This is an archive of past discussions with User:AlexiusHoratius. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Dear,sir
I tried to edit Brock's victory over Shane Carwin at UFC 116 but the page is lock. Now i was not going to slander or vandalize the page in any way or anything like that. I was just simply going to add he won submission of the night. My references are the UFC 116 Wikipedia page UFC.com as well as YouTube.com/ufc. I employ you to reconsider your lock of the page so i may add that piece of information do to it's importance. Thank you for your time.
P.S Why are you moderating a MMA fighters page? It seems you don't much if anything about it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gandaf12 (talk • contribs) 12:57, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
If you feel an edit should be made to a semiprotected article, you can discuss the matter on the article's talk page and get a consensus from other editors; one of them should be able to edit it (having been autoconfirmed). I likely came to the article due to a request at requests for page protection, and you are correct that I am rather ignorant on the topic. However, that means I'm rather neutral as well. AlexiusHoratius17:26, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Why are Americans Wankers?
They just are, they hacked and ruin the English Language Wikipedia so much that it is meaningless to English people. Prawns are Shrimp, Shrimps are Shrimp, but they are not. Oh well, Colour is Color. Thousands of other articles are ruin by you. Well done!
109.34.15.75 (talk)
Hello,
I have many of the same interests as you, especially in geography, but have less of the know-how relating to wikipedia... I was wondering if you would have any interest in updating the sioux falls map you created. I would like to do it but my skills in this area are woefully inadequate!
Jde605 (talk) 15:46, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Absolutely - I've always been meaning to update that map (I've learned a lot of "tricks" along the way - if you'll look at the maps I've done for Wikipedia from the earlier ones compared to the more recent SD one on my userpage, I don't think it's bragging to say I've come a long way) and for the Sioux Falls map I've been meaning to do an updated version that has many of the same features but will still be an improvement in many ways - for instance on a much larger canvass one is able to put more detail on it without it looking too sloppy. I'm always open to suggestions/comments, or if you would like to get into this sort of thing on your own (the software I used for the SD map is free - you just have to practice a bit with it and know a few tricks to get it to do what you want) I'd be happy to answer any questions you'd have on getting involved in this area on your own - Wikipedia has a lot of gaps when it comes to maps and photographs - so there is plenty of work that needs doing. AlexiusHoratius16:42, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Suggestion to pull WikiProject Wyoming under WikiProject United States
It was recently suggested that WikiProject Wyoming, to which you are a member, may be inactive or semi active and it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States. After reviewing the project it appears that there have not been any active discussions on the talk page in some time and the only content updates appear to be simple maintenance so being supported by a larger project might be beneficial. I have begun a discussion on the projects talk page to see how the members of the project feel about this suggestion. --Kumioko (talk) 00:45, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Research into the user pages of Wikipedians: Invitation to participate
Greetings,
My name is John-Paul and I am a student with the University of Alberta specializing in Communications and Technology.
I would like to include your Wikipedia user page in a study I am doing about how people present themselves online. I am interested in whether people see themselves in different ways, online and offline. One of the things I am looking at is how contributors to Wikipedia present themselves to each other through their user pages. Would you consider letting me include your user page in my study?
With your consent, I will read and analyze your user page, and ask you five short questions about it that will take about ten to fifteen minutes to answer. I am looking at about twenty user pages belonging to twenty different people. I will be looking at all user pages together, looking for common threads in the way people introduce themselves to other Wikipedians.
I hope that my research will help answer questions about how people collaborate, work together, and share knowledge. If you are open to participating in this study, please reply to this message, on your User Talk page or on mine. I will provide you with a complete description of my research, which you can use to decide if you want to participate.
Thank-you,
John-Paul Mcvea
University of Alberta
jmcvea@ualberta.ca
I work for a television station in NC and we are developing a FREE iphone weather app and, with your permission, would like to use the photo of Downtown Concord, NC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Downtown_Concord_NC_5.jpg)
for the main Concord weather page of the app. This is a FREE app and we would love to use the picture.
It's me again! I saw the pic you posted of Matthews and would like to use it for the same purpose as the Concord photo. Would i have your permission for that one, as well? I appreciate it! Thank you!Twill212 (talk) 02:59, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
You can use any image I've uploaded for any purpose. They are technically covered by this license, but I personally consider my photos and images to be in the public domain - you can do whatever you want with them so long as you don't claim someone else produced them. AlexiusHoratius03:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
CitySocialising
Hi Alexius! I have lent a hand on the article for Citysocialising. I've taken it upon myself to create a neutral article for this website on my own userspace. I shared it with the talk page, and user RearGuards has really taken it upon themselves to go off about my contributions. I believe they have a personal problem with the website, and now they are accusing me of being a crony for the organization, etc. I explained policies to him, and explained neutrality, sourcing, etc. I'm not sure if this article will ever be able to be "unlocked" due to RearGuards personal feelings about the company. Just thought I'd let you know in case you wanted to take a look at the talk page. I have a feeling this contributor won't be "letting their personal problems" go for the sake of the article. Thanks! SarahStierch (talk) 19:31, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
I haven't really been involved in the article other than the protection (there was a request at RfPP and sometimes I'll use a short period of full protection to get everybody to go back to their corners for a bit) but looking at their contributions RearGuards doesn't seem to have much of an interest in any other article. I suppose the next step, if the disruption continues after the protection lapses, and I expect it may well continue, would be blocking them for disruptive editing. I'll take a look in a few days, but if problems start up before then, let me know. AlexiusHoratius20:06, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello User talk:AlexiusHoratius. I have seen that you already helped many users to have their own protection in their own article. I was hoping if you could help me have a semi-protection in my article : Flintzel Diao, because it is a victim of a high level IP vandalism. Please consider this. Thank You! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flint Diao (talk • contribs) 08:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Semi-protection wouldn't do anything about the activity on that article as all of the editors so far are autoconfirmed. Semi-protection only blocks new accounts and people editing without an account. AlexiusHoratius19:56, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Just wanted to say thanks for stepping in on this issue with full protection (moments before I filed a RfP request for this article). I just wanted your advice as to what to do should the disruption continue after the protection period has expired? Thanks. Basaliskinspect damage⁄berate20:32, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
If both sides are willing to discuss and compromise, then WP:Dispute resolution is the best option. If one side has no interest in discussing anything, and the disruption picks up again after the protection lapses, list it again at RfPP, but add a few sentences as to what the situation is. Otherwise an admin may take a quick look and say "declined-try dispute resolution" or fully protect the article for a short time, when in fact the situation may call for a long period of semiprotection instead. AlexiusHoratius20:46, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Semi-protection
I was wondering if you could do me a huge favor. I was wondering if you could semi-protect some pages for me where people should not be posting on my page. Here are the links:
I protected all of them except your talk page, which should only be protected in cases of extreme vandalism. (I'm going to reply here as I believe in keeping conversations in one place and I'm not sure how to navigate your message boards.) The idea is that users (both registered and anon ones) should be able to get in touch with you if they need to discuss something - I don't know if your request that people only reply on one of your semi-protected boards is going to fly. I personally don't really care either way what someone does in their userspace, but don't be surprised if at some point an admin takes issue with the request on your talk page that people don't use the page. AlexiusHoratius18:11, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
You find it on my user page and follow the links. I asked you to protect my talk page because that is no longer my talk page, I moved it to the place of my message boards. Those will never be any kind of protected. I will put a link in my signature in there. My idea is to have my message boards in catagories, notices of deletion, general message board. Thats my idea, and thats how I chose to patrol my message boards. Its more put together.
Please reply on my message boards! Larsona19:08, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
The Statue of Liberty is a colossalneoclassical sculpture on Liberty Island in New York Harbor, designed by Frédéric Bartholdi and dedicated on October 28, 1886. The statue, a gift to the United States from the people of France, is of a robed female figure representing Libertas, the Roman goddess of freedom, who bears a torch and a tabula ansata (a tablet evoking the law) upon which is inscribed the date of American independence. It has become an iconic symbol of freedom and of the United States. Fundraising for the statue proved difficult, especially for the Americans, and by 1885 work on the statue's pedestal was threatened due to lack of funds. Publisher Joseph Pulitzer of the World initiated a drive for donations to complete the project, and the campaign inspired over 120,000 contributors, most of whom gave less than a dollar. The statue was constructed in France, shipped overseas in crates, and reassembled on the completed pedestal on what was then called Bedloe's Island. Its completion was marked by New York's first ticker-tape parade and a dedication ceremony presided over by PresidentGrover Cleveland. (more...)
Thank you. I never thought I would be deemed worthy of the "Falseifier" award. Actually I didn't know the award existed... and I'm not sure what "falseifier" means. In any case, it will have an eternal place of honor on my userpage. AlexiusHoratius03:39, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Invitation to take part in Wikipedia survey
Hello, AlexiusHoratius! We would like to know what you think of Wikipedia in your day-to-day editing.
That's why we've created a survey here where you can answer all the questions about what you do here anonymously. What's more, the results will be used to make the editing experience better for all. Thank you.
I'm going to be in the Twin Cities in a few days. In particular I'm going to have approximately 3 hours to kill on Monday afternoon. Any suggestions for how I can kill the time? Preferably something close to U of M. sdgjake (talk) 03:02, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
My personal favorite for daytime is the Minneapolis Institute of Arts - it's basically a classic art museum, but it's huge and free and the collections are pretty impressive. (Greek, Roman, Dutch masters, modern, photography, etc.) It has pretty much everything so you can pick whatever area you want to see. One time I went there I spent about 4 hours in it and only saw about half of it. It's not on the campus but it isn't too far - it's about a mile due south of downtown. Nearer to the campus is the Saint Anthony Falls/Stone Arch Bridge area (on the northeast side of downtown along the river) - it has the Mill City Museum and Guthrie Theater on one side and it's an interesting area to wander around outside if you've never been there and the weather is decent. On campus there's the Weisman Art Museum (I was never particularly impressed with it but that's just my opinion) and the Wilson Library (the university's main library) on the West Bank. The Loring Pasta Bar is a good restaurant/bar for lunch or supper, it's just off campus in Dinkytown and the food isn't too expensive. This is a decent site for events/music and so on. AlexiusHoratius04:27, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for all the suggestions. It turned out to be a really nice day, so I spent the time walking around. I walked the St. Anthony Heritage Trail, and then around the Mill district for awhile. I also saw the memorial for the I-35W bridge collapse; that was interesting and somewhat touching. The Guthrie Theater was also really cool to see up close. I wish I could've gone inside, I really wanted to check out the sky walk. However I feel there is one question that I didn't ask that I really should have: Where the hell do you park in that town?! I eventually figured it out obviously but man was it a pain. Anyways, thanks again. sdgjake (talk) 15:16, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
After moving up here it took a few months to get used to the freeways and about a year to get comfortable with parallel parking, which is something most people from even Sioux Falls rarely have to do. I live in probably the worst residential area for parking availablity in the city, so snow emergencies are a special adventure (take the amount of street parking available, cut it in half, add two feet of snow, and if you make a mistake you get towed.) AlexiusHoratius21:18, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Many thanks for answering the much needed call for protection of the article. It is approaching a state of near perfection for its subject. This will help the few of us working at it, to enable us to work in peace! Djathinkimacowboy05:38, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
why is the brandon darby page protected now? there are clear examples of bias in the article, as well as broad statements that are blatantly false. using a documentary film produced and compiled with a biased viewpoint is not neutral. to completely disregard the multitude of interviews the subject of the article has given, and instead use materials clearly biased, is not neutral. the sequence of events, and the sweeping summations, of the trial the subject participated in is laughable. the author did not even try to be neutral. i'll keep this short, but the lines proclaiming he is despised by these people, and welcomed as a patriot by others, is clearly biased, and injects the writers personal stake in the interpretation of events. any intelligent, rational person would read the article and know the writer has sympathy with the convicted felons, and a strong dislike for the fbi informant. the material should be presented to the reader for their own decision. lastly, using the person's own extensive interviews and testimony would and should be the best source material for the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atheist-5150 (talk • contribs) 06:40, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Use the article's talk page and get a consensus if you feel changes should be made. I protected the article as there were people edit warring in a content dispute; the other option would have been to block the ones doing all the reverting. AlexiusHoratius21:04, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
I was about to, but I think I may hold off on it for now - most of the activity from the past days or so is due to Achtung Baby being the main page's featured article, and the article was quite a bit quieter before that. But if it keeps up at the same rate, go ahead and list it at RFPP. AlexiusHoratius10:39, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
For your outstanding work at WP:RFPP. You deserve way more barnstars for your admin work on Wikipedia. I thank you for your contributions. Happy editing! -- Luke(Talk)04:50, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm going to hold off on that one for now. There have only been a few incidents in the last couple months, which isn't too hard to stay on top of. AlexiusHoratius20:37, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
In the absence of obvious vandalism, I generally don't. This helps keep my WP:Uninvolved bona fides intact. (In other words, reverting then protecting looks to some like protecting my preferred version.) As it is, it's just a redirect, which may or may not be the right way to go, but won't kill anyone either way. Just use the week (or shorter, if the consensus is obvious) to discuss it and come to a solid decision. At that point, if there are still moves going on, the consensus version can be the one protected. AlexiusHoratius03:32, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
The last 50 edits go back 2 days, with at least a dozen "undid revision..." edit summaries, maybe more. I don't know what the dispute is, and I don't care what her name is or what was tweeted somewhere, but there is obviously some sort of dispute, and that level of activity was getting disruptive. The current protection will expire in 3 days. If some sort of consensus about whatever everyone is falling over each to add is agreed to on the talk page, then the article can be unprotected. The other option would be for people to somehow manage to wait 72 hours before adding/deleting/modifying/updating the material in the article. AlexiusHoratius23:56, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough, though I believe you're mistaking a bunch of edits to the page that have nothing to do with her name as being part of the claimed edit war. I'll just grump back to my cave and rumble about the days when we didn't have the page protection tool and actually had to work with each other. --The Cunctator (talk) 00:25, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
An editor requested unprotection on an article that had been fully protected since May. I checked to see if he had asked you first. Although he hadn't, I saw you hadn't made any edits in the last few weeks. I unprotected the article (which can be easily re-protected if needed.) I was in the process of clearing a backlog of about a dozen requests. I've never been on IRC. Not really sure what alternative course of action would have been better. AlexiusHoratius07:39, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
A Charlie Brown Christmas
I think you placed the page in semi-protected status. I wanted to link one of the animators to his Wikipedia page. Please advise on how I can achieve this. I would like to have the credit for this edit. Thanks! Truthczar (talk) 04:26, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi AlexiusHoratius -- Thank you for posting this wonderful photograph . I am writing a Wikipedia article titled Old Settlers' Cemetery (Charlotte, North Carolina) and will be using this photo to illustrate it, if you do not mind.
I am interested in all things Charlotte and have written a lot of Charlotte pages. Do you happen to have photos of any other Charlotte Parks, especially The Green, McGill Rose Garden, or Freedom Park?
Thanks for the compliments. I do have a few more photos of that cemetery (although the one I uploaded is probably the best general one), but I wouldn't be able to get photos of the other parks as I'm not from the area and the ones I took were only from a week-long trip to Charlotte last summer. I'd gladly go back if my uncle and aunt needed another house sitter, but there aren't any plans for now, so the photos I have already uploaded in NC are probably all I'll be able to get in the near future. If I do get back sometime, I'll certainly try to take more. AlexiusHoratius15:15, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Monavie
The Monavie wikipedia is written in a very biased manner and has non credible references, is there a way to remove all the non credible redundant biased information to have it read more neutral?--YorbaLindaOCMan (talk) 23:39, 21 December 2011 (UTC)YORBALINDAOCMAN
I was about to say no but I looked again at the history and protection log and seems to be a long train of the same thing - so switched to indef. Talk page still open, though. AlexiusHoratius00:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
I am having some issues creating the page for the Journal of Foreign Relations. It seems someone prior has made unsuccessful attempts in the past, which I am uncertain as to whether this remains the issue. What does someone need to do to move forward with unblocking a page's development? EpsilonRed (talk) 00:36, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Just a heads up that you don't need to add protection templates to pages you protect, because a bot is doing that automatically. →Στc.04:28, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi AlexiusHoratius. Some editors have reached a consensus here to move the article Don 2: The King is Back to simply Don 2, but due to some reasons, they couldn't manage to do that, and need admin help. Could you please look into it? Thanks in advance. Scieberking (talk) 20:54, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
I've removed the move protection (which is added by default when an article is semiprotected). You should be able to move it now (although I'm not sure why autoconfirmed users would have had a problem moving it before). If there are still problems with it let me know. AlexiusHoratius21:08, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I tried but it gives the following error:
"The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. Please choose another name, or use Requested moves to ask an administrator to help you with the move. Do not manually move the article by copying and pasting it; the page history must be moved along with the article text."
Oh, there's a redirect already there (Don 2 automatically goes to the longer title). Put a request in at Wikipedia:Rm#Requesting_technical_move or ask another admin whose active right now. I don't know much about deletion - I do most of my admin stuff at requests for protection. AlexiusHoratius01:03, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello Alexius. I extended the semiprotection to two years on three articles you had previously protected, including Carbon Nation, per a request today at WP:RFPP. See my rationale at RFPP and let me know if you disagree. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 04:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
I have noticed that in the article "tiger vs lion" , you have reverted the changes i have made. I want to know how i can do the changes in order they are not considered vandalism --Alex gnpi (talk) 01:31, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
I didn't revert anyone's edit, I just protected the version that was the most recent when I went to the article. The article's talk page is the best place to discuss changes to the article. After a consensus has been reached, the changes or additions can be made. The wrong way to go about it is for everyone to be simply reverting everyone else's edits. If there is a pressing need for an edit to be made (such as obviously incorrect facts or vandalism showing up on the protected version) one can add a {{edit semi-protected}} template along with your reasoning on the article's talk page. AlexiusHoratius02:20, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
You are rigth, you just protected the version that was the most recent. I have stopped to add information about the article becouse there are people that are just deleating the info, I guess becouse they want to favor the tiger. I would like to know how I can do the edit in the rigth way, (becouse there are some issues with the referenes and vandalism). I have already discuss it in the talk page, but I dont know what is next. --Alex gnpi (talk) 17:18, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
You should be able to edit the article now, as your account appears to have the number of edits and age to be autoconfirmed. Still, I would stress that anything other than removing obvious vandalism or making minor improvements or corrections needs to be discussed on the talk page first, as the subject seems to be a contentious one. AlexiusHoratius17:25, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
If there is a general agreement on the talk page that the edit is fine, then it can be made. If you suggest it and nobody raises any objections, then go ahead and make the edit after a little bit. If there is a lot of people sounding like they disagree with it, then you'll have to work out some sort of alternate compromise. AlexiusHoratius00:31, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Roger Boscovich
Hello Alexius,
Regarding the article about Roger Boscovich, I suggested a neutral point of view, which was accepted by some users, while other users continue to remove references and parts of the article. Everyone is entitled to its own point of view. But if someone removed references, just to support its own point of view, that's not allowed, as I know.
There are competing claims for Bošković's ethnicity/nationality (between Italians, Serbs and Croats / Italy, Croatia and Serbia). My references supporting the Serbian point of view, and they are not only from Serbian sources, but also from British, Italian, American sources etc. (Eg. the official Italian Encyclopedia - and the Italians are one of the "interested parties" - third party). Few Croatian users just removing references because they support Serbian point of view.
Among the Serbian people Boscovich has always regarded аs Serbian (or Serbian-Italian) scientist (of Serbian-Italian origin). During the former Yugoslavia, Boscovich was also considered as Yugoslav scientist, like everyone else. After the breakup of Yugoslavia, Serbia is consider Boscovich as Serbian scientist by the origin of his father, while Croatia is consider him as Croatian scientist, because he was born in the Republic of Ragusa (today Croatia).
The first astronomical society in the Balkans, which was founded in Belgrade bears his name, as well as the planetarium; the first private educational system in Serbia also, while Serbian scientific institutions and governments mark the anniversaries related to Boscovich. Also, Roger Boscovich is ranked among "the 100 most famous Serbs of all time" by the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts.
On the other hand, after the breakup of Yugoslavia, Croatia had a banknote with a portrait of Boscovich, as a Croatian scientist. On the objection of some former Serbian institutions from Croatia and the request of the Government of Italy, Croatia had to stop printing banknote with the portrait of Boscovich, because it was presented as a Croatian scientist.
So, when you protecting the article about Roger Boscovich, can you protect it with all references, please (because it is more or less neutral version)? Thank you! Ljuboni (talk) 04:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
The only times I'll change a protected version are in cases when obvious vandalism or errors are present in the protected article. Otherwise, it makes it look like I favor when side over another (which I don't, at least in this case). Content disputes and different points of view are best handled through dispute resolution and by using the talk page to discuss an edit before making one. AlexiusHoratius04:30, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Well, if I remove Croatian references, then it will be... what?
Unfortunately, it did not help (talk page). Actually, I do not make edits, but only reverts references deleted by few users. But it's okay, I understand your position. In any case, thank you. Ljuboni (talk) 14:58, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
What does that link represent - a consensus version everyone has agreed on? It looks more like you left your opinion and want me to unprotect the article based on that. AlexiusHoratius19:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
If you notice, I am trying to give sources for a statement in the article. Does a statement with a source not automatically make it more valuable than the same statement with the citation needed tag? Does wikipedia benefit from having no citations for it's claims? I now understand why so much of wiki information is wrong, it doesn't matter what is correct, only what is consensus.75.139.32.32 (talk) 23:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
"Does a statement with a source not automatically make it more valuable than the same statement with the citation needed tag?" Depends on the source. If it is reliable and verifiable, then yes. If it's something other than reliable and verifiable, then probably not. AlexiusHoratius06:19, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Is it your opinion the sources I placed are unreliable? 166.248.139.108 (talk) 17:30, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Also, if you think a statement without a source is better than one with a weak source, then why is the statement in the article to begin with? Someones butthole is better than a research journal? 166.248.139.108 (talk) 17:32, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
I have no idea if the sources are reliable or not. That's something to discuss with other editors who either have an interest or have any knowledge about cholesterol, which I don't. No, some butthole is not better than a research journal, but if there is a problem with the source, I would take some butthole's opinion[citation needed] over some butthole's opinion<ref>Some other butthole's opinion</ref>. AlexiusHoratius21:19, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
I respect you have no interest in the subject. That said, is it really the position of Wikipedia to have unsourced claims instead of sourced ones, even if the sources are simply old? Rambling on, I personally find it ridiculous that wikipedia finds a government position on a subject a proper source of fact. Not speaking towards you with this of course. Back to the subject at hand, if you read the talk page, you will see that the only reason he requested protection is because I didn't format the citations how he wished. Which according to the page that shows up when you click citation needed, is not necessary nor required. But instead of formatting it correctly himself, he just removes them. If he wants them formatted, he should do it. That's usually how things work, if you want something done, you do it. All I care about now is getting that statement in the article cited, since that guy is clearly against the position that dietary cholesterol does not have an appreciable effect on serum cholesterol and I want to rub it in his face. Not that serum cholesterol is even bad, btw. Shaddix (talk) 04:07, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
In most cases, you're right, and a citation is usually better than a cn tag. However, having a reference there implies that the statement is fully covered by a reliable source, so it also depends on what the source is. I'm not saying your source isn't reliable (that's for the people at the article to figure out), but if a source was in some way faulty (unreliable, obviously biased, or really out of date compared to current research), then I probably would rather see a cn tag than a bad reference. As an example, and I'm not sure that this is still the case as I don't do much work on the article, the Minneapolis article has a referenced statement claiming that it's the most gay-friendly (or gayest or something along those lines) city in America, along with a reference. The reference is to some gay-themed magazine, whose criteria for their "study" include the number of Tegan and Sara concerts. The statement in the article is referenced nonetheless, as though the census bureau or a major university did a exhaustive study on the issue. Only after investigating the source a bit is one able to see that the basis for this claim is shaky at best. This is an example of a case in which I'd rather see something other than a simple citiation. AlexiusHoratius19:11, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
MSU Interview
Dear AlexiusHoratius,
My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.
So a few things about the interviews:
Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.
Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.
If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.
Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.
The Minnesota Wikipedia community and local historians are invited to edit entries in Wikipedia on Minneapolis history. Please help increase the depth of information on Minneapolis history topics by utilizing materials in the Minneapolis Collection. Find your own Minneapolis History topics to edit or work from a list developed by Special Collections Librarians.
Where: Minneapolis Central Library, 300 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis When: Saturday, February 25, 2012, 10-5 pm 10 am - 11 am Orientation to Minneapolis Collection 11 am - 5 pm Edit-a-thon Website:Hennepin County Library, Special Collections, Map & Directions Parking: Metered street parking or pay ramp in basement, enter on 4th Ave
Hi - since you edited the Berlin page within the last couple months, I'm writing to ask if you'd like to weigh in on a current content dispute that has resulted in a request for comment. The issue, simply, is whether the Berlin article should include an image of the "Buddy Bears" or not. Thanks for your time, Sindinero (talk) 16:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
I gave 49 an edit warring warning, and another editor has given 50 a final warning (although no edits have been made since then). Report the situation at WP:AIV if these IPs continue, or if a new IP shows up from the same range, report them at WP:RFPP along with a short discription of the situation and someone will protect the articles. AlexiusHoratius07:23, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Help protect the Tirumala Venkateswara temple
Request you to protect it for a couple of months period: constant undiscussed/unsourced/unexplained edits from vandalism.
There has only been one anon editor since the last protection expired on the 10th - that's not really disruptive enough to require protection for now. If the situation gets worse, list it at WP:RFPP. AlexiusHoratius02:13, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
I think I see what you're saying - if you want to amend or change anything regarding who was and wasn't blocked, or perhaps if protection would be a better option, go ahead and do what you think is needed (in other words, I won't get upset about my block or lack of protection being changed). I don't know too much about the situation and only took a quick look after a request was posted at RfPP. I only looked at the one account and didn't consider the other account was probably the IP. AlexiusHoratius21:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm on my phone at the moment, so not doing any admin tasks at the moment as the mobile interface is a pain. It's at ANI now though, so will just wait for it to get addressed at that board. --- Barek (talk) - 22:07, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Still sounds like some sort of content dispute. If there were some sort of rock-solid consensus I'd unprotect it, but I don't see anything like that on the talk page. AlexiusHoratius22:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Luka Sulic article locked but it states wrong information
You have locked the Luka Sulic article even though it's content is false. It is stated that Sulic is a Croatian-Slovenian cellist which is not true,he is a Croatian cellist which also has Slovenian citizenship because he was born and lived there,but he is Croatian and declares himself as such.
Unless you can find a video (since a video is the ultimate source,you see the people talking in person) in which Luka says he is Slovenian than i must request of you to change the article to state he is Croatian with additional Slovenian citizenship how it should be.Odiriuss (talk) 11:18, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Additionally i request that you lock the Luka Sulic article once you have made the changes and to lock the 2cellos article to prevent further vandalism. Odiriuss (talk) 11:20, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
I also plead to you to do something about user Eleassar. He is clearly not objective and has issues,just see the 2cellos talk page for proof. He does not accept valid evidence (the videos i provided to you too) and is attempting to use his admin rights to make Luka Sulic Slovenian,when he is in fact Croatian. Odiriuss (talk) 11:36, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Content disputes are best discussed on the article's talk page. I only protected the latest version. I don't have an opinion on which version is more correct. AlexiusHoratius17:31, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for protecting this article per my request. I see on the request board you say it has been protected for one month, but the log shows it only for one week. Whatever, maybe that will be enough to deter the vandal. Textorus (talk) 00:56, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
I meant to say a week at RfPP, not a month. Sometimes when I answer a bunch of requests in a row I end up getting a bit confused, or at least the different time periods get jumbled together in my head. AlexiusHoratius01:12, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
It looks like another editor has updated both the map and the table. If future issues come up, putting an {{edit semi-protected}} template on the talk page along with a reason for the desired change is the best way to make sure it stays up to date. AlexiusHoratius23:00, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:AlexiusHoratius. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
