User talk:Bearcat/Archive 17

Archive 10

←

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

OHLS=a total absence of good faith or functional rules on wikipedia, suppression of part of Canada...are you ok with that?

Hi Bearcat, I notice that you seem to be Canadian. OHLS is one of many Canadian institutions that has figured as an element of Canadian history and will likely continue to. You are no doubt aware that there is a gang of Wikipedia criminals who have been looking for any reason to diminish the wiki page for OHLS and to in turn, diminish its brand and supposed importance in Canadian history. That's already contrary to the goals and policies of Wikipedia...if there really even are any. I and others have built up that page and sought to have it reflect an accurate encyclopedic entry for the subject. However, a bunch of the edits are periodically wiped out with the weasel word "sockpuppetry". Are you ok with that? Why? Are you ok with the fact that the page was not vandalised but actually built up (including with inline citations, which was the previous abuse-of-rules technicality that was used to essentially suppress the page) with obviously notable entries including the latest appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada and the Canadian Senate? Do you think it's appropriate for this gang of idiots who don't even understand the badly constructed rules they try to cite that they see fit to just remove a bunch of obviously valid info that was building up the page properly? These idiots (and apparently most of the 'admins' on Wikipedia) had no answers to Paulydee who proved to them that the removals based on "no inline citations" were contrary to their own rules and policies. Then a gang of user accounts lied about notability when in fact everything on the page was notable according their own rules, which again, they don't seem to understand. Now inline citations are present so this gang of mentally deficient bullies are using 'sockpuppetry' as though that is an argument or justification for removing constructive contributions to the page. If any attempt to put the contentions to a dispute resolution process is made they actually remove the posts so that no dispute resolution process is even possible. Yeah. They are undermining the OHLS page because there is an anti OHLS agenda among some people and because they are getting off on some kind of power struggle akin to a bullying disorder. Are Canadian 'admins' actually happy about that?? This gang of corrupt vandals shouldn't be allowed to be doing what they are doing for many reasons but one of them is that they're distorting and supressing part of Canada's history on a website that, unfortunately (!), is one of the first things that comes up on google searches. If this gang of clowns (whose behaviour actually resembles that of sociopaths) isn't reigned in Wikipedia will lose its legitimacy and get pulled down into crazier an crazier nonsense. Bullies usually get what they deserve. If you hadn't been aware of this situation please look into it. I hope you will attempt to correct the situation. Thanks.79.141.163.15 (talk) 01:14, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Request

Hello Bearcat, can you please block me for four days, I need some time off. Regards and thanks--Buchbibliothek (talk) 08:50, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for giving me a good laugh today. Wikiwatcher!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.208.247.47 (talk) 16:07, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

New 10,000 Challenge for Canada

Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada/The 10,000 Challenge is up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge for the UK which has currently produced over 2200 article improvements and creations. If you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Canada like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1300 articles in 3 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for Canada but fuelled by a contest such as The North America Destubathon to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. I would like some support from Canadian wikipedians here to get the Challenge off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile! Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:28, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Request for advice

Hi there, I'm a relatively new editor, and in the interest of just "doing stuff" happened upon this page: Jonathan Moore (Actor, Writer, Director) as an orphan/dead-end page in need of some links (I thought). You can see that it's entirely a cut and paste from the subject's personal website, and entirely the work of one editor (probably his agent). I removed the "testimonials" section right away, and have found a couple legitimate citations. At first I was pretty sure it at least met GNG, but now I'm starting to wonder. I've seen your signature on quite a few pages, theatre-related ones among them, and thought you might have some advice on how to proceed with a page like this. Many thanks, nerdgoonrant (talk) 00:13, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy reply! So, should I tag it Db-g12? nerdgoonrant (talk) 00:38, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Sweet! Thanks! nerdgoonrant (talk) 00:53, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Mo's redemption

Hey Bearcat it's me again I know your mad at me after months fiasco, it's long story to tell you this I wouldn't know. Look in the past I was quite a disruptive delinquent for most times but excuse for my rash behavior I'm very totally sorry, I know I have heavy temper because no one in Wikipedia listen to me every time I contact them they always ignore that's why I became so tense and angry, I know my repetitiveness way to get you all attention. But the point is I was try to help to give Wikipedia a good clean shape I know my lesson that vandalizing Wikipedia is wrong, I was deeply remorse for months and I regretfully pay for the damage I cause. So Bearcat I'am asking you a favor, would you unblock Tony Penikett and 6th Queens to redeem myself as proof I'am not a sock-puppet from bottom my heart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.69.56.77 (talk) 11:00, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Bearcat.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review needs your help

Hi Bearcat,

As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).

Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.

Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.

It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.

(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Ottawa Roads

Richardson Side Road, March Road, Greenbank Road are now all at AFD. Did you notice the template Roads in Ottawa - there are about 75 of these here (major and secondary arteries) and while I haven't gone through them all yet, I haven't seen any yet that seem notable. Do you have any thoughts on these roads? MB 04:55, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I saw your response. Well, since there is no time limit I will do a few at a time. I don't like to have too many at AFD at one time because even when something seems like a no-brainer, someone else may not see it that way... MB 03:56, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Request for 5 minute survey

Hi! I'm a researcher from the University of Minnesota conducting a study on LGBT user contributions to Wikipedia. Would you be willing to answer a short five minute survey? If so, I would appreciate if you could drop me an email at leung085@umn.edu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weiwensg (talk • contribs) 22:58, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Tony Penikett and 6th Queens

• Tony Penikett (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• 6th Queens (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Unprotection: To prove I'm not a sock-puppet. Mo

Still not how this works. If there are changes needed to either article, explain what they are. Bearcat (talk) 21:53, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Bearcat. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Bearcat. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

The newb asks...

Is this vandalism? DAB page for PPRC becomes an unsourced article about the mysterious Public Paparazzi Convention? By a new editor with only this to their name? Okay, pretty obviously someone just messing around. I guess my question is actually, "Does one just roll that back and hope for the best?" Cheers! nerdgoonrant (talk) 03:51, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I saw what you did there! cool. nerdgoonrant (talk) 04:13, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

While I'm at it... (I'm going through dead-end pages, that's where I'm finding this stuff) There's this earnest kid: User:Simon.goldweber/sandbox who made this new page: Mesopotamian social structure Not needed, could easily fit into Mesopotamia, but his sandbox makes him sound earnest (and really young) Hate to make a kid hate trying to do things, y'know? God, I overthink this stuff. nerdgoonrant (talk) 04:35, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Oddity needing investigation

Hello—I found a page creation that I don't quite understand, and I wanted the eyes of a savvy administrator. User:Yroneide4088 has made relatively few edits, nearly all of which were dedicated to some minor quasi-advertising objective and were reverted by a handful of editors including me. In his or her most recent change, however, he or she appears to have created the page Wikipedia:File Upload, which makes no sense at all to me. Any thoughts on what's going on here? Also, if there's a better course of interaction than using the talk-page of the first admin whose name I could think of, feel free to say so. Thanks! —jameslucas (" " / +) 16:52, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

I've redirected it to Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard for now. Note that you can raise issues to admins in general at the Administrators' noticeboard. Mindmatrix 17:10, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

WP:ANB—if I ever knew about this, I forgot about it long ago. Great to have on my radar! Thanks! —jameslucas (" " / +) 02:52, 26 November 2016 (UTC)