Been a while since I expressed appreciation to you for helping me be a better person
The Purple Barnstar
For correctly opposing my first RfA, I award you this peculiarly purplish barnstar. Your insightful choice in that process prevented me from making many more mistakes of immaturity at the time and set me on the course which even now allows me to contribute to a higher level. Your oppose painted you as my mentor then, and such has turned out to be the case even still. Whatever storms your user account might have suffered know there are wikipedians who you have set on stronger paths because of your personal dedication and candor. BusterD (talk) 19:59, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to thank you for being a teacher to me - hard to believe we started talking 10 years ago - I'm glad to be who I am today and you played no small role in it. Cheers! →Σσς. (Sigma)22:40, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I hardly doubt almost any contribution you have made to Wikipedia would be considered a waste, including your thoughtful reflections. Just a comment from a passerby who might have reviewed your contributions and found interest in many of them. I hope my words find you well. --ARoseWolf21:38, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nice seeing you around Kudpung
Greetings Kudpung, it is good seeing you around; I hope you are and have been well. I recently returned from a prolonged wiki absence and of the many unexpected disappointments I sadly did see, I was sorry to see that misfortune had befallen you. I don't know the circumstances and I'm certain that I don't want to know. I only know that I miss seeing you at discussions where your insight is badly needed. In particular, considering all that you did in the past for RfA reform, I lament the thought of reforms we'll likely not see, that may have been, If you were actively involved. It's probably not even right of me to ask, and I hope you will take this with the sentiments of respect that I mean to attach, but if you will, please consider joining the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2021 review/Issues. Either way, if I don't see you there, I am glad that I saw you here. And I wish you the best.--John Cline (talk) 11:40, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the kind words, John. I see you've been away a lot longer than I have. I have no designs on making a come-back. I throw in the occasional comments now and again but after the character assassination that Arbcom's own members were party to and what they are doing to other admns, no one really takes me seriously these days. I might still write an article, a GA, or a DYK, but I really regret the thousands of hours I spent over the years doing any maintenance tasks or encouraging new users. People say I'm embittered - of course I am. The more I come back and do the odd tweak here and there, the more it shows too. RfA is still a horrible and broken process, and not much will change with the real nastiness that abounds on Wikipedia.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:03, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ridiculous RfA questions
You mentioned you have compiled a list of "200 of the most ridiculous and/or inappropriate questions". I'd like to read that! Maybe even include it in the writeup I'm doing for The Signpost. Could you tell me where?
Bri The research is here. The questions, all sorted by types, are here. Bear in mind that the research was 10 years ago and hence the participation stats are based on pre-reform RfA, i.e. before December 2015 which doubled the number of voters. It surprises me that despite the renewed interest in RFA issues, no one is willing to provide more recent data. Wikipedians are a stats-hungry community, they won't believe anything or do anything until they are given proof, so if Barkeep49 wants to take his monster 2-hour RFC to the next step, he's going to need to provide them, and it's not only about the RFA questions. Our 2011 research covered many aspects of RFA including profiles of the voters.
I put together one piece of data, on support percentages, and am not opposed to putting together more but also I think the solutions which get consensus will touch on different areas than last time so the data which was useful then wouldn't be as useful now. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:34, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Barkeep49, There is a huge number of very different sections on your 'survey', and some of the are mildly ambiguous and overlap with each other. Biblioworm (whose efforts I largely supported) made the same mistakes, and the RFCs became so convoluted that many of the initial particiants tailed off. That said, I certainly do not under estimate the amount of work and effort that went into it - been there, done that, and I've spent time supporting your mission - not that anyone listens to me these days. However, I know I keep banging my drum about WP:RFA2011 but there is a vast amount of info there that is still relevant today and I don't understand why people are so reluctant to consult it first. Anyone who knows how to do regex for a Quarry, can provide up-to-date profiles of the voters and voting trends using the same information targets. For the rest, since 2016 the sample size for RFA might even be to small now to draw any intelligent conclusions beyond the fact that it's still a horrible place and something needs to be done about it if more new admins are to be brought on board. Despite what people say about me these days, I'm not wrong about everything you know. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:02, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If I remember rightly WTT, you and Swarm whose comment in 2011 summed it up nicely, were even coordinators and had plenty to say. In fact it's also something WereSpielChequers said to me once, too. Scottywong did the physical data mining. The research is all here and should be of some considerable use to Barkeep49:
Possible proposals – A basic summary of ideas that the task force is developing and queuing for development based on the active discussions above. Talk
One of the problems of inappropriate questions is that they can be hard to differentiate from appropriate ones that should have had a diff supporting them. Take "How has your opinion of Wikipedia changed since you started editing?" If you look at someone's early edits or an old version of their userpage you will probably see signs of change between them as a newbie and them as a someone ready for RFA. Sometimes the arc is obvious, one of my supports in one of my RFAs pointed out that some of my earliest edits lacked neutral point of View - (I remember learning about the neutral point of view policy by discovering the Bad King John was King John of England on Wikipedia). So "How has your opinion of Wikipedia changed since you started editing?" could be an appropriate question if you are uncertain whether someone has changed or just gone quiet about some views that they have expressed in the past. Equally the editing whilst intoxicated question, if you look at someone's talkpage history a bunch of trout slapping incidents, warnings etc then the question might be relevant and even be linked to some past blocks. Asking either of those questions without good reason to ask them of that specific candidate is very wrong. There are also questions, and indeed opposes that try to change policy in an underhand manner such as "this policy may have consensus behind it, but if I catch people following it I will oppose at RFA". I consider that tactic a form of harassment. ϢereSpielChequers08:10, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I see you you translate from German to English. I am in the process of creating an English article of a Dutch company, based in Enschede, near the German border. I have found a potentially useful resource, but the article is in German, so I am unable to read it, and since it's a pdf, I can't use online translators either. Are you able to translate this German article from page 79 to 82? It's for the the article Hollandia (matzah)(Hollandia (matzes)), and this article appears to have useful information about the Woudstra family, who opened the matzo factory in 1933, after escaping the Nazis in Germany. --Bardberic (talk) 21:35, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bardberic, The link you provided is not to a PDF and this is not within the scope of what I do as an unpaid translator for Wikipedia. You could do what many editors do and buy the book, or get it from a library, scan the pages, put them through OCR and copy and paste into Google Translate. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:32, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bardberic, I took a quick look, but I don't think the article you propose is going to meet en.Wiki's notability and have sufficient reliable sources. No one can deny our respect and sympathy for victims of Nazism but unfortunately it doesn't make them all worthy of an article by the English Wikipedia's criteria (not all Wikipedias are so strict).Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:35, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I understand. I'm not making an article about the man, I'm making an article about the brand he founded. The products from the company are found in essentially every supermarket in the Netherlands, selling millions of boxes a year, and it remains the only matzo factory in Benelux, serving all the current Jewish citizens, and anyone else who likes matzo, in the region. It's notorious enough that a Dutch article already exists, I have reliable resources otherwise, there's just some clarification issues regarding the family who founded it, hence where this article comes into play. --Bardberic (talk) 03:40, 10 October 2021 (UTC).[reply]
Bardberic, I did also read the Dutch article. It's unfortunately not notable enough that a Dutch article already exists - all language Wikipedias are entirely independent and do not follow the same rules. I would be surprised if it would pass en.Wiki criteria, but you're welcome to try. Like all new articles, it would have to pass the strict scrutiny of WP:NPR. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:07, 10 October 2021 (UTC).[reply]
I read the notability requirements. The article has enough reliable sources, the only time period that's unclear is 1940-1944 due to the Holocaust, which this German article covers. It was actually, otherwise, a fairly easy article to write as the National Library of Israel has dozens of (English) documents regarding the company, which I used to make a rather extensive article. All I need to do connect the early history of the company (1930s) to the present history (1950s - present). --Bardberic (talk) 04:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bardberic, do bear in mind that the specially authorised team at NPR decide if an article will be kept or listed for rejection, not the article creator. If you want to be doubly sure and avoid disappointment, create your article as a draft in your sandbox first, then submit it to WP:AfC for preliminary approval. They will provide advice on it which the New Page Review team do not. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:22, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:AbbeyColLogo.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:AbbeyColLogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
scope_creep, idiomatic translation is difficult for people without total cultural immersion. It's what I do best. If the other translators stumble over anything, do come back and ask, but I won't read or do whole articles or long texts anymore. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:38, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Its quotes mostly, short quotes. Maybe a dozen of them, odd. I'll post a couple up (2 days) and see what you think. Nine quotes of three sentences or less. scope_creepTalk00:06, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
scope_creep I will have a look as well if I notice at the time (maybe ping me in). I find idiomatic expressions facinating, and a potential minefield. I have known American speakers using German expressions in English language talks in Germany as not even they could find an equivalent, but relied on any English speaker in Germany being aware of the concepts refered to. Agathoclea (talk) 09:08, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Kudpung:. I have gathered the quotes into a sandbox at Sandbox. It is bigger than I thought. There is a couple of big ones but if they are too much then I can farm them out. Please do what you can. I have dropped a message at Agathoclea page as well. scope_creepTalk18:54, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Following a 2 week brainstorming period and a 1 week proposal period, the 30 day discussion of changes to our Request for Adminship process has begun. Following feedback on Phase 1, in order to ensure that the largest number of people possible can see all proposals, new proposals will only be accepted for the for the first 7 days of Phase 2. The 30 day discussion is scheduled to last until November 30. Please join the discussion or even submit your own proposal.
There is 1 future mailing planned with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.
Thank You for your Arbitration Committee Elections 2021 Voter Guide =
Hello Kudpung, I would like to thank you for publishing and providing your voter guide for Arbitration Committee Elections 2021 at User:Kudpung/ACE2021. It has been very helpful and useful to me in learning about the pros & cons of all the different candidates with respect to their suitability for Arbitration Committee. It had proper detailed analysis and rationale on every candidate and helped me in voting informatively. Thanks. TheGeneralUser (talk) 01:13, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
today memories of singing Monteverdi, Handel, Rossini - a triple nod to Brian, an unsurpassed model of constant kindness and helpfulness coupled with competence! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:49, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Kudpung, warm wishes to you and your family throughout the holiday season. May your heart and home be filled with all of the joys the festive season brings. Here is a toast to a Merry Christmas and prosperous New Year!.
The 2021 re-examination of RFA has been completed. 23 (plus 2 variants) ideas were proposed. Over 200 editors participated in this final phase. Three changes gained consensus and two proposals were identified by the closers as having the potential to gain consensus with some further discussion and iteration. Thanks to all who helped to close the discussion, and in particular Primefac, Lee Vilenski, and Ymblanter for closing the most difficult conversations and for TonyBallioni for closing the review of one of the closes.
The following proposals gained consensus and have all been implemented:
Revision of standard question 1 to Why are you interested in becoming an administrator? Special thanks to xaosflux for help with implementation.
A new process, Administrative Action Review (XRV) designed to review if an editor's specific use of an advanced permission, including the admin tools, is consistent with policy in a process similar to that of deletion review and move review. Thanks to all the editors who contributed (and are continuing to contribute) to the discussion of how to implement this proposal.
Removal of autopatrol from the administrator's toolkit. Special thanks to Wugapodes and Seddon for their help with implementation.
The following proposals were identified by the closers as having the potential to gain consensus with some further discussion and iteration:
Editors who wish to discuss these ideas or other ideas on how to try to address any of the six issues identified during phase 1 for which no proposal gained are encouraged to do so at RFA's talk page or an appropriate village pump.
A final and huge thanks all those who participated in this effort to improve our RFA process over the last 4 months.
This is the final update with no further talk page messages planned.
Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.
The functionaries email list (functionaries-enlists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
