This is an archive of past discussions with User:Excirial. 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.
I just want to check something with you.
I'm working at the UMass Memorial Medical center (part of UMass Memorial Health Care). It's a great hospital where we do a lot of advanced interventions, but there is lack of awareness of this. As an avid Wikipedia user (and yearly donator to the project) I've been pestering them to update the wiki page. All that is there at the moment is some criticism about some (true and very unfortunate) mistake an associated charity did a few years back (it involved models in high heels and blue wigs!).
Anyway - I told them that other institutions in the area have much more informative wiki entries (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beth_Israel_Deaconess_Medical_Center or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_General_Hospital )
I told them that the UMass wiki should carry equal information. Information about the history of the institution, our Nobel Laureates, extensive research activities, internationally profiled researchers, and (similar to the MGH wiki) rankings (e.g. we have the best survival in heart attack and shock patients, highest rate of advance radial access programs, the ONLY vascular program in the US to perform two types of branch grafts, a surgical program in the top 5% of the country etc etc).. All this information is poorly reflected in the current wiki entry!
After months of pestering them to do something about it they made an effort but apparently, "We tried to counter this and Wikipedia said no to our posting because it was directly from UMMHC and threatened to block us altogether."...
I am not too familiar with wiki editing but I gather that you indefinitely blocked their account after they tried to do some edits. Again - I'm not too good on this but I tried to look at what they did and I think I can see the mistake.
I can see subjective statements along the lines of "[we are] the region's trusted academic medical center" and "We are committed to improving the health of people in Central New England"...
I would agree that these are not appropriate as wiki entries and reads like they just copy pasted from promotional material.
I just wanted to check your thoughts on the above and the block. Was it because of the subjective and promotional edits they introduced or something else? BTW -- they are convinced that the principal editor of the UMass Wiki is some neferious character from a nearby competitor institution who will "retaliate" when he/she sees any favorable edits to the UMass wiki..Ahem
I am terribly late on this reply - apologies for the wait. For what it is worth I did actually start writing a response twice with little success: The first draft of the reply was written in a hurry and lacked half of the points i wanted to mention; the second draft was a lot longer (too long actually) and was written over multiple sittings. The end result was a piece of prose that was both vague and disjointed, up to the point where i was myself wondering what i was even trying to explain. And after that debacle i've been pushing it forward on my todo list two days, guilty as charged on that one.
So, what can you do if you hit a writer's block that keeps you from writing a decently structured reply? You just resort to summing everything up in a bulleted list!
Why was the account blocked? That was done for two reasons:
Username: The Username policy forbids accounts that seem to represent a certain entity such as a company, institution, group or similar. Accounts should always have a name that represent a single, identifiable user. My own alias "Excirial" is unique to me. "Nikos_At_UMass" would also work just fine; While it contains the name of the hospital it clearly identified you as a person. "Marketing_at_Umass" or "CEO_At_UMass" on the other hands wouldn't be allowed since they represent a role at the institution.
Non Neutral Content: The second reason for the block was the addition of Non neutral, promotional content. Your own comment on the more problematic parts is entirely spot on, which is actually quite of a relief. Belief it or not but i had multiple discussions with PR people who believed that lines such " <Company X> produces the most stunning jewelry created by true masters of the jewel crafting art, for very competitive prices " were entirely neutral as they just stated what the company did. But i digress, as i am trailing off topic.
These two rationales together caused the promotional editing block. Note that the added content would have been problematic regardless of the username; If the username had not been an issue it would have been reverted with a warning for promotional editing.
What can i do now?
Conflict of Interest: First and foremost be aware that you and any other UMass Memorial Health Care employees have a clear conflict of interest with the topic. The standard advice for people with a conflict of interest is: "If you have a (strong) conflict of interest you should not edit articles related to this conflict, as writing neutral, encyclopedic content may be excessively difficult in these instances.". While editing under these circumstances is not outright forbidden promotional editing is. Do be aware that editors adding promotional content / editors with a COI tend to be observed more carefully than usual editors since there is a higher likelihood that edits may be problematic.
Neutrality is key: If you edit the article the most ideal circumstance would be one where i wouldn't even be able to tell you were related to the hospital (And if i would notice the edits shouldn't be promotional or advertising). Pretty much this sums up to:
Use neutral language: Evade words such as "Top Notch", "Fantastic" and "Superb" like the plague. Also keep the general structure of a sentence in mind "UMass Memorial Health Care is the best hospital" is promotional and non neutral. "According to <notable medical journal>'s 2014 survey the UMass Memorial Health ranked first on the quality scale for midwestland hospitals" on the other hand, is not as you are citing what someone else has written.
Don't draw conclusions: based on the source material. If the hospital won 10 notable awards those can be added. You cannot, however, draw the conclusion "It is a fantastic hospital" based on those rewards.
Balance, Balance. A good article is a neutral description of the subject, and neither critical nor approving. Bad article's only highlight a subjects strong suits or attempt to send something crashing into earth with negativity. It is a somewhat vague topic to describe so an example may help. Osama bin Laden is pretty much universally disliked in the United States (A major English-speaking nation). Yet the article provides a neutral overview with no calls to arms against him as a person. It just sums up what other people write without adding its own judgement.
Cite everything you add: Got a notable alumni? Good! Add a reliable source to back it up. Got a notable price? Great! Back it up with another source. No reliable source to back a claim up? Don't add it in that case.
Well, that turned out to be long, though thankfully i believe it IS somewhat more readable than the past two attempts I hope it proves useful! Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)
Hi Excirial,
No worries - please do not apologize! In fact I am most impressed that you took the time to write this long, detailed and beautifully bulleted response and even more so that this was the third one you wrote!
I had not spotted the username SNAFU until after I wrote the above but did also point out that it fell foul of Wikipedian policy.
I am also glad to hear that the rationale for the block was, as I thought, the promotional nature of the content.
What's really funny is that I looked even further back on the UMass Wiki's history and noted that a user by the name of "UMass Memorial Medical Center" made some edits that were almost immediately reverted.
Unfortunately no one has taken any action to improve the wiki hence my involvement despite the conflict of interest. I agree that given this circumstance one has to be even more careful to not fall foul of neutrality. Factual statements with plenty of references will be key.
BTW - I have no idea who user BookWorm8932 is but I see they made some edits on the wiki today, the appropriateness of which I am not entirely certain of. The region’s “most trusted academic medical center” may be true but needs reference, especially as it is in quotes. Also not sure about all the phone numbers and addresses along with free parking advertising...
Would you please have a look and advise?
Is there any way of telling where the edits were made from (e.g. ?from here?)
I am writing to request more information on exactly what content was deemed inappropriate so that we can make the appropriate changes. We modeled our entry after a very similar association, and we do perform a critical function in the New York legal community so it is imperative that we have an accurate, through and complete wiki. A lot of time was spent figuring out how to upload and link and to have it all erased in a single sweep is disheartening to say the least. Was none of this long entry appropriate? Did it all need to be wiped out?
You fast response will be both appreciated and acted upon immediately.
I apologise for the vandalism of one of my students here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Excirial/Content&diff=prev&oldid=613598394
I will have a talk with him next week.
we are doing a wikipedia course for teens www.lawrence.lib.ks.us/news-events/events/wiki-warriors-2014-06-05/ and they are learning.
last lesson was ruined because the entire ip of the library was blocked and we could not continue. If you look we are working on adding pictures and content to articles in lawrence kansas. Can you please unblock it for next thursday for our next lesson? that would be awesome.
thanks
mike
James Michael DuPont (talk) 23:35, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Hiyas Mike,
I did already remove the autoblock that was present on the IP yesterday, about 30 or so minutes after the block was initially made. I blocked the account for vandalism but from my perspective it sure was an unusual situation: The account seemed to be part of a larger group of about 10 editors who were somehow all new and interrelated to each other. Once i noticed that i wasn't sure if this was something akin to a class project (Which could take flak damage from my block) or a rather oddly operating sock puppeteer so I asked a checkuser to look into that for me. The CU managed to figure out what i couldn't, and pointed me towards the Wiki Warriors page a little while after the block. I removed the autoblock from that IP address as soon as i figured what was going on but unfortunately that was about ~30 minutes after i blocked the account (And 20 minutes past the end time of the library activity mentioned on the library website).
For a moment i considered forwarding a message that the block was removed, but i did not feel like finding out where the "Chat with a Librarian" option on the website would take me (Quite frankly i figured someone might end up thinking i was some form of prankster if i were to state i was looking for the Wiki Warriors program, stating that i just blocked and unblocked the libraries IP). Aside from the auto block i just unblocked the Bubs92 account as well. Seeing the situation i don't think there is any malicious intent here, just a bit of... well, lets call it an overenthusiastic start of a great editing career. Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)00:50, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
PS: As there are multiple people editing from the library there is always a slight but unfortunate change that the IP gets caught in an autoblock. If that would happen again you might want to drop by on the #wikipedia-en-unblock IRC chat channel to request it to be unblock. The activity is publicly documented and you're a long time editor, so i doubt many people would fuss over a quick unblock if it were ever to be needed. Aside from that may i add on a personal note that i find the Wiki Warriors programs quite the lovely initiative?
("well thats not helping why i get the messages from you. And even if it was me i would do PROPER edits not edits that a noob would do 2.28.247.109 (talk) 15:31, 19 June 2014 (UTC)")
If you connect to the Internet your Internet Service Provider (ISP) provider you with a IP Address that identifies your connection. These IP addresses can be allocated both dynamically and statically, and may or may not represent a large group of people. In your case your provider Orange Home / Wanadoo UK provides you with the IP Address 2.28.247.109. If an IP adress is dynamically allocated it changes routinely (Ranging from every few days to every time you reset your router). If your IP Address is static you will receive the same number every time you connect to the Internet. Seeing you still have the same address it is either static or long-lease (Meaning that the ISP will not guarantee it is the same every time, but in practice attempts to ensure this). I can also infer that the connection represent a small group of people as the IP address is in an IPV4 netblock that seems to be registered specifically for home users. Conclusion: The IP address represents a small group of people, and by being static it always represents the same group of people.
Now, with that in mind lets look at the contributions made from this IP address. The IP never edited before 7 June 2014 and on this day all edits in a 20 minute timeframe resolve around the Electric Eel page. Now, in a timeframe spanning mere minutes someone blanked the Electric Eel page, vandalized my user page, removed the warnings and claimed "This is terrible I got lots of messages for stuff I didn't do". The chance that two people in a single household would choose to edit Wikipedia within a 10 minute timeframe is quite eligible. Now, about two weeks later the same IP address leaves a message on my talk page and states "And even if it was me i would do PROPER edits not edits that a noob would do". Yet that same IP address edits the Electric Eel once again. Now tell me: There is a small group of people represented by the same IP number, and we know this group contains the same persons each time. What is the chance that, over a two week or so time span both of these two persons would decide to edit the same page page minutes from each other? I would say that this was done by two individual persons nigh 0%.
Now, if you would happen to meet a housemate or someone you are related to who would have made these edits could you please relay a message to them? The message would be that honest mistakes are fine and happen all the time. Even if some of the edits were disruptive that is something that can always be overlooked if there is no more vandalism afterwards. If you would by any chance have a younger brother please ask them to read this insightful page and make sure they understand (Make sure you read it yourself as well, its always good to know what information you pass on). After that you yourself should be free of any further unjustified messages regarding vandalism you did not commit yourself. Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)17:57, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Why did you revert back to the original page? I edited the content to bring it up to date. I work for Therm-O-Disc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.191.148.7 (talk) 18:23, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I apologize for the previous edits of this page that were unsatisfactory in regards to the guidelines of wikipedia's policy. That was our first stab at trying to update content. We are working on building content. I am wondering if there is a location that specifies the rules and guidelines when making updates?
i dont know if it was an accident but what did i say because i neaver remember saying ANYTHING at all
i have never edited wiki all i ever do is read them for school work because i use it for homework in the RE subject so there must be some kind of mistake.
(TL;DR: Your IP Address can be dynamic, which means you may receive another whenever you connect to the internet. Once that happens you may see messages left for a user who previously used the IP address you are currently using.)
If you connect to the internet your Internet Service Provider (ISP) will provide you with a so-called IP Address, an unique number that can identify your connection over the internet. This IP is both used to determine where you are, and who you are. Using the IP adress a website like Wikipedia can determine who asked it to do something - be it retrieving an article, be it editing a page or otherwise. If you are not logged into an account Wikipedia will only recognize you as an IP address. Once you are logged into an account it will recognize you as that user instead (Wikipedia will still know the IP address, but it knows it should address you as a specific user instead).
This is where the diagram to the right comes into play. Imagine we have two editors - one who is doing good work, and one who is just trying to vandalize pages. In this example both editors are not logged into an account and as of such their edits are only recognized as being made by their unique IP address. Like any other editors, IP addresses have talk pages that are used for communication towards them. If such an IP editor vandalizes, they will receive a warning that will be placed on their talk page.
This is where some technical stuff comes into play. While an IP Address is unique it only identifies a connection, and not a user. Most ISP's actually have what is called an Address pool, a large set of unique addresses that they can give to their users once they connect to the internet. In most cases an ISP will not give a subscriber the same address every time they connect to the internet. Instead it will look at its pool of addresses and determine which ones not in use yet, and give the subscriber one of these. Just compare it to a hotel: If you rent a room you will receive a random one, and the hotel will not keep your room reserved between your various stays.
Since IP addresses shift between various people it might occur that you may receive an IP address that was previously used by a vandal. If this occurs the talk page of that editor will still contain warning for previous acts of vandalism. So all of a sudden you might end up seeing a boatload of warnings for editors you never made in the first place. To emphasize this - the warnings you saw were targeted at this IP's talk page as opposed to your user accounts talk page. If you look at the contributions made by the IP address you will probably see several more editors that you never made.
There is actually quite a bit more technical stuff involved and the above explanation is a simplified version. Still i hope it explains what happened here, why the warning were there and why you see them even though you were not their target. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)20:03, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Hairbangers Ball Band Page
Slow down tiger, As the box states if I add context I can remove the box. I am still in the process of adding content to this page. Hairbangers has been a popular band in the Midwest region especially Chicago land for over a decade. It is a topic that I am sure users would like to view. Unless you are from the region and can attest to this please do not remove! You are not qualified to to add this tag because you have not done any research If you do and still feel it needs to be tagged I will dispute, until then please DO NOT VANDALIZE the page. Thanks, John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpeterson101 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 25 June 2014 (UTC) Slow Down
I think you may have missed part of the template, and in particular the bolded section: "do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself". Speedy deletion templates may not be removed from a page by the editor who created the page, which, in this case, is you. The creator of the page can use the "contest this speedy deletion" button which will take you to the article's talk page where a rationale can be provided as to why the page should not be deleted.
Policy-technically i should be restoring the speedy deletion template where it will remain till someone decides to remove the notice or delete the page. Since you mentioned you are still actively working on the page it may be practical to (temporally) move it over to the draft namespace. The draft namespace is especially made for article's in development and can therefor be used to create an article in relative peace as the article-related speedy deletion criteria (The CSD criteria that start with A[Number]). Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)18:41, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
RFA
Excirial,
I came across your RFA page from a few years ago now through the archives Lawrense, KA talk entry Excirial's RFA. Awesome read! Congrats! PS: Yay - took me a while to figure out how to not have this comment within the barnstar :)
Nikos (talk) 00:10, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi sorry to bothered you but there was one question I wanted to ask. Ok on masashi kishimoto page there was one thing I wanted to ask under kishimoto work's it said that naruto sold 95 million copies in us an I was just wondering if it's true I know this is kinda of a dumb question but I just wanted to know thank you.
Not quite sure what, but something has confused the AfC backlog drive script and messed up this section. I tried to figure it out and fix the page in question w/o any luck. I do know the script is match on "#" when it should be matching on "\n#" which has caused some problem, for example [1] (see Victorious22). I fixed the couple times I saw it by getting rid of the #, but since I was reporting the other problem anyway I figured you should know. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:20, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Hey, josiah here. I am so sorry about what happened on the Tomonobu Itagaki page. I am a huge fan of Ninja Gaiden, and I have friend, who I will not name, was aware of this. Being the hilarious and mature person he is, he decided to edit the Itagaki article in a way that I find offensive and vulgar. I know this apology does not really mean much, but I am sorry for his actions and will make sure such shenanigans never occur again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josiah Wolf (talk • contribs) 01:59, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
PADI Page
Hi. Thank you for your message regarding the Professional Association of Diving Instructors page. I am not sure if I had written my notes for the deletion in the incorrect spot? I had posted them on the PADI Talk page under Criticism Removal for a while before I submitted that part for deletion if you would like to take a look? I have also resubmitted the edit for deletion and tried to copy & paste my reasons from the talk page into the edit summary. Is that ok? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TotalConversionMarketing (talk • contribs) 19:31, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Excirial I had resubmitted the deletion because I thought I had to include an edit summary (which wasn't on the first one). That is why I did it the second time. I am not sure what to do at this point?
How does the "debate" process work about the appropriate sources? I thought the talk page had the debate already. I just didn't see anything happening with it and there seemed to be no objections from when I posted on May 12. However, Rexxs, has kindly offered his suggestions today. I will follow whatever protocol you advise. I am just trying to contribute to the PADI page as I am familiar with PADI and have experience in scuba diving industry. Thank you so much! TotalConversionMarketing (talk) 02:10, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello Excirial
Thanks for your message. Re: Toy Connor Wiki Page, It should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... I am the original Author and Copyright owner of this work. The Vimeo account is my account as well. What are the steps to show prove my authenticity? I look forward to your response. BSEMedia (talk) 20:42, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
New huggle 3.1 is going to be released soon
Hi Excirial, we are to release a new major version of huggle, but we did receive almost no feedback from our beta testing team, which you are a part of (see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Huggle/Members). It would be of a great help if you could download it (if you have windows, all you need to do is getting http://tools.wmflabs.org/huggle/files/huggle3.1.0beta.exe and putting it to a folder where you have installed huggle) and test it. You can always get a help with making it @ #huggleconnect!
Major changes:
Multisite support - you can now log in to unlimited number of wikis in 1 huggle session and get a huge queue of all edits made to these wikis. This is good for smaller projects which gets overlooked often.
Ranged diffs - you can select multiple revisions and get a huge diff that display all changes done to them.
I work on a public company at the local library, I did not make a "contribution" to neptune ( mythology). That would be another user at the local library that I work from. Watch the attitude! Thank you much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.36.132.34 (talk) 17:52, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
AfC backlog drive
Any chance you can rerun the script to update Zach's page? We are working on revieweing his stuff and it would be helpful to know where we stand on the review process periodically. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:01, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Edits to Remote Area Medical
The information we provided updated it to 2014. The links were directly linked to the videos described in the information. If you are going to edit it for neutral purposes please at least use the updated information. Let me know — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chiefdevelopmentofficer (talk • contribs) 18:40, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Excirial. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 20:03, 14 July 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello, I received a message from you saying that you had deleted one of my entries to the Siberian Tiger wikipedia page. I had no idea what you were talking about until I viewed the entry that you provided the link to. It turns out that my daughter, who was supposed to be using the wiki to find facts for her Siberian Tiger report, had made the offensive entry. I am so mortified and humbly apologize for her inexcusable behavior. Rest assured she will be more closely monitored in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.187.170.235 (talk) 03:12, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Aron Barbey, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.
You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.
Would you please check the first decision node is correct that test success directs to rewriting the code? And a failed test is sending for developing the production code.
Hello Excirial. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.
The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.
If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)
If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.
Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.
I have received a message from you stating that an edit to her page was made from my IP address. I can assure you that I did not make the change, nor did any software on my computer. I do not wish to have any kinds of bans placed on my IP address. I have looked at the change that supposedly came from my computer, and I can assure you I would never write such a thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.122.25.105 (talk) 20:36, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Hey Excirial remember a guy named paway? Guess what? He's back! In an all new version of paway2! Don't you get tired of blocking people from editing dude? Well here's something. Have a nice day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paway2 (talk • contribs) 06:15, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Saint Petersburg State Institute of Psychology and Social Work
You removed the redirecting page (mentioned above) which has still links leading to it. So now those links became red, although the article contents is still available on Wikipedia. Great work, mister admin... --CiaPan (talk) 13:56, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Your right - i was mostly busy performing a history split for the first question and figured i'd have a look at the second one after i was done. Since it initially looked like the ye-regular page rename a day after the page was created i ended up cleaning the redirect without remembering to check for backlinks first. Stupid, but thankfully relatively harmless and easily fixed by restoring the page (Done now). That said - Was that second line really required to get the message across? Errare humanum est and such. Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)14:23, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm really sorry, that was not necessary. Just typing too fast when was angry—and I was angry because I tried to answer WP:Help desk#St. Petersburg State Institute of Psychology and Social Work point 2), saying the redir should be kept, and before I committed my answer I realized it was too late because the redir already disappeared. Please accept my apologies, I certainly should have waited an hour or two before answering. --CiaPan (talk) 17:40, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
I have recently launched a new downloads for beta testers that contains nightly builds of huggle, eg. versions that are built every day from our master branch and contains latest huggle. These builds are currently provided only for Windows and Ubuntu. You can find them here: http://huggle.wmflabs.org/builds/
Please keep in mind that these don't have any automatic updates and if you download and start using nightly build, you will need to update it yourself! So don't get yourself to running old version, it's possible to install both stable and nightly huggle, which is what I suggest.
@George8211: That is possible, but they might also be fans of the 2006 Sekai album; Aside from that Sekay is also an (uncommon) last name so it may also just be a play on that as well. If the question is whether or not the username is ok to use, I'd say i see nothing wrong with the name in itself. Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)19:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
@GRuban: A lot of credit for the speed is due to using Huggle and Stiki, two excellent applications that can really speed up vandalism patrol and coverage. Without those two i could only do a fraction of the work i can do nowadays with the pair of them. (That, and i suppose it would be nigh impossible to keep an eye on more than a fraction of the Wiki without some form of automation ) Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)21:05, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
T.J.Hebert
Hey it is T.J.Hebert, thank you for restoring my sandbox it was an accident. However, I am trying to make a new sandbox and I am unsure on how to that. Thank you for restoring my page. T.J.Hebert — Preceding unsigned comment added by T.J.Hebert (talk • contribs) 21:50, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello T.J,
I expected that something went a tad awry there, since it is not often an article writer would intentionally remove an article that is obviously of good quality! What i think you are running into here is that your original sandbox became a redirect to the article you wrote once you moved it to the article space. This is an automatic consequence of page moves - the old title is automatically set up to point to the new article.
Often this is practical, but in this case i think you simply want your sandbox back. Just follow the below steps:
You will be redirected to the article you wrote. However, you will notice that right under the title there will be a small-print text that states "Redirected from User:T.J.Hebert/sandbox"
Click the "User:T.J.Hebert/sandbox" link in the "Redirected from User:T.J.Hebert/sandbox". Now you will be taken to the sandbox page which will state that it is a redirect.
Simply edit your sandbox page and clear the page. And presto; you have a new empty sandbox all ready for usage without being forwarded to the article space once you try to access it.
One very different matter that caught my eye: Did you perchance format part of the references inside the Deicke and Millbrig bentonite layers by hand? If you happen to have the DOI for your reference at hand you may find this website to be exceptionally practical. Just enter the DOI on it, and it will fill create an entire filled-out Wikipedia cite template without having to enter any other data. Also, if you plan to use a fairly large amount of references or wish to reuse them across the page, you may want to have a look at ProveIt, as it can really make life easier when working with references.
Hey thank you I was trying to clear my sandbox. Could you please check to make sure I did it correctly. Also yes I did do the references by hand. Would I add the DOI to the reference? T.J.Hebert (talk) 22:28, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
The sandbox itself look a-ok right now. As for the DOI: just navigate to the link provided, and paste the DOI itself in the textbox and press "Load". It will then display a new text area that contains the formatted reference which can be pasted straight into the Wikipedia page.
For example: If we paste the DOI for your reference "DID A VOLCANIC MEGA-ERUPTION CAUSE GLOBAL COOLING DURING THE LATE ORDOVICIAN?" ("10.2110/palo.2010.p10-069r") in and press load, it will create this citation:
<ref name="HerrmannMacleod2010">{{cite journal|last1=Herrmann|first1=A. D.|last2=Macleod|first2=K. G.|last3=Leslie|first3=S. A.|title=DID A VOLCANIC MEGA-ERUPTION CAUSE GLOBAL COOLING DURING THE LATE ORDOVICIAN?|journal=PALAIOS|volume=25|issue=12|year=2010|pages=831–836|issn=0883-1351|doi=10.2110/palo.2010.p10-069r}}</ref>[1]
If you would paste this in the article it would show up in the reference list like below. All the known information for the DOI you entered (Author, journal title, release year, page title) are automatically filled in without having to type anything manually. Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)22:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Example of the reference list
^Herrmann, A. D.; Macleod, K. G.; Leslie, S. A. (2010). "DID A VOLCANIC MEGA-ERUPTION CAUSE GLOBAL COOLING DURING THE LATE ORDOVICIAN?". PALAIOS. 25 (12): 831–836. doi:10.2110/palo.2010.p10-069r. ISSN0883-1351.
I have nominated that this IP user be blocked from editing due to the number of unconstructive edits in a short period. Thank you for reverting their latest unconstructive edits. Lord Laitinen (talk)19:44, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
I have an issue with you reverting my edits from mark bell. His actual nickname is smelly. Many people call him that in his videos, his Twitter handle is even mark smelly bell. My other edit was fixing the wording of another section and saying he is a fitness entrepreneur. This is also true, he owns a gym, makes a product called a slingshot to assist on bench, has a podcast, and his own magazine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xxcbyers (talk • contribs) 01:07, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
@Xxcbyers: You will have to be a bit more specific for me to be able to give a specific reply. Your account has only one edit (This message to my talk page) so i have no idea what page or edit we are talking about; and since i made several hundreds of recent edits you have to forgive me for not remembering every single one of them.
I can give you a generic reply though. Since we are apparently talking about a biographic article the Biography of living persons policy applies to any content added. Summarized the gist of it would be: "Any content added to an article detailing a living person needs a reliable source to back it up". This applies even more strongly to content that could possibly be libelous or controversial (Which includes the nickname you mentioned). Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)15:05, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Seeing as it is a free source encyclopedia and i have read all terms and service agreements and am not in violation of any of them You will refrain from impeding on my right to freedom of speech. If you would like to contact my lawyer I will be happy to direct you to my ACLU Rep who will tear your argument apart in court and show that censorship on a site that allows ANYONE to edit an article either needs to restrict editorial access or refrain from complaining about it. Seeing as you have no grounds for any sort of vandalism allegation i will also ask you to refrain from attempting to bully me with words that you misspell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OHTheHummor (talk • contribs) 19:12, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
@Excirial: Please post the exact term of service I Violated, As well as an account is a dime a dozen. Do remember that it is not a privilege to have free speech in the United States where you receive federal grants from my tax dollars. So in part i pay so this site is up which means I am the boss so get use to someone who knows their Constitutional Rights telling you Kindly to once again either provide what rule was broken or stop restricting what I say. Btw you missed the body of the edit where i said it is a pimp palace and frequents hookers.
(Unrelated editor) @OHTheHummor: vandalism is not allowed. Being able to edit something freely doesn't mean you can do what you want with it.
When Wikipedia was created, Jimbo and Sanger could have made it so that you'd have to write to the WMF to get an account to edit, then they'd do a complete CRB check on you, confirm your identity, contact the passport office, et cetera. But they didn't. The openness of Wikipedia is not something to be abused, otherwise you will be blocked from editing. —George8211 / T19:44, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Shortly after I added Dave Bergman to Deaths in 2015, you reverted it. I'm curious as to why. (For what it's worth, Bergman did die - and his name is back on the list.) I'd appreciate any clarification. Thanks! EKMichigan (talk) 00:04, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
@EKMichigan: There is a very detailed and long explanation and rationale for this particular edit conveniently listed on this excellent page. Joking aside this is one of those thankfully rare but unfortunately still occurring reverts where i have no clue as to why i reverted a page. The diff itself provides no hint as to why i would even want to revert it, and while i can normally recall most reverts a day after if i see them again i cannot remember seeing this particular one at all. It might be a case of reverting the wrong page or (hopefully not) me not paying as much attention as i should have. Long story short: That is a revert that should not have been executed - apologies for the inconvenience! Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)21:39, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
@DoctorJoeE: I think there is relatively little that can be done in this case. The level of vandalism generated by the IP is low and far in between - any block on the IP would need to be lenghty for it to have any effect, and the long length would be out of proportion compared to the level of vandalism it actually generates. The best thing that can be done is warning the IP when it vandalizes and blocking it when it passes warning level 4. If the vandalism grows worse or persistent a longer term block may be an option though. Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)20:13, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
REPLACE THIS TEXT WITH YOUR MESSAGE Stephenjohngregg111 (talk) 21:06, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
my wiki pass godspeed. also read this the key to world peace. pass this on to elite, not Cameron. world controlled by an organization called invisible bank, super rich in charge, pass onto queen and milaband. good luck guys. a good friend :)
Hi! I was not the person who edited the Lagoon Nebula article, but i appreciate that you are respectful enough of others' viewpoints and work to attempt to contact the revisor....blessings, Subito Piano 104.228.68.210 (talk) 16:23, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
I manage the PSAL website www.psal.org and it was brought to my attention by my boss's boss that the Wikipedia PSAL page has a section that is incorrect
Information that is false
He went on to say to remove it and to check it every week to make sure that the section that I keep removing does not appear.
The section that I keep removing is the controversy
Please do not keep adding it
@Mromannyr: If you are closely related to the subject of an article - such as being a paid employee of an organization it describes - you have a so called conflict of interest when editing the page in question. Summarized this means that your edits to the page are unlikely to be made for the benefit of creating a quality encyclopedia and are instead aimed at presenting the organization in a preferred positive (And thus biased) point of view. While editing under a COI is not outright forbidden it is very strongly discouraged and subject to the usual policies regarding neutrality.
As for the information in the controversy section itself: It would appear that the controversy section is supported by several sources that on first glance appear to be reliable. The inclusion criteria for Wikipedia is - among others - verifiability, not truth. Since there are several sources that can be considered reliable i see no rationale to flatly remove the entire section under the rationale of it being "Not correct". Seeing the surrounding situation my own translation of the "incorrect" comment would instead be "My bosses boss does not like the section as it is critical in tone, and therefor gave the explicit instruction to remove it weekly". As mentioned in the first paragraph this type of editing would be one that is explicitly disallowed when representing a company. Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)20:41, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello. You have recently revert a change that I have made. The change is with the title of the page Prince of wales museum, The official name of the museum is Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sangrahalaya. As changed by the government, refer http://www.thehindu.com/2000/11/16/stories/0216000q.htm and the official website www.csmvs.in
My argument for your assistance is this would be when you search for Bombay on wikipedia a user is direct to the page Mumbai. Because the name of the city was officially changed by the goverment. However, the page does mention that the city was previous called Bombay. Like we have mentioned that Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sangrahalaya was formerly known as Price of Wales Museum of Western India.
More over the page title itself is wrong. The museum was never known as Price of Wales museum but Prince of Wales Museum of Western India. The current title is a common term.
Also, if the argument few other users who have changed the title is that the page title should be in English. Then the page for Arc_de_Triomphe should be renamed Arc of Triumph.
Please do assist me in changing the title of the page to its official name and please do lock any further name changes.
Im an official representative of the Museum. Allanoscar (talk) 19:05, 5 February 2015 (UTC)Allan Oscar
@Allanoscar: I have no particular opinion in regards to the actual renaming of the page - my only concern was the copy and paste move used to relocate the page as this breaks the article's link to its page history. I do however note that there was a previous discussion regarding the name of the page which ended up without consensus to move the page. Since Wikipedia is build upon Consensus it would not be prudent for me to override a (recent) previous discussions result by moving the page. Instead i have opened a request to have the article moved on its talk page (You can find it here). Based on the discussion the page may either be moved or left at its current title. Your input is of course quite welcome at the talk page mentioned. Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)19:27, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Like Monroe
If the creator of an article removes a speedy deletion tag, feel free to re-add it, but don't blindly revert. Blanking a lot of intermediate material is not helpful. WilyD16:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
On 5 February 2013 you deleted my article. I understand your reasons, nevertheless, i would like to test a page describing my company and gather other people's opinions and suggestions on matters there touched upon.
Please check www.cosmictroops.com
Thank you for any help
Hello, I will try to correct my page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spo0K_(film) although it is okay to delete
this page: I didn't even realize this was immediately visible. The film itself isn't even released yet and the
only notable things about it is that it has been made by Dutch artist Valensia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valensia
who is my favorite artist and does have a Wiki page, but reading through it all I think it's not notable enough to mention.
I know it rarely happens a Dutch produced film is released in the US but it's indeed not appropriate to dedicate a page
to (at least not now) as the film isn't even released yet. I would like it to be up there and correct it, but no problem
at all when deleted Daniellovell (talk) 20:19, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Adding onto that: Excirial, the author of an article can request its deletion either expressly or, by blanking it, implicitly, "[i]f requested in good faith and provided that the only substantial content to the page was added by its author." See WP:CSD G7. In this case, placing a {{db-author}} tag on the page rather than restoring its contents would have been appropriate. —Largo Plazo (talk) 21:15, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
@Largoplazo: I intentionally opted against using a G7 template in this particular instance. One slight drawback of using a CSD template is that they are dealt with quite fast - sometimes even before the article's writer would have a chance to see them. Since this page was already half a day old and contained ~35k worth of textual data the chances of an accidental or unintended removal of content were relatively high compared to the usual page blanking cases. Seeing the circumstances i opted to use a revert and blank1 warning template as a sorts of "Are you Sure" mechanism over the "If you were not sure, please get a refund" option as it seemed a bit more user friendly.
Granted, i did have the (incorrect) impression that {{uw-delete1}} contained a line that specifically dealt with a user blanking his or her own pages while it actually does not. In retrospect a manual message would have been more practical for what i was trying to accomplish. Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)23:51, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Your recent edit to the Cards Against Humanity page changed information that is important to the game. It says clearly in the rules that whoever last pooped is the person who starts as card czar.50.248.194.69 (talk) 18:53, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Good ol' card against humanity - i suppose it is the only article where that line could even remotely qualify as a good edit rather than vandalism. Seems your edit was good, and my revert of it wasn't - I restored the deleted content to the article. I did opt to place the line in quotes and added a reference for the games rules right after it, just to make sure people such as myself won't mistake it for vandalism so easily. Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)21:39, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
The edit that was reverted is this particular change on the Culture of New Zealand page. Note that this change was made by the IP address you are currently using, which may or may not have previously been used by another person. As for all the other questions: I am (as far as i am aware) completely unrelated to New Zealand or its culture. Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)21:30, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
This was my first Wikipedia Article Contribution, and I interacted with fellow members of the community all of whom approved and even improved upon it. However, there is one Wikipedia user who has a hidden agenda and keeps adding it for deletion - this is not right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BBen489 (talk • contribs) 20:54, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
@BBen489: Wikipedia's article deletion depends upon consensus between editors to determine if an article should be kept or deleted. As a result any editor may - in good faith - nominate an article for deletion using the article's for deletion procedure. Gbawden marked your article for deletion arguing that the article's subject does not have lasting notability, and that it may thus be too soon to have an article regarding Siddharth Shetty (Perhaps for now, perhaps permanently). The argument is a valid deletion rationale and while you (and perhaps other editors, that is what the AFD discussion is for) may not agree with the rationale it is up to the AFD discussion to determine the aforementioned consensus regarding the article.
AFD templates themselves may not be removed from an article while the discussion is still open - nor may the discussion be flat-out blanked for that matter. You received four warnings that this is not acceptable and based on your further edits i am fairly certain you saw these warnings but chose to ignore them. As a result Materialscientist ended blocking your account for 24 hours for disruptive editing. After the block had expired you are more than welcome to resume editing but i would strongly suggest discussing the proposed deletion in the AFD discussion over flat out removing the template or the discussion over and over. Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)21:55, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
hello im here because you removed my contribution. it is a very obvious and well known fact that the 'Lauren is nae' movement exists im the smart one here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.232.136.142 (talk) 20:35, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
I am a trademark attorney for PharmaMar, SA. I am trying to update/correct the entry for Aplidin®. Aplidin® is the trademark of PharmaMar for the drug plitidepsin. The current entry uses Aplidin as a generic name for the drug, which is inaccurate. Please let me know how I can edit this entry to correct the use of my client's trademark.
Gillete Stadium66.251.14.226 (talk) 15:21, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Yo dude im from boston i have a newspaper in front of me saying Boston Bruins host 2016 nhl winter classic at gillete stadium and i know my cousin did the same to citzens bank park in philly so why change mine
dude that isnt me that is my friend who is the other computer next to me in the same school we share the same ip address. so you dont understand i put my team bruins under the gillete stadium that is my only edit so post it back now!!!!!!
The edit you are referring to was removed by User:ClueBot BG when it removed some vandalism posted right afterwards. I see you already reinstated the edit mentioned yourself. Technically it is not accurate to list the Boston Bruins as a tenant for the Gillette stadium as the tenant list is used to list team that have a particular station as their home station (The bruins are just visiting for one game though). That said: Adding that line isn't vandalism so i am fine with it being there. Excirial(Contact me,Contribs)19:09, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
