This is an archive of past discussions with User:Nathan. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
Thanks ;-) I'm trying not to (and hoping I don't) muck it up - it's undeniably true that I am not now a content contributor or an expert on the tribulations of medical articles. Outside of a small number of articles awhile ago, most of my understanding of these issues comes from years of stalking talkpages like yours and Sandy's. It has been distressing for a long time to see really great contributors get frustrated and withdraw because they get so little support stemming the tide. I wish I had the expertise to be more than a cheerleader, but I thought the least I could do is get the ball rolling faster on a long-term improvement in the status of MEDRS and its dedicated cabal. Nathan T 19:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
I didn't get into this in the interest of focus, but I actually don't think that content contributions per se are essential to an understanding of these issues. I certainly don't contribute as much article content as I used to. It's more a matter of empathy for the sorts of problems content creators face. Risker and Brad have been two of the best Arbs because, regardless of how much or how little content they create, they have empathy for the challenges editors face in the trenches. You're the same way. But a lot of people who don't edit content have utter, sanctimonious contempt for the difficulties facing those who do. There was a certain Arb (whom I won't name since it would just be spiteful and he's no longer on the Committee anyway) who sort of personified that outlook, and it's always infuriated me. MastCellTalk19:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Sockpuppet investigation for Jamesburns et al in Apr 2009
I am still very much a noob when it comes to posting things on wiki and have only done so a handful of times.
When i found out that one of my edits for Led Zeppelin's song D'yer Maker, which had been on there for at least a year, was deleted by this alleged woman, I got irritated
I'm glad to find out that you guys caught and banned her associated IPs. However, I'm wondering if just my little one sentence post never got put back in, how many hundreds of others weren't as well. This goes not only for her obsession, Led Zeppelin, but all the other bands she messed with and even the LGBT community stuff.
If that would take took long to check on, just let me know if I should just simply add my sentence back in, which was factual and relevant, and never should have been removed in the first place.
You should feel free to redo any edits you think were undone in error. While policy allows us to revert the contributions of banned editors and their socks, it doesn't require it... and more often than not, it isn't done simply because no one volunteers to do so. Even when it is done, it's usually limited to removing material added by the banned user; it is quite rare, as far as I know, for anyone to systematically undo removals of text. Nathan T 01:52, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
New Wikimedia affiliation models
Hello Nathan, thanks for your comment on the affiliation-models interview in the recent signpost. What questions did you want more detailed answers to? – SJ +21:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
The New England Wikimedia General Meeting will be a large-scale meetup of all Wikimedians (and friends) from the New England area in order to discuss regional coordination and possible formalization of our community (i.e., a chapter). Come hang out with other Wikimedians, learn more about ongoing activities, and help plan for the future!
The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.
Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow
In this issue:
Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
Research: The most recent DR data
Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
You're invited: Ada Lovelace, STEM women edit-a-thon at Harvard
U.S. Ada Lovelace Day 2012 edit-a-thon, Harvard University - You are invited!
Now in its fourth year, Ada Lovelace Day is an international celebration of women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), and related fields. Participants from around New England are invited to gather together at Harvard Law School to edit and create Wikipedia entries on women who have made significant contributions to the STEM fields. Register to attend or sign up to participate remotely - visit this page to do either. 00:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Would you please reverse yourself?
I note your action here. Müdigkeit is not banned; he's indefinitely blocked right now, but as the blocking administrator I would be happy to consider unblocking him if he agreed to discuss his ideas rather than try to act on them without community consensus. By putting forward his proposal on minimum support for success for Arbitration Committee candidates, he was discussing his views and seeking community input. This is something that we as a community generally support. We don't have to support his ideas to support his efforts in trying to communicate them. I ask you to reconsider your removal. Risker (talk) 20:16, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Sure, no problem. Clearly I'm out of the habit of using Wikipedia lingo if I've used banned in place of indefinitely blocked ;) Reverted. Nathan T 20:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi, re your comment, can you please add the actual link to where Ana Ivanović herself posts in an English forum using no ć, and note also how she refers to other Serbians with surnames in -ić, does she not bother typing their ć also? Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:16, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
I use a VPN to access the Internet from home to improve privacy and security; my VPN is evidently blocked from even editing user talkpages. I've been an editor in good standing for a long time, so I'm hoping I can get IPBE so that I can continue to use my VPN and make the occasional edit. The IP most recently was 108.61.59.19, the block applies to the /16. Thanks! Nathan T 13:59, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Must be nice to have IPBE by default and not have to expose your network information to the world simply in order to edit Wikipedia. I guess from atop the pedestal, such concerns must seem quite plebeian. Nathan T 20:46, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
I agree, that was pretty silly. I've given your account IP block exemption. You're clearly in good standing and the request sounds entirely reasonable to me. MastCellTalk21:01, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Hey, thanks MastCell, appreciate the assistance and glad to see you are still keeping a close eye on the wiki! Not sure I will be editing any more frequently now; it's hard to get into it and stay into it when the tone of "discussion" across the project often turns my stomach. But I do still believe in the ultimate goals and the enormous value of this place, and I use it myself all the time, so I would like to be able to make the occasional edit from home when I get the urge ;) Thanks again! Nathan T 17:22, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Public smearing
That was pretty low-down of you to smear me on a public mailing list without even informing me you'd done so. It happens that someone noticed and alerted me.
You don't mind if I smear you on a public list, then, without informing you?
I don't agree that it was "smearing" - to me it was just the facts. I guess reasonable minds can differ on that. But I should have informed you, you're right. I apologize for the oversight. Nathan T 13:04, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
You've apologised for the procedural failure. But really, you're going further down in my estimations the more you write. Tony(talk) 13:20, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
That's the fourth time you've referred to your opinion of me. I suppose I'm sorry you don't like me, and that's too bad, but it's not my chief motivation. Constructive criticism from an uninvolved party about journalistic ethics is not bullying or smearing or ranting or hounding. I even agree with you about the substance of the article, but that's beside the point. Nathan T 13:29, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
It's not constructive. I had a very high opinion of your posts on the Wikimedia mailing list. But that has now dissolved into distaste. You should be motivated to gain good opinions of fellow editors, since it's primarily a social process. You've lost it. Tony(talk) 13:33, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm not running for office or anything like that. If I screened every possibly critical post against the chance that it might upset someone, I'd never make another post about anything in my life. Like I said, it's too bad that you receive criticism as a personal attack and that this has influenced your opinion of me. But it doesn't deter me from offering criticism to you or others in the future. Being "all comers" critical isn't going to line up friends outside my door, but then it isn't meant to. Nathan T 13:37, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Aldo Bensadoun, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yellow Shoes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi Nathan, thanks very much for your support for my RfB. Yes, I do seem to recall you telling me that you thought I had withdrawn my previous RfB too early. Did we also work together to help a certain former admin (who later regained the tools) to get his sanctions lifted? I'm pretty sure we did. At any rate, thanks for your kind words. :) Best. Acalamari23:20, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
I think it's a little debatable. The guidelines for academic journals are fairly lax, and I prefer to err on the side of inclusiveness when it comes to this kind of topic. I'll remove the prod, and if the editor persists in having it deleted you can chime in on the AfD discussion. Nathan T 20:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
My recent comment
I've revisited what I posted, and you're right, it was far too narrow in scope and conflated an ISP report with a legal investigation. I'm not sure how that happened... regardless, my prior espoused belief has been stricken. Kurtis(talk)21:35, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Precious
biographies of living persons
Thank you for quality contributions to biographies such as Wyclef Jean and Norman Finkelstein, for page moves and help with articles for creation, for clarifying what can be added and the value of a talk page, helping living persons, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (13 November 2008)!
I do not understand the revert of my edit on Gaza War article for the section "Casualties". What is the issue? American vs British spelling of "center"? I'm assuming that the other reason of non-neutral and unsourced info, probably refers to the Ron Paul quote not mine, since it is hardly believable that the version sitting right now is more neutral than the one after my edit. There is a discussion on the talk page on this.
Kingsindian (talk) 15:31, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
@Kingsindian: Thanks for the heads up. Rejecting the pending changes wiped three edits; my edit summary referred to the other two. I've restored your adjustments and the change should be live without further review. Nathan T 15:36, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gaza War (2008–09), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SPME. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello. Please don't add KBE to the article. Bloomberg is American, not British, and it's only honorary. Both Bill Gates and Rudy Giuliani have been given the same honorary knighthood, and if you check their articles, you'll find that there's no KBE there... Thomas.W talk17:52, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
@Thomas.W:, I'm not sure what difference it makes, if he's authorized to use KBE and has the order (honorary or not). But, ok. Typical Wikipedia decision-making I guess. Nathan T 17:59, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
It's an honorary knighthood, not a full knighthood, so it doesn't give him the right to add Sir in front of his name, and probably not KBE after the name either. Thomas.W talk18:06, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
@Thomas.W: A "full knighthood" is mostly honorary as well, wouldn't you say? Is there an MOS somewhere that says you can only add KBE to your name if you are also to be called Sir? If so, that's an odd conclusion, since we could simply refrain from calling someone "Sir" while using only that which they have been authorized... namely, the KBE. Indeed, using KBE in his name is explicitly authorized by an honorary knighthood. Nathan T 18:14, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Charliehebdo.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Charliehebdo.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).
biographies of living persons
Thank you for quality contributions to biographies such as Wyclef Jean and Norman Finkelstein, for page moves and help with articles for creation, for clarifying what can be added and the value of a talk page, helping living persons, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (13 November 2008)!
Dear Wikipedian, you recently voted in the ArbCom election. Your username, along with around 155 other usernames of your fellow Wikipedians, was randomly selected from the 2000+ Wikipedians who voted this year, with the help of one of the election-commissioners. If you are willing, could you please participate (at your option either on-wiki via userspace or off-wiki via email) in an exit poll, and answer some questions about how you decided amongst the ArbCom candidates?
If you decide to participate in this exit poll, the statistical results will be published in the Signpost, an online newspaper with over 1000 Wikipedians among the readership. There are about twelve questions, which have alphanumerical answers; it should take you a few minutes to complete the exit poll questionnaire, and will help improve Wikipedia by giving future candidates information about what you think is important. This is only an unofficial survey, and will have no impact on your actual vote during this election, nor in any future election.
All questions are individually optional, and this entire exit poll itself is also entirely optional, though if you choose not to participate, I would appreciate a brief reply indicating why you decided not to take part (see Question Zero). Thanks for being a Wikipedian
The questionnaire
Dear Wikipedian, please fill out these questions -- at your option via usertalk or via email, see Detailed Instructions at the end of the twelve questions -- by putting the appropriate answer in the blanks provided. If you decide not to answer a question (all questions are optional), please put the reason down: "undecided" / "private information" / "prefer not to answer" / "question is not well-posed" / "other: please specify". Although the Signpost cannot guarantee that complex answers can be processed for publication, it will help us improve future exit polls, if you give us comments about why you could not answer specific questions.
quick and easy exit poll , estimated time required: 4 minutes
Q#0. Will you be responding to the questions in this exit poll? Why or why not?
Your Answer: Yes
Your Comments:
Q#1. Arbs must have at least 0k / 2k / 4k / 8k / 16k / 32k+ edits to Wikipedia.
Your Numeric Answer: 8k
Your Comments: I don't really use a firm edit count requirement, but N/A isn't an option.
Q#2. Arbs must have at least 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7+ years editing Wikipedia.
Your Numeric Answer: 2
Your Comments: It takes at least a couple of years to understand the community well enough to navigate the strong waters of ArbCom and the vortex of meta drama.
Q#3. Arbs...
A: should not be an admin
B: should preferably not be an admin
C: can be but need not be an admin
D:should preferably be an admin
E:must be or have been an admin
F:must currently be an admin
Your Single-Letter Answer: F
Your Comments: If you can be elected to ArbCom, you should be able to pass RfA. If you can't pass RfA or haven't bothered to try, then ArbCom isn't for you.
Q#4. Arbs must have at least 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7+ years of experience as an admin.
The Quick&Easy End. Thank you for your answers. Please sign with your Wikipedia username here, especially important if you are emailing your answers, so we can avoid double-counting and similar confusion.
Your Wikipedia Username: Nathan
General Comments: I imagine the object of this poll is to verify the fears that mass-messaging people tipped the scales on the results in some negative way. I personally find it distasteful that some advocate a strategy of limiting participation in order to avoid outcomes they don't like. Mass-messaging for ArbCom elections should become the standard every year; broader participation by the community supports the legitimacy of the committee and offers the opportunity of a much stronger mandate for particularly appealing platforms and individuals.
Q#6. Completely optional, as all these questions are completely optional: which candidates did you oppose this year, and why?
Your List-Of-Usernames You Opposed:
Your Comments:
Q#7. Are there any Wikipedians you would like to see run for ArbCom, in the December 2016 election, twelve months from now? Who?
Your List-Of-Usernames As Potential Future Candidates:
Your Comments:
Q#8. Why did you vote in the 2015 ArbCom elections? In particular, how did you learn about the election, and what motivated you to participate this year?
Your Answer:
Your Comments:
Q#9. For potential arbs, good indicators of the right kind of contributions outside noticeboard activity, would be:
A: discussions on the talkpages of articles which ARE subject to ArbCom sanctions
B: discussions on the talkpages of articles NOT subject to ArbCom restrictions
C: sending talkpage notifications e.g. with Twinkle, sticking to formal language
D: sending talkpage notifications manually, and explaining with informal English
E: working on policies/guidelines
F: working on essays/helpdocs
G: working on GA/FA/DYK/similar content
H: working on copyedits/infoboxes/pictures/similar content
K: working with other Wikipedians via wikiprojects e.g. with MILHIST
L: working with other Wikipedians via IRC e.g. with #wikipedia-en-helpconnect or informally
M: working with other Wikipedians via email e.g. with UTRS or informally
N: working with other Wikipedians in person e.g. at edit-a-thons / Wikipedian-in-residence / Wikimania / etc
O: other types of contribution, please specify in your comments
Please specify a comma-separated list of the types of contributions you see as positive indicators for arb-candidates to have.
Your List-Of-Letters Answer:
Your Comments:
Q#10. Arbs who make many well-informed comments at these noticeboards (please specify which!) have the right kind of background, or experience, for ArbCom.
Please specify a comma-separated list of the noticeboards you see as important background-experience for arb-candidates to have.
Your List-Of-Letters Answer:
Your Comments:
Q#11. Arbs who make many comments at these noticeboards (please specify!) have the wrong kind of temperament, or personality, for ArbCom.
Options: (same as previous question -- please see above)
Please specify a comma-separated list of the noticeboards you see as worrisome personality-indicators for arb-candidates to have.
Your List-Of-Letters Answer:
Your Comments:
Q#12. Anything else we ought to know?
Your Custom-Designed Question(s):
Your Custom-Designed Answer(s):
The Extended-Answers End. Thank you for your answers. Please sign with your Wikipedia username here, especially important if you are emailing your answers, so we can avoid double-counting and similar confusion.
Your Wikipedia Username:
General Comments:
Detailed Instructions: you are welcome to answer these questions via usertalk (easiest), or via email (for a modicum of privacy).
how to submit your answers , estimated time required: 2 minutes
If you wish to answer via usertalk, go ahead and fill in the blanks by editing this subsection. Once you have completed the usertalk-based exit poll answers, click here to notify the Signpost copy-editor, leave a short usertalk note, and click save. The point of leaving the usertalk note, is to make sure your answers are processed and published.
If you wish to answer via email, create a new email to the Signpost column-editor by clicking Special:EmailUser/GamerPro64, and then paste the *plaintext* of the questions therein. Once you have completed the email-based exit poll answers, click here to notify the Signpost column-editor, leave a short usertalk note specifying the *time* you sent the email, and click save. The point of leaving the usertalk note, is to make sure your answers are processed and published (not stuck in the spam-folder).
Processing of responses will be performed in batches of ten, prior to publication in the Signpost. GamerPro64 will be processing the email-based answers, and will strive to maintain the privacy of your answers (as well as your email address and the associated IP address typically found in the email-headers), though of course as a volunteer effort, we cannot legally guarantee that GamerPro64 will have a system free from computer virii, we cannot legally guarantee that GamerPro64 will resist hypothetical bribes offered by the KGB/NSA/MI6 to reveal your secrets, and we cannot legally guarantee that GamerPro64 will make no mistakes. If you choose to answer on-wiki, your answers will be visible to other Wikipedians. If you choose to answer via email, your answers will be sent unencrypted over the internet, and we will do our best to protect your privacy, but unencrypted email is inherently an improper mechanism for doing so. Sorry! :-)
We do promise to try hard, not to make any mistakes, in the processing and presentation of your answers. If you have any questions or concerns, you may contact column-editor GamerPro64, copy-editor 75.108.94.227, or copy-editor Ryk72. Thanks for reading, and thanks for helping Wikipedia. GamerPro6414:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
The objective of the poll (one of them anyways) is the reverse, actually... I think the fears of mass-messaging messing up the election are waaaay overblown, and expect the datasets will prove it. :-) I also hope it becomes standard procedure, since it seems a no-brainer; I'm not sure we should mass-message 107k usernames *every* year, however, since only 2800 people actually responded... seems a lot of server-load / watchlist-load, for a 2% response-rate. Maybe sort them into tranches, and mass-message all people with edits in the past N months, plus one-third of the 107k, or something? Or perhaps the fear of server-overload is also overblown, too, though I did see some complaints about watchlist-clogging from folks who monitor many usertalk pages. My personal objective, though, in running the poll, was to get answers to question#7, and find pointers to people who ought to run for the seats which will open up in 12 months. Only about half the arms I twisted this year, were receptive to running. Best, 75.108.94.227 (talk) 15:15, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
Four years ago ...
biographies of living persons
... you were recipient no. 879 of Precious, a prize of QAI!
Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa.11:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Nathan. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Request for Comments on use of certain files not copyrighted in the US
Hello,
There is an ongoing discussion about the use of files on Wikipedia that are not protected by copyright in the US because there is no copyright relations between the US and the country of publication. You commented in a 2012 discussion on the same topic that resulted in no consensus. You are invited to share your views in the ongoing discussion. AHeneen (talk) 21:20, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
