User talk:ErrantX/Archive/2011/August


The Signpost: 01 August 2011

Stephanie Adams Discussion Page

Still has "Warrenton, VA" and "chiropractor" on it in the discussion forum that should be (and remain) removed also please. User 69.143.17.59 keeps harassing the subject. 71.183.68.231 (talk) 16:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Insufficient block

This block: 11:39, 7 July 2011 ErrantX (talk | contribs) blocked 92.27.84.129 (talk) (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 1 month (Block evasion: Vote X for Change) has proven to be insufficient. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:26, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Gotcha - extended. --Errant (chat!) 16:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For defense of civil discourse, balanced with a realistic and grounded view of Wikipedia's culture. For acknowledging your own flaws, and thereby showing that improvements aren't usually made by saints, but by fallible humans who desire to make fewer mistakes tomorrow than they made yesterday. Keep the faith, ErrantX. GTBacchus(talk) 22:54, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I have a few ideas how to improve things, but never seem to find the time to propose them! :) --Errant (chat!) 10:14, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 August 2011

You could do with one of these...

A beer on me!
Here's a beer for your fine efforts on improving Wikipedia! Cheers! --BabbaQ (talk) 11:04, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

James Tod GAN

James Tod has been peer reviewed and is now at GAN. If you are not watchlisting the article then would you have the time/inclination to do so, please? Things are afoot and it is quite likely that the GAN will be problematic for reasons unrelated to who ever decides to take on the review.

Also, you mentioned on the talk page that you may have some sort of access to Heathcote, which I cannot get other than by buying it or using inter-library. Should that source ever pop in up in front of you then I would really appreciate if you could check for any relevant info. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 12:46, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

It's there somewhere - though it may be in storage. Will try to find it for you. And I will watchlist the article - good luck! --Errant (chat!) 14:54, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. GA is not a problem per se. In normal circumstances it would be a clear run but there are some people hovering around because I have allegedly sullied the reputation of a behemoth of Indian history. What is likely to happen is some disruption which causes the reviewer to say that the article is not stable. Just one of those things - practically anything connected with India seems to generate this sort of heat. - Sitush (talk) 15:15, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
I'll keep a weather eye out. Nice article BTW - I posted a few suggestions on the talk page. Do you mind if I do a bit of copyediting/tweaking - don't want to trample amongst your good works :) but some people like a fresh eye on things. --Errant (chat!) 15:30, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Do what you want. It is not my article and provided POV-pushers and the like are not wrecking the thing, I do not mind in the slightest. I've already adjusted per your note on the talk page. There will be a few more like that, I am sure. - Sitush (talk) 15:40, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, ErrantX. You have new messages at Cerejota's talk page.
Message added 19:12, 13 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cerejota (talk) 19:12, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

BLPs

[1] (just in case you were unaware of the recent call for evidence). --JN466 16:37, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Can Bibcode bot be unblocked now?

I've agreed several times to restrict it to physical science articles for the meantime. Can it pleased be unblocked now? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 19:43, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

yes, but - please don't take this as endorsement of the bot's edits in general. The onus is on you for the bot to make edits that do not conflict with issues raise on WP:AN. And if it does conflict so, I will be extremely pissed :) The general comments make sense in that thread - more metadata is good. But as a facilitator of that new metadata it is explicitly your responsibility to engage the community and agree on the extent to which the data is added. I hope that makes sense --Errant (chat!) 01:17, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
As I said, it'll be restricted to physical sciences for now. Thanks. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:21, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
No probs. I don't mean to be hard nosed; but I did want to be clear... :) --Errant (chat!) 01:23, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

ErrantX, your language on ANI is unacceptable. Whatever you may feel about the behaviour of participants, if you cannot express it in civil terms, then keep it to yourself. I ask you to strike or amend that comment, not because I'm so thin skinned that it hurts me, but because such behaviour at ANI contributes to it being a nasty place to go and gives admins a bad name. Colin°Talk 07:43, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Lets talk about civility. Curse words are coarse - obviously some people are offended by them but they make the point. What's uncivil, I suggest, is entrenching yourself in an argument in the wrong forum; as you all did yesterday. Perhaps what is uncivil is rather than thinking "hmmm is there a point here" you picked the curse word to come and berate me about.... I struck it and switched to something milder, but the point still stands. Get community input. --Errant (chat!) 08:18, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for The Handley family of Sleaford

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2011

Thanks for informing me about Kingdom of Muqtasid

Never mind, I had a feeling that it might get moved back but thanks for telling me. Muqman 52 (talk) 11:59, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Zuggernaut

Do you consider this to be a violation of Zuggernaut's broadly construed topic ban on Indian history? It seems to be a direct question aimed at influencing the article Ganges. Also, I'm concerned by this edit from Zuggeernaut's topic page, which implies the intent to continue trying to influence issues regarding India on Wikipedia, along with an implication that there may be off-wiki coordination going on via email (i.e., that Zuggernaut is providing advice to other editors). I ask you since you gave Zuggernaut a polite warning before; plus, I'm not exactly clear how "broad" broadly construed is in this case (i.e., whether something like the name of Ganges is related specifically to "Indian history" rather than to India overall). Qwyrxian (talk) 12:56, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I wonder if I am really misunderstanding the ban scope, because today I see him editing articles on current events in India (Jan Lokpal Bill, Anna Hazare, etc.). To me, current events of X fall squarely within the scope of "X-ian history", but am I just mistaken? Qwyrxian (talk) 03:57, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for a delayed reply, yesterday was a whitewash for me :) Yes, the first edit is directly related to the reason for his topic ban. As to current events articles... no I think that's too broadly construed, at least from my reading of the topic ban discussion. It is my understanding he has issues in the area of British colonialism, and this is the primary reason for banning him from Indian history articles. So current events should not be at issue. In terms of off-wiki co-ordination, I can't really comment on that with the evidence given - and don't have time to investigate further. If you have substantive evidence I suggest AN/I is the place to try. --Errant (chat!) 09:53, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Hmmm...just one edit I guess is a minor slip...I'm not really interested in watching over his shoulder for any slip (I had no involvement with him and only came upon the edit after another editor pointed me to it in connection to other sometimes problematic editors in the Indian topic area). Thanks for the info; I'll "keep it and ponder it in my heart" for now. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:13, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Adding AN/I notice not added by IP user

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Shirt58 (talk) 11:07, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

FYI, he's a banned user who simply refuses to accept he is no longer welcome :) The best approach is to revert (per WP:DENY) and get someone to block him. --Errant (chat!) 11:24, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Yup, guessed as much - sorry for being a bother. Was just going the right thing, notification-wise. Looks like 84.92.86.7's going down the same path.--Shirt58 (talk) 11:59, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
No worries
) --Errant (chat!) 12:02, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

User:Dodgechris- blocked again

I've blocked this user for operating multiple accounts in violation of the terms of unblocking that were discussed. If you have any questions, please let me know. TNXMan 14:09, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Sad to see - thanks for letting me know. Some just don't learn :( --Errant (chat!) 14:40, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Leonard R. Brand

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Leonard R. Brand. 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 Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 09:35, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Itō calculus

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Itō calculus. 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 Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 17:35, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

{{indef}}

There needs to be a line between things like Landracer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and what I just did. My judgement is that if talk page access was revoked and the user has been not getting it, I put this on their page.Jasper Deng (talk) 22:51, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

My advice is generally to avoid adding templates like that in most cases; usually it is a good idea to leave it to the blocking admin's discretion. From the template: While everyone can add this tag, it should typically only be placed by the blocking administrator. If the blocker doesn't think it's needed, the odds are it isn't. Use of that template is certainly discretionary - for situations where it's useful to note they are blocked in a more obvious way. Adding them yourself is probably not a great idea, it's not the worst crime in the world, at all, but one day you might slap it on the wrong place and end up catching heat for it :) --Errant (chat!) 22:57, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
You've hit it right on.Jasper Deng (talk) 22:59, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

The "I'll make you famous" Award

The "I'll make you famous" Award
Awarded for steadfast opposition to pressuring of editors by threats of adverse publicity; and for detailed explanations of the reasoning involved. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:17, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

P.S. There's no evidence that William H. Bonney ever told anyone that he'd make them famous - as a threat, euphemism or otherwise - as far as I know, but his character does so in the film Young Guns II. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:19, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Thankee :) Love that film. Perhaps if I feature in this new book eventually it will mean a film deal! After all "The Social Network" was a hit... --Errant (chat!) 12:24, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Commons Notification bot

Thanks. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 20:11, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

New functionality

Would it be possible to deploy this bot to tag articles that use non-free images that are being proposed for deletion due to lack of fair-use rationale? See Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Require article-page or article talk page notification for proposed deletion under F6 for details. --Orlady (talk) 21:34, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Faceted classification

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Faceted classification. 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 Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 14:05, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

CommonsNotification

Hi. I think this was just duplicated here. Cheers! Killiondude (talk) 17:25, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeh it was - sorry about that. I had a crash in the middle of updating the bot and it lost track of what it had done! Which for various complicated reasons meant all the recent VPM posts got duplicated. Thanks for letting me know though :) --Errant (chat!) 17:32, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 August 2011

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Computational forensics
The Coroner's Toolkit
Martyn Poliakoff
Victor Cazalet
John Frederick Nelson
Joel Douglas
HashKeeper
Kenny Logan
Marshall University Forensic Science Graduate Program
Innuitian Mountains
Forensic disk controller
Karnataka State Universities Act, 2000
Forensic geology
Bill Proctor
Carl Wimmer
Frances Osborne
Forensic arts
Kenya Police Criminal Investigation Department
Centre for Forensic Medicine
Cleanup
List of countries by infant mortality rate
Osama bin Laden
Abersychan Comprehensive School
Merge
List of countries by percentage of water area
Online reputation management
Short tandem repeat
Add Sources
Anti-computer forensics
Digital forensic process
Elena Ford
Wikify
James Sargant Storer
Forensic osteology
Kailash Satyarthi
Expand
1959 World Ice Hockey Championships
Herman Philipse
List of Philadelphia Police Department officers killed in the line of duty

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:21, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Title

Hi . Considering the dropping of these charges - What do you think about this retitled article - New York v. Strauss-Kahn (dismissed charges) - Off2riorob (talk) 01:51, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Seems ok; I'm personally apathetic abut the bracketed bit being there or not (so long as the article accurately reflects things). Although I still think it should be deleted ;) --Errant (chat!) 09:17, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

On Chandran Nair Page

Hi ErrantX, I am writing regarding the editing of 2 pages: Chandran Nair (Founder and CEO, Global Institute For Tomorrow) and Chandran Nair (Poet). Please note that it is not correct to put Mr Nair as an environmentalist. I work with Mr Nair at Global Institute For Tomorrow (GIFT) in Hong Kong and Mr Niar has strong opinions about the categorising of his page. Please set up a redirect page for both Mr Nairs and properly categoirse them. Regards, Yuxin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Consumptionomics (talk • contribs) 11:03, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

That is fine - but the alternative is not good either. What would you suggest as a better option? CEO? Businessman? --Errant (chat!) 11:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Chandran Nair

Having looked at the history, I have absolutely no object to you changing Chandran Nair (businessman) back to Chandran Nair (environmentalist) as either would suit and are better than the pompous self-promoting version that we both reverted! --Biker Biker (talk) 11:42, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Businessman seems absolutely fine to me - I went with the other only because someone else had tried it first :) --Errant (chat!) 11:45, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Talk page review

If/when you have the time then please could you take a look at User_talk:MatthewVanitas#ANI_Comment. I am tangentially involved via the ANI thread referred to therein. I am also more than a little mystified. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 00:12, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

As I am with this edit. The idea of focussing on certain people if/when a ban is lifted sounds rather like a proposal to wikistalk. NB: I have had both the talk pages watchlisted for some time now because I deal with both contributors across various articles, but I am not tracking Zuggernaut. - Sitush (talk) 12:53, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
I'd just ignore it. Nothing new is happening, and if it does these can be brought up for review. I'd just disengage from him and ignore what he gets up to as much as possible, always the best way :) --Errant (chat!) 08:13, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2011

CommonsNotificationBot

I'm concerned the current volume is placing too great a burden on WP:VPM. Perhaps you would consider instead editing a dedicated user subpage that interested users could watchlist? It would also provide a better workflow, where posts would only be archived if and only iff they had been dealt with. - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 18:45, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm not adverse to such a solution - part of the long term plan when I brought in the bot was to have an images noticeboard (which Sven was working on, I thought). On the other hand the point of raising the problems centrally is to get people to look at them and sort it. I wouldn't want to relegate it yet further out of the public eye :) I can switch the forum I post to without too much difficulty - the question is where is best? --Errant (chat!) 18:56, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I understand and agree. Perhaps you could start by duplicating to a separate page, and take it from there? - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 10:32, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Ok, how about this - I start WP:Image Noticeboard (I'll talk to Sven about that, see what we can do), which the bot will post to as normal. And I will also add a new set of parameters for images that appear a *lot* - say 500+ occurrences - to be posted to WP:VPM (to make sure such things get noticed). And see how it goes. What do you think? --Errant (chat!) 15:16, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Sounds good to me :) - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 15:32, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to comment

Based on your contributions at Talk:Jared_Lee_Loughner/Archive_2#Fair_use_status_of_Pima_County_photo, you may be interested in commenting at Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_August_29#File:Jared Loughner sheriff's office.jpg. Thanks, Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:26, 30 August 2011 (UTC)