en User talk:ErrantX Archive 2014 February

This is an archive of past discussions with User:ErrantX. 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.

The Signpost: 29 January 2014

Traffic report: Six strikes out

WikiProject report: Special report: Contesting contests

News and notes: Wiki-PR defends itself, condemns Wikipedia's actions

Arbitration report: Kafziel case closed; Kww admonished by motion

Recent research: Translation assignments, weasel words, and Wikipedia's content in its later years

NPOV Noticeboard help

Hello ErrantX. A while ago I posted a NPOV dispute and haven't gotten anyone to respond to the dilemma. I was hoping you'd be able to take a look at it and offer your opinion. I saw that you were active on the ANI noticeboard, so I thought you'd be more open to assisting editors in need. The problem is pretty clearly defined and examples are linked. I will add that Toddst1 tried to merge a separate ORN dispute on similar/same material into my inquiry about NPOV, but please don't feel forced to address both issues unless you want to. I wanted to keep the discussion focused on the specific violation which is why I'm less eager to discuss the ORN aspects of it, especially since we're not suppose to discuss OR disputes on the NPOV noticeboard but if you're willing to assist and want to approach both aspects, then I'm willing. You can find it here [1] Thanks for any assistance you can offer. Scoobydunk (talk) 11:43, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 January 2014

Traffic report: Six strikes out

WikiProject report: Special report: Contesting contests

News and notes: Wiki-PR defends itself, condemns Wikipedia's actions

Arbitration report: Kafziel case closed; Kww admonished by motion

Recent research: Translation assignments, weasel words, and Wikipedia's content in its later years

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
	80th Infantry (Reserve) Division (United Kingdom) (talk)	Add sources
	Double agent (talk)	Add sources
262	Choco Pie (talk)	Add sources
	Mont Pelerin Society (talk)	Add sources
	Arthur Owens (talk)	Add sources
8	Operation Samwest (talk)	Add sources
	The Cup (TV series) (talk)	Cleanup
	The Man Who Rocked the Earth (talk)	Cleanup
	Erich Raeder (talk)	Cleanup
	Cell wall (talk)	Expand
	Solo (restaurant) (talk)	Expand
180	James M. Gavin (talk)	Expand
	Transrapid (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
477	Cola Wars (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
	Lašva Valley ethnic cleansing (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
247	Self-report study (talk)	Merge
	Special Operations Executive (talk)	Merge
	Katyn massacre (talk)	Merge
	Operation Chameleon '92 (talk)	Wikify
217	St Crispin's Day Speech (talk)	Wikify
	TorSearch (talk)	Wikify
	Zeppelin (iPod speaker system) (talk)	Orphan
	Vanessa Perron (talk)	Orphan
	Mafia Magazine (talk)	Orphan
4	Société Générale des Transports Aériens (talk)	Stub
	De Nederlanden (restaurant) (talk)	Stub
5	Society for Scholarly Publishing (talk)	Stub
2	Fred (restaurant) (talk)	Stub
1	Le Restaurant (talk)	Stub
	Photo slideshow software (talk)	Stub

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) 15:31, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

...for closing that mess. 28bytes (talk) 23:11, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes thank you, although I don't appreciate being told to grow up because I refuse to put up with a bunch of BS from abusive editors. The mere fact that multiple editors were continuously harassing me and no one said a damn thing is pretty piss poor. But I am the one that needs to grow up? That's a joke. Apparently you weren't reading that mess...or didn't care. 108.45.104.158 (talk) 01:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi ErrantX. Following a brief chat on 28bytes page he suggested that you should answer the question I asked him. While he asked for the ban suggestion to be closed, it still leaves the question of the original block review raised by another Admin. It isn't clear what the status of that is, other than it is a separate issue to the site ban proposal, which really became a distracting fork. Leaky Caldron 15:08, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Leaky. Really there is no consensus I can see for any kind of action. This is a situation the community is struggling to cope with... and I don't see a simple solution (other than the obvioius... and lets be honest that's not likely to stick). What I will say is this; Kumioko is going to keep doing what he's doing and one of two things will happen. Either he will learn how to make criticism that people will listen to, or, everyone realises that his intent is not really to provide criticism but to disrupt - and so the next proposed ban sticks. I suggest that the only really viable venue now is Arbcom. I'm fairly sure if you bring a detailed enough case they'll step up and implement a ban. It's a shame, I did watch what happened to Kumiko with, well, confusion and sadness - I still can't fully understand why he lost track of the community so much. But having a lengthy AN argument isn't really getting anywhere.. So, yeh, Arbcom. Possibly not the answer you were hoping for, but the best I can do for you. --Errant ^(chat!) 15:29, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Errant. I didn't comment on the ban section myself. I did contribute to the block evasion section. The purpose in checking with you was really just that ensure that your close (of the whole thing) covered any necessary formalities viz the original request for a block review by Beeblebox. If it does, that's fine. My issue with Kumioko doesn't run deep enough to prepare an AC case, but if he carries on someone will. Thnx for the clarification! Leaky Caldron 22:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 February 2014

In the media: WikiVIP; Art Feminism; Medical articles; PR manipulation; Azerbaijani Wikipedia

Technology report: Left with no choice

News and notes: WMF bites the bullet on affiliation and FDC funding, elevates Wikimedia user groups

Featured content: Space selfie

Traffic report: Sports Day

WikiProject report: Game Time in Russia

JOB

I AM 12 PASS ONLY WITH BASIC Knowledge of Computer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.37.228.5 (talk) 17:46, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

sorry

I should have notified you of the arbcom case -- was thinking the user mention would trigger notification (forgetting you may not have that active in your preferences). NE Ent 16:27, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I do have them enabled, but sadly no notification - it does seem rather buggy as I keep being "notified" of things that happened weeks ago. So not your fault. By good fortune, I was passing by :) --Errant ^(chat!) 16:32, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

List of Ops (B) staff

Hi! I just noticed List of Ops (B) staff at WP:GAN and thought to let you know that standalone lists are not eligible for GA status per WP:GACR. Perhaps it would be better off at WP:FLC instead? Cheers--Tomobe03 (talk) 15:13, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, last time someone looked at it in that context the feeling was it was more prose than list and therefore was an article (despite the title). So in a bit of a bind over what to do with it for peer review :P --Errant ^(chat!) 15:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 February 2014

News and notes: Foundation takes aim at undisclosed paid editing; Greek Wikipedia editor faces down legal challenge

Technology report: ULS Comeback

WikiProject report: Countering Systemic Bias

Featured content: Holotype

Traffic report: Chilly Valentines

The Bugle: Issue XCV, February 2014

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content
Book reviews: Rabaul in World War II and Australia in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:34, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Nimrod Programming Language Deletion Question

I noticed you were the last person to delete the Nimrod Programming Language Wikipedia entry.

I think in the months since the deletion, there has been a bit of activity around Nimrod, and I wondered if the following sources were enough to get the Nimrod page re-instated? http://www.drdobbs.com/open-source/nimrod-a-new-systems-programming-languag/240165321?pgno=1 http://vocalbit.com/posts/exploring-type-classes-in-nimrod.html http://steved-imaginaryreal.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/nimrod-return-of-pascal.html

These show up on first page Google results. I thought I would ask you directly before bothering with anything else. Sorry if this isn't the right way or place to discuss this kind of thing. Also Dr. Dobbs is a notable source for such an article, as this is what they have been dealing with for almost 40 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Dobb's_Journal

Thanks!

Daegalus (talk) 02:05, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Only the Dr. Dobb's Journal source is what *might* be considered a reliable, published source (not a blog) for the purposes of notability. Unfortunately, it's written by the creator of the Nimrod language, and as a result is not likely enough to satisfy the outcome of the previous deletion. To be honest; the problem is there isn't really any history to this language at the moment so nothing much to write about it. Sorry! I think there's enough sourcing, though, to fit it into e.g. List of open-source programming languages :) --Errant ^(chat!) 11:31, 26 February 2014 (UTC)