This is an archive of past discussions with User:GlassCobra. 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.
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. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
...for indef'ing that harassment account. Also for removing Nimur's false charge of sockpuppetry, hence I don't have to accelerate it to ANI or someplace. His vision of the ref desk is rather different from mine, but I've tried to do better after a previous ANI discussion about it. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots00:44, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for explaining the reason of your edit. I could agree in general terms but in this case the rank of his leadership is quite unquestionable as he is considered by historians and informed people on par with Jean Moulin. I believe that N#2 in worst case qualifies for "a top lead[*]".
Please take the time to check the links, especially from M. Douzou (#4) (in French) about the heroes that could qualify as N#1 for De Gaulle, where out of a very short list of 5, only these 2 would stand final screening. (with quite objective criteria).
Would you propose something different, like a "senior leading member" ? In French they usually say "la haute résistance" to distinguish those top leaders from others less influential but using "High Resistance" would be probably inexpressive in English. Mpbb (talk) 21:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
About the mop
Thank you for the nice note on my talk page. I'm honored that you would think of me as a potential admin. Unfortunately, I'm not up to the task at present due to off-wiki commitments. However, I may reconsider the matter next year. Is it OK if I contact you at that time for your advice? Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 22:23, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
I reverted the edits you made to the article on Douglas Coe. The name of the group is in fact, "The Fellowship" not "The Family" as you changed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EricLeFevre (talk • contribs)
I apologize for not signing my post there, I was in a bit of a hurry. As for the article being called "The Family" I have no idea why. Every single source from major newspapers, (NBC, Newsweek, ect) refer to the organization as the fellowship. A guy named Jeff Sharlet wrote a book about it awhile ago and religiously referred to the group in question as "The Family," but he was actually talking about "The Fellowship." Why he would get the name of the group wrong is beyond me. Regardless, whoever wrote that article named the group incorrectly, so the name of the article needs to be changed, how to do that without breaking all the internal links I don't know. I don't think I even have the ability to change the articles name, it might be something an admin has to do. EricLeFevre (talk) 23:46, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Train station
Actually, there are many, many articles about train stations in Wikipedia, mostly in the U.K. (can you say trainspotting? I knew you could!). Is there any reason not to have those for Indonesia, if we tolerate them for the U.K.? --Orange Mike | Talk20:46, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm bad about updating that. I can't get on IRC at the moment (I'm in class) but I might be able to get on once I get out (about 45 minutes). If it's urgent, I should be able to respond to emails. Hersfold(t/a/c)22:17, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
i suppose it would be best to link it to the record label Gavity DIP, though i still feel the release is relevent, ecspeacilly to the steal since i think it was one of their first offical releases. But whatever as long as the record is recognized in someway that it actually exists.
In view of what you said here I was hoping you might respond to the gist of what I said to Jayron32 here (you can get the gist in the second and third paragraphs).
I don't think we've interacted much and possibly not at all, but I'll tell you that my jaw dropped a bit when I saw this comment: "...I determined that I felt sufficiently comfortable to place my trust in him once again by nominating him. I did purposefully leave out any mention of The_undertow in his RfA nomination; I wanted editors to judge him solely by his actions and edits as Law." Aside from the fact that you nominated him and wanted him to pass RfA, I'm curious as to where and when you feel you accrued the authority to knowingly misrepresent an RfA candidate's past to the community and act as arbiter of what Law would or would not be judged on. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs06:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Why did you delete the page, Greg Mowry? Everything and all the information is and was correct. Greg did star in Starlight Express as Rusty on Broadway at the Gershwin Theatre from 1987 to 1989. The facts are documented on Broadwayworld.com and also on ibdb.com
Well, its like Clinton, his dick, and his lying about where it had been. What did that have to do with being prez? Directly, not a thing. However, he damn near was removed from office for it, and a great many people feel he should have been. Or if you prefer, finding out a policeman does a little pot or coke when not on duty. They lose their badge, because they've shown they have no respect for the law. "Gross misconduct" it is called, and it has nothing to do with how they carry out the duties as a cop.[2]KillerChihuahua?!?Advice19:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Request for arbitration
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Administrators aiding a sock puppet at RFA and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
I also feel that nominating Law without disclosing your knowledge that he had previously been desysopped badly damages the community's trust in you, and would urge you to resign, even though this doesn't meet your criteria for recall.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry to join the chorus, GlassCobra, but I have to say I feel the same way as the others here and I think you have really betrayed the community's trust in you. Your statement that, "I determined that I felt sufficiently comfortable to place my trust in him" is really very shocking to me. If you felt that you could trust Law, you should have presented him for an appeal and helped him regain the tools in an honest and honourable manner, not knowingly and purposefully assisting him in regaining admniship with a sockpuppet. I'm so appalled by this stunning business of enforcing policy strictly on poor regular unconnected users and giving special treatment and free passes to friends. How are we supposed to answer users who complain, rightfully I now see, that blocks and unblocks and access to trusted positions aren't decided on by merit but on who you're friends with? I'm really very shocked and perplexed by your actions and the fact you don't seem to 'get it' and say you find the reaction to recent revelations a "mystery" leaves me completely astounded and seriously concerned about your judgement. I have never had any problems with you in the past but I sincerely believe you need to retest the community's trust in you by having your position as a "trusted user" reconfirmed. 03:40, 2 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarah (talk • contribs)
I agree with Sarah. I consider the nomination of a banned user at RfA without disclosing this fact to be a flagrant abuse of the process and the community's trust in you. Those supporting Law based on your nomination relied on your perceived good character and good judgment. It was reasonable for them to assume that you would have let them know if you were asking them to support a controversial candidate (especially someone who was to you knowledge evading a ban at the time). If you are willing to behave in this manner to benefit your friends, I don't think it is possible to trust you to be an administrator on this project. WJBscribe(talk)17:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I have a question.. Please see this diff, last paragraph. This explains why the editor you helped was originally banned. You were a friend of his, right? Did you know about these things he did? Friday(talk)13:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I am an administrator in good standing, and uninvolved with this situation (in fact, I was on wikibreak for much of this year, including the time of the RfA). Now that I'm taking a look at things though, I have serious concerns. You nominated a de-sysopped user for adminship, and failed to disclose his previous identity. This was a serious lapse of judgment. The way it should have been handled, was to first make things right with the previous account, and then try again with the new one, while making it absolutely transparent that there were other previous accounts involved. Keeping it secret was not the way to go. Because of these serious concerns that are being expressed both by me and other uninvolved administrators, at a minimum, you should resign from your position as an arbitration clerk. --Elonka18:26, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I believe that you are correct in this matter, and I have resigned as a clerk effective immediately. I have expressed my openness to sanctions, including a reconfirmation RFA, and if ArbCom deems them necessary, I will certainly comply. Thanks, GlassCobra17:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
What a joke this arbitration is. Heaps of very high-ranking folks knew of another admin's sock that double dipped. Sounds like the token public executions that Nguyen Cao Ky and Nguyen Van Thieu did for some hapless guy for corruption when their wives looted hundreds of millions and 30% of the army were ghost soldiers being used to plunder payrolls. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:16, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Accusations of bad faith
Which users did you mean when you said, I do note FT2's comments involving the questionable motives and bad faith on the part of certain users here, ? Please be specific. I have no personal gripes with you whatsoever. Our relationship has always been positive as far as I can remember, and I hope you're not referring to me. JehochmanTalk00:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Your statement on Arbcom
You mention the name of the editor in question - are you sure you mean to do that? Friendly question just in case that was a slip. - Wikidemon (talk) 00:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Well, that's the thing. I don't want to leave totally; it's just that I've been feeling a bit stalked (hence the lag in my edits). Besides, my t-ban expired a while ago, didn't it? Gp75motorsportsTALK17:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Wikistalked. I feel like the involved admins are following me a bit too tightly. Speaking of which, it'd be helpful to have a list of everyone currently watching me. --Gp75motorsportsTALK21:16, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
WHATWikis Take Manhattan is a scavenger hunt and free content photography contest aimed at illustrating Wikipedia and
StreetsWiki articles covering sites and street features in Manhattan and across the five boroughs of New York City.
WINNINGS?
The first prize winning team members will get Eye-Fi Share cards, which automatically upload photos from your camera to your computer and to sites like Flickr. And there will also be cool prizes for other top scorers.
WHEN
The hunt will take place Saturday, October 10th from 1:00pm to 6:30pm, followed by prizes and celebration.
WHO
All Wikipedians and non-Wikipedians are invited to participate in team of up to three (no special knowledge is required at all, just a digital camera and a love of the city). Bring a friend (or two)!
REGISTER
The proper place to register your team is here. It's also perfectly possible to register on the day of when you get there, but it will be slightly easier for us if you register beforehand.
WHERE
Participants can begin the hunt from either of two locations: one at Columbia University (at the sundial on college walk) and one at The Open Planning Project's fantastic new event space nestled between Chinatown and SoHo. Everyone will end at The Open Planning Project:
I deprodded. It's not a neologism, I can find uses on Google News back to 1945, and there are hundreds of news stories referring to this event at fairs. I've added one from the 1950s. Most of the stories are in local press, but this is a widespread tradition by the looks of it. Fences&Windows02:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Another one. The number of wikilinks isn't a relevant criteria on judging deletion of an article, and this statistic is discussed and used by thousands of sources, including the UN.[3] Are you looking for sources before prodding? Fences&Windows03:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you GlassCobra for being the gatekeeper for content quality. I will rewrite my article (maybe take a course in Journalism before) and resubmit article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryerrams (talk • contribs) 18:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Please delete my website's TITLEs from your system immediately. & this users comments
Dear Wikipedia,
Please delete my website's TITLE: datingpeoplemixer.com & Dating People Mixer from your system immediately. I refuse to support or donate to Wikimedia when my website is being discriminated against with a repeated speedy deletion sign that is constantly posted on the pages with datingpeoplemixer.com and dating people mixer in the Wikipedia pages.
Please delete my website's title IMMEDIATELY! - I REFUSE TO DONATE NOR HAVE MY ASSOCIATES DONATE TO WIKIMEDIA EITHER WITH THIS TYPE OF ACTIVITY!
Also I would like to REPORT THIS USER: GlassCobra
This User GlassCobra within the Wikipedia system is putting out degrading statements about Datingpeoplemixer.com and Dating People Mixer and GlassCobra page should be deleted on Wikipedia. This users statements comes up in the Google search when typing in Datingpeoplemixer.com. THIS IS WRONG!
LOL... I'm not sure whether to take this seriously or not... as far as I can tell, you (or one of "your associates") created an article about your website, and is was speedy deleted for fails notability concerns, at which point you created it 3 more times, and even tried to change the article title... then, instead of reading up on policy and understanding why this happened, you got angry...
are you getting angry because the promotional article you wrote about your non-notable website is being deleted? Also, you then wish to have the deleting admin "deleted"? (Who wasn't even the deleting admin...) I always like to start my day with a laugh, but this is new... also, if you are going to make a claim such as "This User GlassCobra within the Wikipedia system is putting out degrading statements about Datingpeoplemixer.com and Dating People Mixer", you should really have some kind of evidence included with the claim, it would help the rest of us to believe that a trusted admin is doing something wrong... - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Furthermore, I see nowhere that GC wrote anything (degrading or otherwise) about you or your website... please show me any kind of evidence for anything you are claiming... - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:09, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
This User GlassCobra within the Wikipedia system has no right to make comments on a situation of an inexperienced Wikipedia insert on Wikipedia. This users "GlassCobra" statements comes up in the Google search when typing in Datingpeoplemixer.com. There are important things going on in this world for someone such as GlassCobra to be posting silly remarks about a insignigicant situation that is needs to be addressed and deleted by Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.238.191.173 (talk) 16:22, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Again, please show where he made a comment... I see a link on google to GC's user page that transposes the UAA report made by TheLetterM, but no comments by GC himself... I really hope that you stop and figure out what is actually going on before you dig your hole any deeper... and the comment below is verging on incivility... please calm down and read our assorted policies before you make any more comments... - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Your attention is brought to the text of three motions passed by the Arbitration Committee on 11 October 2009.
GlassCobra: GlassCobra (talk·contribs) nominated Law (talk·contribs) for adminship. Law was an undisclosed account of previously 9-month blocked and desysopped editor The undertow (talk·contribs), and GlassCobra made his nomination while aware of that fact and without disclosing it. GlassCobra has since agreed that this was a breach of trust incompatible with his holding the position of an ArbCom clerkand has resigned from that post at the Committee's request. GlassCobra has apologized, pledged not to repeat such an error, and is willing to accept a sanction.
GlassCobra admonished: GlassCobra is strongly admonished for having knowingly promoted the request for adminship of an editor he knew was using an undisclosed alternate account. He was aware that knowledge of the former account's history would materially affect the request, and displayed poor judgment by failing to disclose that information along with his support.
GlassCobra desysopped: GlassCobra is desysopped for having knowingly promoted the request for adminship of an editor he knew was using an undisclosed alternate account. He was aware that knowledge of the former account's history would materially affect the request, and breached the community's trust by failing to disclose that information along with his support. Adminship may be regained by request to the arbitration committee or via the usual means.
As per Motion 3 of Case "Disclosure of known alternate accounts" at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Motions#2009, a request for the removal of your administrator status was lodged at Meta and this request has now been processed.
As per the terms of the motion, you are immediately free to request the reinstatement of your administrator status directly to the Arbitration Committee, or via an application at WP:RFA.
That's a shame: though as far as I'm concerned, you were a great admin, and I hope you will be one once again. It would be nice to think that your desysopping will have set precedent (i.e. the fact you weren't desysopped for tool abuse), and we'll now be able to remove admins who cause trouble all the time (a list which, I should note, you were not on) but don't actually abuse their tools, and also admins who pushed for desysoppings just to get rid of some people they didn't like. You still have my trust. Best. Acalamari16:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
It's a shame, yes, but did you seriously expect otherwise given what you knowingly did? Anyway, I've given you rollback status to make things a bit easier. DS (talk) 16:33, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind words, Acalamari. I may try to re-acquire the tools at a later date, but I think I'll take a while and write some articles and putter around some areas that I did not frequent as an admin. GlassCobra21:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I've always found you to be an exceptionally level-headed, thoughtful, and clueful administrator. I've seen you do a lot of good work, and it's unfortunate that this one lapse in judgment seems to have, at least temporarily, overshadowed the good you've done with the bit. Enjoy life with less clutter on your tab bar. I would be happy to support you if you ever wish to re-apply for adminship. MastCellTalk23:09, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I was sorry to see all that transpired recently, but I want you to know you have my vote of confidence. Cheers, amigo. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:10, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
For the purpose of clarity, you still possess the following user rights.
Edit Filter manager
Rollback
Autoconfirmed user
Autoreviewer
Although not explicitly instructed to do so by Arbcom, in my capacity as a clerk I have updated your user rights log accordingly. Manning (talk) 16:59, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I admire you for your conduct leading up to your ArbCom desysopping. You admit you made a mistake, and you were willing to accept the consequences. That truly impresses me. FWIW, ping me if you ever run for RfA again, as I think you were and still would be a fine administrator. Best, Dylan620 (contribs, logs, review) 00:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
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. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
Truth be told, I don't care much about VAC being included on the list; I get tired of people squabbling over what bands are or are not what genre. What I do care about is trying to circumvent the system by first removing a genre from a band's article, then removing that band from the list, saying that since the genre is gone, they no longer belong on the list. I would recommend that you stop edit warring, and discuss your issues on the talk page. GlassCobra19:12, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Note: Pulling stuff like this doesn't count. VAC was clearly not previously discussed, do not attempt to mislead editors by adding it to that list. GlassCobra19:14, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Note. YOU are edit warring. YOU are violating the 3 revert rule. VAC has never been considered Gothic rock. They've ALWAYS been industrial. Getting all butt-hurt and reverting my edits changes nothing. No wonder your admin status was taken away. What are you, 12? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.42.127 (talk) 19:17, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
I said very clearly above that I don't care what genre you think a band is or is not; the correct way to propose improvements to an article is to take your argument to the article's talk page if your change is disputed. I hardly consider myself "butt-hurt" over a minor squabble with some Internet malcontent, nor does this type of exchange have anything to do with why my admin tools were taken. GlassCobra19:22, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miguel Angel Sano
On October 25, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Miguel Angel Sano, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On October 26, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Yusei Kikuchi, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
You have twice reverted edits that I made to the Aung San Suu Kyi page ("Prime Minister-elect"). I have left a detailed comment explaining my actions in the discussion under that page. It would be appreciated if you respond to those comments before reverting again. Thanks!
Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 174 in support, 2 in opposition and 1 neutral votes. Special thanks goes to RegentsPark, Samir and John Carter for their kind nomination and support. I am truly honored by the trust and confidence that the community has placed in me. I thank you for your kind inputs and I will be sincerely looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas ( including my english ;) ). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). Have a great day ! -- TinuCherian - 04:29, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
The picture appears to be a non-free image, which we cannot use in our articles about living people per WP:NFC#UULP. Furthermore, as the file appears to be from some sort of press shoot, as has been uploaded without any kind of credit or copyright, it does not belong as Wikimedia Commons and has been nominated for deletion there. GlassCobra20:25, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Community College Futures Assembly
I would like to contest the deletion of the page I created on the Community College Futures Assembly. This is a conference held by the University of Florida. I am a professor at the University of Texas, so I have no affiliation with this conference. I am a professor of community college administration and have been working to "fill in the gaps" on aspects related to community college administration and vocational education on the wiki pages.
I put the community college futures assembly wiki up and it was immediately flagged as blatant advertising. I was not sure how because there was no solicitation for products, attendance, or any other attempt to sell any product. It was written in a neutral voice, much in the same vein as your other commercial sites such as Best Buy on wikipedia. It was suggested from the administrator that I just redo the page and submit again as a new prospective page and perhaps the next admin would allow it. (l’Aquatique, Sept. 2008). I contested and Nyttend upheld, in that the article needed to be written from a more neutral point of view. They said they would help if I needed it…I replied and never heard back from them. I decided the time spent chasing down admins to even respond was not worth it.
Ok, being a techie I decided to give wiki’s one last try…
I brought the page back up, did some updates and added some references with the intent of adding more. Before I could even finish adding references the next admin flagged it for speedy delete as being SPAM (Queencake). She even put in there “thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia…your test worked, and the page you created has been or soon will be deleted” which I found to be offensive since I spent a lot of hours working on that particular page. I added the hangon tag and responded to her as to why the page should not be deleted and, again, was ignored and received no reply. In the reply I provided a list of other education-related conferences and other conferences in general on the wikipedia for which my wiki followed their format.
Again, Spam is something this page is not. It is encyclopedic knowledge of one of the main community college administration conferences (wiki already has pages on some of the others). This time the admin suggested I added more citations and references and follow the guidelines for conference pages. So, I added 58 references from external sources such as academic journals, newspapers, and websites touting the importance and relevance of this conference.
This time the admin went and sought out the older deleted article and based their decision upon the older one, instead of the newer one. (Spartaz). I asked them if they could look at the current one which follows the requirements for conferences and did not receive an answer (but, this has only been a day or so at this point, to be fair to Spartaz, but wiki shows them on-line for the past 12 hours and they have been actively posting.).
Thus, I am turning to appeal to you. I have followed the wikipedia guidelines on conferences. I have 58 references, citations, and sources. I do intend on providing more but I have spent the better part of three days on this I do not wish to spend anymore time if this effort is fruitless. The page is written in a neutral voice. This is not my conference and I have no affiliation with it. I am merely a professor of community college administration who is attempting to fill in the gaps of encyclopedic knowledge on wikipedia. If you could look at the most current page I would appreciate it. Thank you for your time.
Because 2004 World Series is a featured article, 2008 is not. If you can find sourcing for the international broadcasters, awesome, but the country flags are just unneeded. Staxringoldtalkcontribs15:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
I think so. The policy as to why is cited on the 09 talk page. But my focus is the 09 WS, I wanna get that to FA status (hopefully with the Yankees winning. :) ) Staxringoldtalkcontribs15:27, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
We should work together and co-nom this sucker, then. I've been staying away from major editing while it's underway, but I'll hit the ground running as soon as it's done. Staxringoldtalkcontribs15:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Kurt. I saw your request while reading GlassCobra's talk page, and have undeleted and unprotected your user and user talk pages. Please let me know if there is anything else you want me to do. NW(Talk)17:59, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
