Arbcom, but I am still interested and would be delighted if you would adopt me. Thanks-- Gilderien Talk|Contribs 19:53, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Next time.
Dave,

I'm sorry to hear you didn't make it to ArbCom. I'm surprised you didn't. But to think you were somehwere in the process - reading your talk page - you were very close, that's something that can keep you motivated until next time - which I'm sure will be successful.

Also, on another note, I'd just like to say thank you. Although it shows where your loyalties stand... I'm kidding!!! Anyway in all seriousness, You were totally nice about it, and you had to think about what's best for WP, and I respect that. The article just wasn't at standard. Hopefully one day he'll be in the "notable" category - and next time I'll corroborate that notability in the article. As Yetti Hunter told me, "we've all had articles deleted" - don't know if that's exactly true, but I'm convinced that I'm not the only one.

So thank you, and goodluck for ArbCom next year!

Next test hopefully tonight (maybe) or tommorow :P I have'nt forgotten - yet. -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 09:54, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not exactly the worst thing in the world, ArbCom is a lot of work and I'm not going to miss that. I was a hair's breadth away, but those who are on the committee are excellent editors (I think I voted for all but 1) and deserve their places. Maybe next year, maybe not.
 * I did a lot of research on Said - looked for sources and all sorts. He's just not at the level I'd call notable. You'd written a great article on the individual though, neutral as it can be. Feeling the pride in an article that is shown when it is deleted is something that each wikipedian should have at some time. Don't feel disheartened, you didn't do anything wrong.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:01, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Ahh question - since I'm basically the only editor on the article - and I have requested it deleted - can't you delete it...like now? I just want it gone...can't it be CSD'd under G7? -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 10:09, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe so, but I'd rather not press the button since I voted - perhaps ask another admin, Kudpung may be able to help? It should be closed and deleted soon enough, just de-watchlist it and pretend it's gone ;)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:27, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * LOL okay I'll de-watchlist it, and pretend it's gone ;) Thank you, -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 10:31, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Same from me. You were an excellent candidate, and it's a shame that you weren't elected. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:09, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Belatedly... it's yet another thing to blame that 1% for, don't you think? :) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 02:39, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Your "mentee"...
...is at it again. Can you please knock some sense into him?  Eagles   24/7  (C)  01:53, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * NOTE: As since contributors to the MFD have said to link to the ban proposal via the archive, it has a link to the archive. (Would you mind signing my guestbook?) -Porch corpter (talk/contribs) 06:05, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * NOTE: WP:THETRUTH.  Eagles   24/7  (C)  18:41, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Mentoring
Hi Worm, I'm not sure if you are still an active mentor, but if you are there is a request for your mentorship at User_talk:Protector_of_Wiki The user is currently indefinitely blocked, but there is a chance of him being unblocked as he seems to have changed his perspective over the last year. N o f o rmation Talk  07:01, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Activity
Hi friend, Recently, I haven't been writing in wiki.en, because I'm portuguese and I more focus on pt.wikipedia. But now I want to start work hard because I want to learn english language too. I'm a young man and I think that English is a good chance for the future. Sorry if I have got some grammar or orthographic mistakes. In a few days or months I will surely write down my name on "List for Adoption". Thank you, Tiago Peixoto (talk) 18:48, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy Xmas


Rcsprinter is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.  Rcsprinter  (whisper)  20:42, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!


 HurricaneFan 25  —  is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.  HurricaneFan 25  —  21:30, 24 December 2011 (UTC) 

Gilderien Talk|Contribs is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Gilderien Talk|Contribs 22:07, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy Xmas


(Would you mind signing my guestbook?) -Porch corpter (talk/contribs) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Well, it's been good being a mentor. This is to wish merry christmas. (Would you mind signing my guestbook?) -Porch corpter (talk/contribs) 09:04, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Twilight Zone
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Twilight Zone. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 22:15, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your help
Hi Worm That Turned: thank you for removing my adoption request - I hope to return to editing once some other projects wrap up, but I am currently inactive. Will put out the call for help again once I'm back in the game. oishiisou — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oishiisou (talk • contribs) 02:12, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

FYI
User talk:Beeblebrox -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 03:23, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * FYI.  Eagles   24/7  (C)  05:27, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Is he still your mentee? Moar dramaz. You may be interested. Nothing to rush back for, though. Hope you're enjoying the holidays. Edit: Woah. "Moar dramaz" just turned into a full site ban proposal. If you can get around to it, your input would obviously be valuable..  Swarm   X 06:34, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Now he has been blocked for 6 months. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:24, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I feel really bad about blocking one of your (ex?) mentees, but he doesn't seem to be able to hold in his head the instructions he was given, or to extrapolate from single instances to 'how we do things around here', and since he kept on repeating that his clean block log was evidence that his editing was OK, I am hoping that this might actually get through to him, as mere talking doesn't.--Elen of the Roads (talk) 19:29, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm back online tomorrow morning and its a shame this couldn't have waited until then. No idea exactly what has gone on but if things have got bad enough for a 6 month block then I must say I'm surprised. Thanks for the message  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 19:58, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Several of us did ask people to wait until you came back before taking action, but... -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:07, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I felt like I should drop you a line here just to reiterate that as far as I am concerned, you did everything anyone could have expected from a mentor and more. I come from a familly of teachers and one thing they all know is that sometimes you run into a student who just can't be taught certain things. I cetainly hope you don't feel like what happened here was your fault, if anything you helped him hold on this long. Of course I also hope, once you get the time to read up on all the nonsense that has been going on recently, that it isn't my fault either. The problem is simply that Porch doesn't get it and any and all attempt to help him get it have failed. He made it clear during the course of our conversations that even after being told he had competence problems so many times he doesn't even understand the meaning of the word "competence." That's not the kind of problem a mentor, even one as patient as yourself, can fix. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:12, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm back online now, after a good week away (amazing how much can go on in a week). I'll do a bit of reading up and see what's going on.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:40, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Just a reply to this last comment. Thank you Beeblebrox for your comments - I've seen how you've been worn down by PC over the years, and you were pretty exhausted when I took him on as a protege. I don't think he's a lost cause as yet, but I think that you've reached the point that it is unlikely that anything positive or constructive will come from your interactions with Porchcorpter. Hopefully walking away from him will work out.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:52, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

A Hyperthetical
Dave, Apologies if I'm bothering you,

I have a question - a hypothetical one. You create an article. This article has The very next day that article is AfD'd.
 * the subject has been documented recently by say ten first-class media outlet's (newspaper/broadcast) around the world. === Hundreds
 * the subject had died; and their funeral was broadcasted on a television network. === An attendance of 1,400 - outside viewership of 11,000
 * the subject managed two YouTube channels, 1 with 10,000~ subscribers (13Vids), the other with 30,000+ (30Vids). === 25,000 Subs (17vids); 62,000 Subs (38Vids)
 * the subject had a third channel, with more than 2,000+ subscribers, 2 videos with combined views of nearly 2 million. === 6,000 Subs; 4 million
 * the subject was an internet personality, like Zyzz for example.
 * the article you created is mentioned in a few of those media outlets. === that and in a broadcast
 * overnight, the article - 24 hours old - has over 10,000 views - higher than many new articles have in a day. === X9 (90,000 views)
 * Reasons include:
 * WP:NTEMP - Notability will just dissapear. === Funny, the subs seem to be going higher to me; Sources keep on coming.
 * WP:MEMORIAL - Everyone dies. === not everyone is an Internet personality.
 * WP:BLP1E - Doesn't properly represent the facts. === Going by sources, yes it does.
 * WP:NN - Therefore no notability. === Notability on a gold plate.

Hyperthetically speaking. What is your first move. What do you do? challenge, or agree? Why would you challenge or agree? -- MST  ☆  R   (Merry Christmas!) 11:54, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, hyp-o-thetically this is a difficult one. Internet personalities are such a new phenomenom that it is difficult to assess whether their notability is lasting or transient. I'd say it depends significantly on the documentation by the third party sources. Obituaries are likely to be a good source of information, effectively short biographies and if you have reliable news outlets that don't normally cover that area mentioning him, then chances are he's notable. (Eg, if say, the Times wrote an obituary)
 * Assuming the sources are good, I'd challenge it at AfD, writing a good argument, explaining why the subject is notable. BLP1E shouldn't matter, nor should NTEMP. But it really depends on the quality of the sources - and that can't be hypothetical.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 12:04, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The facts after the "===" is what is actually happening. I'll reveal to you the subject by providing you sources to examine. I'll be one second, please don't go! (finally someone's listening). -- MST  ☆  R   (Merry Christmas!) 12:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Take your pick -> Here. PS. Multiple sources today havent been added, due to someone worrying about the AfD (other sourcesnot included here, mention celebrities Kid Kudi - even famous for being famous celeb. Kim Kardashian - tweets and messages regarding the subject). Thank you, -- MST  ☆  R   (Merry Christmas!) 12:16, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm looking into it now, but 2 quick comments. Firstly - No results prior to Christmas day - effectively it appears to be his Christmas death which has made news. Secondly, AfD is not a vote - and whilst it's possibly worth mentioning a count of editors who say the page should be kept, you shouldn't be adding each one as a "Keep" vote.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 12:19, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've removed them, and advised that any further thoughts on the matter should be shared at the AFD page. -- MST  ☆  R   (Merry Christmas!) 12:38, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry to be such a hassell, but you have Mail. -- MST  ☆  R   (Merry Christmas!) 13:41, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I had replied to your message. Geez, I'm like one of those unwanted Christmas presents, that you chave no choice but to accept. Look, New Year's is in 10hrs, My sister, "Miss Socializer" is going out, therefore I have to go with my parents to their friends house to celebrate NYE - no one my age. So, I'm going to bring my computer, and use up their internet on Wikipedia, I've decided. I'll be off by the morning, and officially commence my needed break. Thank you, -- MST  ☆  R   (Merry Christmas!) 00:59, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I did read it, but got involved elsewhere in real life! Sorry, will try and reply soon by email.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 01:07, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

re adoption
Hi,

You said on my talk page that you would adopt me, and that you would get back to me regarding setting me up. You haven't forgotten me, have you?

Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 03:56, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, I answered my questions, and asked a question myself about an article I'm reviewing. Would appreciate your opinion. Happy New Year!  MathewTownsend (talk) 02:31, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2012 WikiCup
Hello, and welcome to the 2012 WikiCup! The competition officially began at the start of 2012 (UTC), and so you are free to claim any content from after that time. Your submission page, where you must note any content for which you wish to claim points, can be found here, and formatting instructions can be found in hidden comments on the page. A bot will then update the main table, which can be seen on the WikiCup page. The full rules for what will and will not be awarded points can be found at WikiCup/Scoring. There's also a section on that page listing the changes that have been made to the rules this year, so that experienced participants can get up-to-date in a few seconds. One point of which we must remind everyone; you may only claim points for content upon which you have done significant work, and which you have nominated, in 2012. For instance, articles written or good article reviews started in 2011 are not eligible for points.

This round will last until late February, and signups will remain open until the middle of February. If you know of anyone who may like to take part, please let them know about the comeptition; the more the merrier! At the end of this round, the top 64 scorers will progress to the next round, where their scores will reset, and they will be split into pools. Note that, by default, you have been added to our newsletter list; we will be in contact at the end of every month with news. You're welcome to remove yourself from this list if you do not wish to hear from us. Conversely, those interested in following the competition are more than welcome to add themselves to the list. Please direct any questions towards the judges, or on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn (talk) and The ed17 (talk) 14:30, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Arbitration Clerk traineeship
Hi Worm That Turned. I have added you to the list of clerks and subscribed you to the mailing list (info: WP:AC/C). Welcome, and I look forward to working with you! To adjust your subscription options for the mailing list, see the link at clerks-l. The mailing list works in the usual way, and the address to which new mailing list threads can be sent is. Useful reading for new clerks is the procedures page, WP:AC/C/P, but you will learn all the basic components of clerking on-the-job.

New clerks begin as a trainee, are listed as such at WP:AC/C, and will remain so until they have learned all the aspects of the job. When you've finished training, which usually takes a couple of/a few months, then we'll propose to the Committee that you be made a full clerk. As a clerk, you'll need to check your e-mail regularly, as the mailing list is where the clerks co-ordinate (on-wiki co-ordination page also exists but is not used nearly as much). If you've any questions at any point of your traineeship, simply post to the mailing list.

Again, welcome! Regards, NW ( Talk ) 20:37, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Good News!
So good that I have to tell you over mail - and break the possibility of a wikibreak enforcer! Tell me when you have time to hear it, thanks -- MST  ☆  R   (Happy New Year!) 10:16, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Replied -- MST  ☆  R   (Happy New Year!) 11:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Saw your message, thanks :) Btw, this. Completely forgot. Now that I have remembered, can I have next test? -- MST  ☆  R   (Happy New Year!) 00:50, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * 'Bout time.. -- MST  ☆  R   (Happy New Year!) 08:07, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

About Jasper Deng
I think he's an unfit editor being pro-Microsoft. He doesn't want to add a criticism section in the windows 7 article despite it being suggested in the discussion section, he even said there was no consensus for a criticism, despite it being present in other version of windows. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helios solaris (talk • contribs) 16:42, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Helios solaris and welcome to my talk page. I'd like to point out first of all that holding a point of view does not make an editor "unfit" - as long as the edits he make are from a neutral point of view and he accepts consensus. I haven't seen Jasper making any POV edits to articles - but that's the sort of thing that should be discussed on the relevant article talk pages.
 * As for other articles having criticism sections - that doesn't automatically mean that every article should. We don't base information that is added or removed to any article on what is in other articles, as each article should be treated the same. It may be that the criticism sections are not appropriate in the other articles. I would suggest that you take it to Talk:Windows 7 page, perhaps getting a third opinion or even starting an request for comment if you would like fresh eyes on the discussion.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 16:50, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I meant to write reviewer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helios solaris (talk • contribs) 18:14, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!


AviationExpert  ✈ &#32;(talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
 * adding date  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 14:48, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Let's Talk
Hi there,

I've edited the article you reviewed earlier and submitted another article for creation, can you have a look and share with me your insights?

Best wishes for the new year ;) Many Thanks, Abdallah Iskandarani (talk) 14:48, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

My talk page
There's a new thread there that may be of interest to you. I'm sure you'll be able to tell which one. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:46, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Ugh. We've now moved on to ANI. Forget I brought it up, this one's not worth your efforts. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:14, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

My Signature
Hello worm, I was wondering if you have come up with a solution to my problem concerning my signature. I have been going in big circles with mine. 17:07, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

My RfA votes
You have drawn a rather biased conclusion from the stats you presented in your evidence to the Arbitration Committee; what you appear to have missed is that my vote agrees with the result in the "overwhelming majority" of cases. "This user's vote matched the end result of the RfA 29 times, or 65.9% of the time." Malleus Fatuorum 20:46, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I concur with MF. While it is factual to state that the majority of his votes are opposes, the sentence might imply that this is a bad thing. I challenge the notion that the statement should include "vast". If you look at the last 200, rather than the last 50, and count only support, oppose and neutral (i.e., exclude unparseable), the percentage is 64%, which is a majority, but not really a vast majority. Furthermore, while I do not know what per cent of all attempts are unsuccessful, I'll be surprised if the failures are materially below 64%. As MF notes, and I'll update with the last 200, MF votes with the final decision 69.7% of the time. That doesn't strike me as someone who is out of step with the community.


 * Finally, while MF does sometimes, oppose candidates who are successful, the reverse does occur, so some of the times that MF does not match the community, it is due to a support vote by MF on an unsuccessful attempt.


 * All together, this does not portray an editor who is simply trying to hinder the addition of new admins.-- SPhilbrick  (Talk)  21:23, 4 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Given that most Rfas which fail are closed prematurely, it is actually quite difficult to get a net oppose. I accept that Malleus' votes do regularly match the outcome but I attribute that to the large influence Malleus has. I will however review the data tomorrow and update my evidence based on both your comments.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 21:55, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I was running to an engagement when I posted, so I only had time to vaguely wonder whether we had stats on overall percentage of successful RfA attempts. We seem to have stats on just about everything, so I would have guessed they exist, although I don't recall seeing them. (if they do exist, I would want net of SNOW anyway). I'm slightly worred(partially kidding), that if MF sees that his votes are mainstream, he may decide he has to do something about that :) do appreciate that if MF wields some influence, then matching isn't necessarily MF following the crowd, but vice-versa. This potentially could be measured (looks at changes in percentages after his !vote), but that doesn't sound like a trivial exercise, and hardly worth the effort, as it relates to an item of evidence, but isn't central to the civility issue.
 * I appreciate your willingness to take a second look, I can't ask for more.-- SPhilbrick  (Talk)  13:58, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * To give you an idea - in 2010, there were 155 unsuccessful RfAs, of which just 18 ran full 7 days (the rest were withdrawn, notnow or snow), in the same period, there were 75 successful RfAs, all of which ran for a full 7 days. In that period, Malleus voted 40 times, 27 opposes, and 12 supports. He was right 22 times. In situations where he didn't match the community's decision, he voted 4 times for an editor who was unsuccessful and 13 times he voted against an editor who was successful.
 * My evidence regarding Malleus opposing as often as he does was just part of my evidence that Malleus appears to have issues with administrators in general on Wikipedia, and I feel that a topic ban from RfA (especially the talk page) would be a positive step. The topic ban which I'm advocating is relevant, as the whole exchange which kicked this off happened on WT:RFA.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 14:44, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, at least it's a novel approach to achieving Kudpung's evident goal of eliminating all opposition at every RfA. Malleus Fatuorum 17:00, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The only thing I would like to  eliminate from  Wikipedia  is MF's novel  way  of treating people.  If he wants to offend to  make offence a skill, it's a bit  late to redeem time when men think least he will. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:51, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

It's me again.
Darling Worm, you set up my archive algo a few months ago, but it seems to have stopped working and I wonder if I screwed it up. You set it to archive every 6 months and I changed that to 120 days. Can you look to see if I messed it up? Thank you. And how have you been, by the way? I've been taking a break from heavy writing on WP, but doing odds and ends, here and there, now and then. Hope you had a good holiday season. Take care.--TEHodson 20:17, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi there TEHodson! Good to see you again. I'm very well thank you. You've not broken anything, it's working fine - the next thread to be archived is due on the 21st January, which is 120 days (or 4 months) after 21st September. Perhaps you'd consider reducing the length of time to 60 days? Anything over 2 months since the last comment is unlikely to be edited again any time soon.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 21:00, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I must have been exceptionally blonde the day I put in 120 days--I meant to type in 90 (which is why I expected it have run by now), but you're right--60 would be better. Silly girl. Thank you very much. You should change your User Name to "Mighty Mouse." Have a good day!--TEHodson 23:10, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Year
Hi David!

Belated season's greetings.

Could there be a formatting issue with your thoughtful principles at the workshop? Your principles seem to be "findings of fact", at least in my eyes.

Cheers, Kiefer .Wolfowitz 23:41, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Morning Kiefer. Having re-read, yes, at least one is a FoF, so I've moved that. I think the other two are principles, though at one would fit in both sections. Happy new year to you too.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:55, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I had trouble grokking the fullness of your contribution, because of computing limitations and visual overload. (The page should be split up into chunks.)
 * Your headings would be fine for principles. Unfortunately, they contain rather concrete statements about Malleus, which are very poorly described by the headings. I understand your wish to abide by civility and avoid naming Malleus in the headings but I wish you would make your "evidence" headers better descriptors.
 * If you have time, that is!
 * Cheers, Kiefer .Wolfowitz 16:28, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks KW, but I'm quite happy with the titles I've used on the evidence page, I believe they summarise the section admirably. I'm also surprised that you decided to use such a large portion of your 500 words of evidence re-hashing old grudges. I've moved on, accepted that the RfC failed and have kept out of your way since. I suggest that you consider more productive uses of your time on wikipedia than writing long walls of text with me as a subject.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 20:55, 13 January 2012 (UTC)


 * David,
 * I had underestimated your denial about your responsibility in the fuck-ups with the RfCs.
 * You did pursue a partisan campaign against me for months, and you did manipulate evidence. You violated civility by manipulating quotes, and you never corrected or withdrew your accusations that were false. I had thought that your getting beat at ArbCom elections or have a public talking to from Casliber (RE BadgerDrink) would have broken through the denial.
 * Unfortunately, when I read your NPA violation alleging again inability to deal with stressors, I decided to perform an intervention, for all of our sakes.
 * Please review my Wikipedia colleagues and yours. Please review my contributions and yours. You are in little position to advise me, even in this sandbox.
 * 09:33, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Appreciation
Hi,

as you know, I was quite critical of your RfC/U actions earlier this year (and of your answer to question 1b at the elections). Therefore I would like to commend your remark at the workshop. Since some of my critique was public, I leave this note publicly as well.

Best regards, Sasha (talk) 02:13, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Morning Sasha. Thanks for your comment and indeed for your critique earlier this year. If I remember rightly, it moved on to email and we actually found a solution to what I could have done differently, something I've been trying to do since. I've said a few times since that RfC/U doesn't work - I was always aware that it was a terrible tool, but it is the only tool we have. I hope to get some stats together and actually start an RfC on RfC/U at some point!  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:53, 13 January 2012 (UTC)


 * It may be the only tool you have. Kiefer .Wolfowitz 09:36, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Don't forget about me!
Hi,

I know you're really busy, but I hope you have time to continue the lessons you've been giving me, as your adoptee. I have learned a great deal from them. Please, please! More! Regards, MathewTownsend (talk) 18:11, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!
SarahStierch (talk) 20:40, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Quick Break
(>**)> Hugz. You have a lot going on for you at the moment; it's a good idea to take a break for a while so you don't get overwhelmed by having "too much stuff" going on, all at once. I'm sure you have some good opportunities for being creative just now; that's a great antidote to stress. Let your creative mind run riot, enjoy the break, and come back to us refreshed and happier. We'll be waiting for you :o) Pesky  ( talk  …stalk!) 13:37, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * ....Why is everyone taking WikiBreaks? I hope I'm not that annoying! Wish you two all best on your much-deserved breaks! -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 10:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm going on a Wikibreak as well. I may pop in every once in a while.— cyberpower  ( Chat )( WP Edits: 512,077,442 ) 10:21, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Wow, anyone else? ;D -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 10:24, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Na. Just a few thousand others. ;)— cyberpower  ( Chat )( WP Edits: 512,078,873 ) 10:35, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Requests for comment/F&aelig;
A request for comments has been opened on administrator User:F&aelig;. You are being notified due to your prior participation in ANI, RfA, or RfC discussions regarding this user. Thank you, MadmanBot (talk) 19:44, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

NNU Class Project - Winter 2012
Please consider adding your name at: School and university projects/NNU Class Project/Winter 2012

Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:00, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * Thanking you. Taking a bit of time to catch up. Probably a bit of a slow reboot...  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well it's good you had a rest. Good way to start off the year :D I have been taking mini-breaks now and then -- thanks to a little (big) thing known as holiday homework :/
 * If you need anything, which you never really do -(it's usually the other way around), just give me a shout! -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 10:09, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Welcome back! Your late.  My wikibreak ended  days ago.  Nah, I'm just kidding.  You take as long of a break as needed so you feel good when editing Wikipedia.— cyberpower  ( Chat )( WP Edits: 513,809,222 ) 22:00, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi! Hope you had an invigorating wikibreak, and are prepared for a long discussion on WP:AGF after my next adoption test. :-) (note incorrect indent for conversations, but I have learnt some things in your absence)-- Gilderien Talk|Contribs 22:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * S/he learned a bit of Javascript and getting the status notification to easily update with a simple click of a link.— cyberpower ( Chat )( WP Edits: 513,830,541 ) 23:54, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * With a little help from a certain very helpful editor :-) (I am male, by the way)-- Gilderien Talk|Contribs 20:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 January newsletter
WikiCup 2012 is off to a flying start. At the time of writing, we have 112 contestants; comparable to last year, but slightly fewer than 2010. Signups will remain open for another week, after which time they will be closed for this year. Our currrent far-away leader is, due mostly to his work on a slew of good articles about The X-Files; there remain many such articles waiting to be reviewed at good article candidates. Second place is currently held by, whose points come mostly from good articles about television episodes, although good article reviews, did you knows and an article about a baroness round out the score. In third place is, who has scored 200 points for his work on a single featured article, as well as points for work on others, mostly in the area of pop music. In all, nine users have 100 or more points. However, at the other end of the scale, there are still dozens of participants who are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly!

The 64 highest scoring participants will advance to round 2 in a month's time. There, they will be split into eight random groups of eight. The score needed to reach the next round is not at all clear; last year, 8 points guaranteed a place. The year before, 20.

A few participants and their work warrant a mention for achieving "firsts" in this competition.
 * was the first to score, with his good article review of Illinois v. McArthur.
 * was also the first to score points for an article, thanks to his work on Hurricane Debby (1982)- now a good article. Tropical storms have featured heavily in the Cup, and good articles currently have a relatively fast turnaround time for reviews.
 * was the first to score points for a did you know, with Russian submarine K-114 Tula. Military history is another subject which has seen a lot of Cup activity.
 * is also the first person to successfully claim bonus points. Terminator 2: Judgment Day is now a good article, and was eligible for bonus points because the subject was covered on more than 20 other Wikipedias at the start of the competition. It is fantastic to see bonus points being claimed so early!
 * was the first to score points for an In the News entry, with Paedophryne amauensis. The lead image from the article was also used on the main page for a time, and it's certainly eye-catching!
 * was the first to score points for a featured article, and is, at the moment, the only competitor to claim for one. The article, "Halo" (Beyoncé Knowles song), was also worth double points because of its wide coverage. While this is an article that Jivesh and others have worked on for some time, it is undeniable that he has put considerable work into it this year, pushing it over the edge.

We are yet to see any featured lists, featured topics or good topics, but this is unsurprising; firstly, the nomination processes with each of these can take some time, and, secondly, it can take a considerable amount of time to work content to this level. In a similar vein, we have seen only one featured article. The requirement that content must have been worked on this year to be eligible means that we did not expect to see these at the start of the competition. No points have been claimed for featured portals or pictures, but these are not content types which are often claimed; the former has never made a big impact on the WikiCup, while the latter has not done so since 2009's competition.

A quick rules clarification before the regular notices: If you are concerned that another user is claiming points inappropriately, please contact a judge to take a look at the article. Competitors policing one another can create a bad atmosphere, and may lead to inconsistencies and mistakes. Rest assured that we, the judges, are making an effort to check submissions, but it is possible that we will miss something. On a loosely related note: If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:23, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Don't forget about me!
Hi,

I think I answered the questions. I found them difficult though. (I still don't really get templates!) Must have a mental block. Best, MathewTownsend (talk) 20:46, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Haven't forgotten about you! Was reading through your answers yesterday, will make sure I make notes on them today :)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

To be or not to be
I would like to request adminship, but I fear it will fail if I request now because I'm not quite ready. I've learnt to move pages and create redirects, but I need to know how to upload images to increase my chances of being an admin. Can you teach me please? Pdiddyjr (talk) 19:34, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I think more info would be needed to answer this. First of all, think of an image you want to upload. What is the image of, and where does it come from? This will help us to establish which of two types of image it is - either a free image, or a non-free image. There are different rules, requirements and arrangements for each.


 * Regarding the administrator quest, you should probably read User:Kudpung/RfA criteria and similar pages, to get an idea of how much needs to be done. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:32, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey Pdiddyjr. Demiurge makes some great points, I'd be happy to help you upload images, but there are lots of rules to learn about what sort of images you can upload. I even teach a lesson on the matter at User:Worm That Turned/Adopt/Copyright. So, what image are you hoping to upload?
 * As for administration, that's a very different kettle of fish. To become an administrator, you have to got through a process called "Request for adminship", where the entire community can comment on your behaviour and editing, and you need at least 70% to support you. Generally, the community looks for at least a few thousand edits, and a year of editing, so that they can get a good picture of your skills. At the moment, you have about 600 edits, and I'd recommend you aim for at least 10 times that before applying for adminship. I can also give you some tips on where to work if you're interested in adminship.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:36, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Online Ambassador, Spring 2012
Hi, Worm That Turned! As you may know, the Wikipedia Education Program has instilled a new set of standards that courses must meet to officially join the program for the semester. As you can see, one of the requirements is that at least one ambassador or professor is a Wikipedian, as this should give students more access to helpful information about contributing to Wikipedia and creating good content. You are listed on the Online Ambassador page; are you still interested in remaining active this semester? Some of these classes will have to remove themselves from the program should they fail to meet these standards, but we would like to ensure that new students are receiving proper support during the editing process. Please let me know if you are still interested in mentoring these students this semester and/or visit the Online Ambassador talk page to select a course that still needs an Online Ambassador. Thank you! JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 19:49, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom Co
A clerk question: Where does one register the suggestion that an arbitrator may have a conflict of interest on the capitalization and article titles case, because of recent opinionated participation in a poll on the matter at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style, and because of outspoken membership in the WikiProject most noted in Wikipedia history, WP:BIRDS, for engaging in protracted debates about ungrammatical capitalization rules being pushed on the encyclopedia because they're preferred by specialist publications in his/her field? This would appear to be precisely what is at issue in the "Virgin Birth" capitalization evidence raised in the case. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 13:44, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Very good question. I'm not 100% sure myself, am just double checking for you.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 13:55, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * SMcCandlish, the normal first course is to raise it with the arbitrator on their talkpage. Arbs usually record a recusal at the very first stage - the request - but whoever it is may have been away and not seen the request, so you could ask them if they are intending to recuse. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 15:41, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi SMcCandlish. In the first instance, the best thing to do is approach the arbitrator in question directly with your concerns. They're reasonable people and hopefully should either be able to allay your concerns or would recuse. If neither happens, I believe it should be raised at the case talk page, where the other arbitrators can discuss the possible conflict, but the first step is the direct approach. Hope that helps.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 15:47, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That's what I figured. I keep bollixing ArbCom process, though, so it seemed best to ask first. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 15:54, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Taking the much needed advice
First time I have ever seen you block an IP I have had unfortunate dealings with. Fast at it, too! Thank you for doing so. :)

Well, in two hours, I will be commencing with a WikiBreak. After your successful break, I have decided to follow suit ~ also after having issues here and out of WP recently, I think its appropriate. I hope it will go well. I will be popping in and out now and then, but Ill keep it to a bare minimum. I'll do this Wikibreak. I need it. Thanks, -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 11:27, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Lol, I saw it, didn't see any helpful purpose the IP was serving, and blocked. I only use the tools where I see the need, rather than going looking for problems. Lazy I know, but that's me!
 * I agree my break was successful, though it was sort of forced - I was moving house. Was getting fairly wound up with a lot of stuff going on on WP especially considering the real life problems, so a break was what I needed. Am back to my cool, relaxed, boring self :) Now I just have a massive project to deal with :D Enjoy your wikibreak, it helps keep things in perspective. If you can avoid it all together, you'll be doing yourself a service. (I admit I checked in a few times, but only commented once!)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 11:32, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay - so it wasn't a major break... but to be offline for 48hrs+ was big for me. My goal for my next wikibreak, sometime in the future, is extend it to a full week! :) I have got a few things sorted, and I believe I have gotten my full act together - I'm ready to contribute again! Thank you, -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 06:34, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited North Pier, Blackpool, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gypsy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Evidence trimming
AGK edited my evidence to bring it within the 500 word limit, but I'd kind of prefer my earlier comment be restored and my last one be struck -- I didn't realize that took me over the 500 words, or I would have left it. Thanks. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:24, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Now done, just needed to double check that it wouldn't cause issues!  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 15:07, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

your adoptee wants advice
Hi,

I know you're not on line now (probably asleep!), but when you are perhaps I can get some advice. Best, MathewTownsend (talk) 22:56, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey MathewTownsend, What's up? You can always post questions to this page directly, I've got a few friendly talk page stalkers who might help out. Or, if it's sensitive, drop me an email. Anyway, let me know what I can do for you. (Going to check the adoption page)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:39, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know if this is the issue, but maybe you can help Mathew and I explain ourselves to each other. My intervention with JLAN caused Mathew some unhappiness, which I have attempted to apologize for while also trying to explain what was going on behind the scenes, but we seem to not be communicating very well. I'd like to set things right with Mathew, but he seems very angry with me and I'm not sure where to go from here.   Montanabw (talk) 16:30, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

JLAN
Hi WormTT, I am sure you mean well, but please look at the entire history here. JLAN is one of the most difficult people I have ever encountered on Wiki, other than a couple of socks that got blocked. I have been a wikipedian almost six years now, with an absolutely clean record of no blocks or other disciplinary action ever having been placed on me (this in spite of the fact that I do piss off people on occasion). I don't know what to do about him, but I know that it is time for the larger community to scrutinize his work because he is making people miserable, including Dana, who has got to be one of the sweetest, nicest, most useful contributors on all of wiki. He may not realize how difficult he's being, but I think he does -- and enjoys it. I can take the stuff he unleashes on me, I've put up with it for a year or so now. But to attack someone like Dana is just unconscionable. Another example that's not on the ANI is that as soon as Dana did a major revision of donkey, JLAN also immediately went in and attacked it, trying to rewrite material, and when Dana stepped out (she doesn't like conflict) and I went in and tried to protect the article from JLAN's meddling, he tendentiously stuck to points (such as the ludicrous discussion of biotin in straw) that were ludicrous. He fails to see or hear anyone's attempts to meet him halfway, and frankly, I'm convinced that he does want to run myself and Dana off wiki. Which, if you look at our contribution history, would be a loss to the project. In contrast, JLAN has done some good things by creating some new animal breed articles, but in total, he's spent more time trying to tear others down than build anything up. ( It's laughable that he proposes a year ban on a topic. Oh please...)   Montanabw (talk) 00:16, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Montanabw. I do indeed mean well, and I'm trying to find a solution which doesn't involve actual sanctions (as you all appear to be clean on that front) - you all appear to be reasonable people. I do appreciate that JLAN has rubbed a lot of people up the wrong way, but I see disagreements, not attacks. I've seen a lot more difficult editors that JLAN, at least he actually reads books! You and he are unlikely to ever get along, so why not just avoid each other, stop replying to each other, don't revert each other - treat the other as if they weren't there. You concede that he's done some good work, so if we can get to a situation where we can reduce the issues then what's left is a net positive.
 * I agree the ban is laughable and the last thing I want to see is you and Dana run off wiki. I'd suggest trying to separate for a while, see if it improves the working atmosphere. If it doesn't, start up an RfC/U - get wider community input on his editing. I can see at least two situations where you've mass reverted edits because of JLAN, losing good edits from other editors in the process, that's not a good way to deal with things and will end up landing you with issues.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:32, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sanctions will be of little benefit at this point. No one has filed an RfC/U on JLAN yet because it will be a month out of our lives of daily wiki-drama.  I was trying for something shorter and simpler; an admonishment for hounding Dana.  I have been trying to avoid him, actually; I've pretty much given up on trying to deal with the donkey articles JLAN's working on, even though his work is about 50% ok and 50% problematic (burros are not a "breed", sigh...), and I've been doing a bit more work on Montana-related articles lately, just for something different that he has zero reason to touch, but WPEQ is where my heart is at and I am not going to let someone run me out of the mainstream horse stuff.  I can watch that I don't revert other people when I revert JLAN (other than Large Black pig, though, I think everything else I did actually restored a clean version as intervening edits were edits of JLAN's edits, though I could be mistaken).  But here's the bottom line:  Dana is my friend, and this whole thing started because I know the stuff JLAN does to her work is painful to her and causes her difficulty.  I felt she needed a gladiator out there before she gets run off wiki entirely; her editing has cut back a lot -- I recognize editors who are losing their joy of editing, I think it's happening to her. My ANI seems to have misfired, but that's the real point - have you EVER seen a RFA go through with ZERO "oppose" votes? Dana's did. She doesn't deserve to have her GA and FA articles hounded the way JLAN is hounding them (he's attacked or tendentiously inserted himself with unneeded "issues" at least three other GAs or FAs I forgot to include in the ANI--Appaloosa, where, like a fool, I had invited him, thinking he'd learn about FA and collaboration, Italian Heavy Draft, Dana's GA, pretty much solo - he was trying to change name, good example of tendentious tendencies and Trait du Nord, also Dana's solo GA - just annoyance tagging)  Montanabw (talk) 16:26, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm just headed home, but I'll have a look at these links tomorrow. Hopefully we can get some sort of closure then, if there isn't beforehand.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 16:31, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * OK. Here's hoping.   Montanabw (talk) 17:14, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey Worm, I hope something sensible can be arranged here. I've dropped a note onto Mathew's talk; I can understand why he got upset, but I can also understand why Montanabw's upset, and why Dana has "gone quiet" compared to before.  I've been deliberately avoiding anywhere that JLAN's active for quite a long time now, which means I haven't done anything horse-related for ages.  It's not that I personally have had any real problems with him, it's that I can see the distress he causes for other people, and I didn't want any of it myself.  He's done some good work, but he's also shown a long-term tendency to disrupt articles with OR, UNDUE, POV and other stuff, and has been very "in yer face" confrontational since he was really quite a newbie.  He started with the "confrontational" when he'd only  been editing for about a fortnight, and it's got progressively worse, sadly.  I've watched, but not joined in (too much shite going on in real life, as you know!)  I'm sure he'd be happier starting with a clean slate and focussing on a different WikiProject entirely; it would give him a chance to edit with a fresh group of people, with whom he has no history.  But he really is at the point where he's driving other editors away from WP:EQUINE; they're just tired of the constant confrontations and argumentativeness.  It gets incredibly wearing after a year or so.  It's depressing.  (>**)> Hugz to you.
 * P.S. All Montana was doing was "babysitting" the article as Dana couldn't check JLAN's work. Unfortunately, though JLAN is capable of some good stuff, his work does need babysitting and checking, it can't automatically be assumed to be OK.  Pesky  (talk ) 06:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Worm, your suggestions at the ANI were well-taken and I responded there. That said, per your comment on Mathew's page I'd suggest that  my hasty mass revert  was not "wholly inappropriate," it was merely ONE too-hasty mass revert done in a moment of impatience, that got reverted back, and life went on. I did not edit war nor continue to do anything to the article.  I am very frustrated and saddened that Mathew continues to berate me about this and cannot see that I had a good faith intent as far as he was concerned.  Indeed, I did not try to push my concerns much further at that article; instead, I took my worries to a more appropriate forum.  So  I encourage a little perspective here.  I am not the bad guy on this one, I am a "good guy" who had a momentary overreaction.  I'll grant you I had a "brain fart" on my part, as well as getting too impatient and seeing red over watching my friend being bullied by JLAN, but I'm a little miffed at the overreaction here and would like to see it ratchet down.  So if you have suggestions as to how we can get Mathew and I to have a truce, I'd be all ears.    Montanabw (talk) 22:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I would still say it was wholly inappropriate. You should never revert without checking what you are reverting. At the time, there was no reason for JLAN to not edit the article and I didn't see that his edits were problematic. What's more, it's not the first time you appear to have mass reverted edits - it's quite simply a disruptive way to behave & insulting to all parties who you've reverted. I do appreciate the culmination of factors which led to these edits but I used the language I did for a reason and I stand by it.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:24, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I can accept that this is the way you feel, but I DID check and compare diffs. It was clear that JLAN had changed quite a bit of material, but lacking access to the sources used, I could not verify that he had made changes consistent with the sources and I did not want to see Mathew continue to review an article that may have been edited to insert OR or poorly referenced material, which is a hallmark of JLAN's style. It is not wrong to revert a set of mass edits that are incorrect, badly sourced, or made in poor faith.  It is also the burden of the person seeking to add material to justify its inclusion.  I will confess to having lost any faith in JLAN as a productive or collaborative editor.  He is occasionally correct in pointing out something, but he does it in such an unkind and cruel manner that he has disrupted many other areas beyond WPEQ.  JLAN is particularly disingenuous when he argues that  *I* have run people off WP, when the reality is that Ealdgyth, Kim, Richard, Pesky, and Dana are all people I've "met"  off-wiki and who I consider to be my friends.  (Ealdgyth, who I have met IRL, is my conscience, I trust her to call me on my stuff, which she does, regularly.  For that matter, so does Kim)  What puzzles me is that I provided a good dozen diffs at the ANI to prove what he has done, none of which primarily involved me, at least initially, and I keep wondering why I am the one getting all this criticism here when it is clear as a bell JLAN's primary interest here is to tendentiously edit and then intimidate into silence anyone who calls him on his stuff.  Really, look at the record.  Look at the quality of the articles he has created (a lot of stubs, some of which are content forks, a few lists, some navboxes) with the quality of the articles Dana has created or improved to GA or FA status (dozens of GA and FAs, thousands and thousands of edits) -- JLAN has never taken an article to GA or FA, he only attacks those who do.  And I will not make this a "JLAN v. MTBW" situation, the diffs I provided at the ANI clearly show that he bothers a lot of people. But, I guess unless others wish to defend themselves, I guess if they get run off WP by JLAN, it's their choice.  I'm really burned out on helping anyone else these days.   Montanabw (talk) 16:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

I do get what you're saying - really I do. I've been in a similar position myself, in that I lost the ability to assume good faith and then everything that person did seemed snide or out to harass. It only made things worse if that person were to comment about me. The fact was though, that I was the one with the problem, I was seeing things from a blinkered point of view. When I took my comments to other editors, they didn't often didn't see things as I did. I do agree that he needs to work on some areas, mostly around improving the way he communicates - but at the same time I don't see that he's as bad as you make out. The accusations from him must stop, but at the same time, the accusations about him must also stop. With regards to the mass revert, yes they can be justified if you are looking through what you're reverting - however, you clearly caught another editor in the crossfire, so you cannot have taken sufficient diligence over it. Further, much of what JLAN added was sourced, for example this edit immediately preceding yours was just relevant facts and figures. No OR, nothing UNDUE. As you mentioned earlier, it's not the end of the world, we can move on here. I'm not saying the rest of your actions were wholly inappropriate, indeed coming to ANI for more eyes was a good move. JLAN has indicated on his talk page he's willing to follow my suggestions too, so let's see how "moving forward" feels. WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 16:50, 16 February 2012 (UTC)