Jump to content

User talk:Rklahn/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Thanks for the thanks for the thanks on First-past-the-post voting:

This was actually my fault as I did a big revert and unintentionally reintroduced an error. So thanks for correcting my error, and thanks for the thanks! — Czello 21:33, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Kamala Harris

This is to inform you that I have opened a dispute resolution concerning the Kamala Harris Talk page "Attendance" item. You have commented there. I believe that the "2019" section of the article should reflect the well-documented fact that Senator Harris missed 62 percent of Senate votes in 2019. https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Kamala_Harris Jab73 (talk) 07:53, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Well seeing you have opened this can of worms, I will say this as well...Are you really sure she was there that much. The number seems a little high and should really be looked at closely.2600:1700:7610:41E0:CD12:123A:B908:BE89 (talk) 18:18, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Teahouse logo

Hi Rklahn! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Getting attention on the Dispute resolution noticeboard, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.


The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia and me in "The Atlantic"

There is a new article in the online version of "The Atlantic", where Im quoted. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/08/the-wikipedia-war-over-kamala-harris-race/615250/ where I was pleading for a return to sanity on Talk:Kamala Harris. I was not successful. It turn out so bad, that it seems to have become newsworthy. Rklahn (talk) 19:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't think that was your contribution quoted in the article. Perhaps, you should reference the archive to research who was the correct contributor of the quote in question. Besides, since when is a cooperative forum the proper place to claim a wording or rewording (of talk page comment) as your work. Sounds to me as if you are a little narcissistic. Have a blessed day.2600:1700:7610:41E0:CD12:123A:B908:BE89 (talk) 18:26, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

@2600:1700:7610:41E0:CD12:123A:B908:BE89: I believe I was quoted by The Atlantic accurately. If you think Im being misleading or was misquoted in some way, you are going to have to highlight that. And I hope you are using "Have a blessed day" in its original spirit. The way you us it, it comes off more like "Go F yourself". Rklahn (talk) 20:14, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Helping on Kamala Harris article

Hi! I was looking for who has already been working on the Kamala Harris article and I want to checkin before I do anything. I’ve been a wikipedian since 2004 but do very little editing so much of my edits seem to get reversed as soon as I log off. I don’t like wasting my time so want to check before I do any more of that.

Could I ask you a few questions about how to edit high-view-count and controversial articles like Kamala Harris? I saw on the Talk page that youd been blocked from editing and hoped to be allowed to again - what happened next?

I’m on Wikipedia very infrequently so might not see your reply here. You are welcome to contact me on any platform - my email is dr.mel.ganus @gmail and I’m also on Facebook and other platforms as Dr Mel Ganus. Thank you very very much for the use number of hours and all the energy you have spent in these crazy wikipedian rabbit holes! Grateful to cross paths and hope We can connect. DrMel (talk) 08:24, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Question regarding requesting protection

Hello, I 36.68.187.70. I see that you requesting extended-confirmed protection on Tax returns of Donald Trump because your argument is his subject and it's opponent already ECP. But for me this is not necessary because the article was already protected by admin to prevent vandalism from IPs. You can prepemtively request ECP for the article that already semi-protected. So I would like to you to requesting imposing 1RR for the article because it was included in WP:ARBAP2 and move protection for the article per all American biographical articles. For me, semi protected should be enough to prevent vandalism from IPs. Thank you. 36.68.187.70 (talk) 03:35, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Im not entirely sure where to respond to an anonymous account, so Im just hoping you are watching my talk page. I understand your argument, but happen to disagree with it. I do not agree that semi-protection is enough. Vandalism also comes from registered accounts that qualify for semi-protected edits. And this is common on pages related to this election. Many articles in this space already are ECPed. I mentioned Donald Trump and Joe Biden already. Kamala Harris, a page that Im engaged in as an editor, is as well. (But, Mike Pence, strangely, is not) Mechanisms exist for even anonymous editors to get edits made to ECP articles, Ive done it myself. You should also know that Im acting a little against self interest here. I can not edit ECP pages. All this being said, I appreciate taking the time to raise your comments, and I hope that your point of view is considered here. This is an important decision, and all points of view should be considered. Thanks. Rklahn (talk) 05:16, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment. I think it should be considered because i see ARBAP2 applies in that article. I hope you understand my comment. Thank you. 36.68.187.70 (talk) 05:33, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
You are welcome. Im glad you saw my reply. I do understand your comment, and think it represents an important point of view that should be considered. I think what we have here is two reasonable editors seeing the same set of facts, drawing different conclusions. I wish that every engagement that I have on Wikipedia went so reasonably. Best. Rklahn (talk) 05:39, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Removing "Arab slave trade"

There was a discussion on the talk page on the Arab slave trade about splitting it up because the term itself is a misnomer. Since you want something to be listed, then I will try to add trans-Saharan slave trade and Indian ocean slave trade. Ibrahim5361 (talk) 00:06, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

@Ibrahim5361: If the distinction is citable, which it seems to be, then I agree with the consensus. List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll now seems fine. Rklahn (talk) 01:36, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Administrators Noticeboard

Here i have posted about the situation on List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll and on here https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll:_Revision_history_discussion — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielbr11 (talkcontribs) 20:52, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I am notifying you of my New post here https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll_2 Danielbr11 (talk) 02:49, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Notifying you of this arbitration {{subst:arbcom notice|Editing List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll}}Danielbr11 (talk) 02:40, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

The case request mentioned here was removed as premature. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 16:35, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Rklahn would you accept this source from a neutral reliable publisher for 150 million deaths under British Empire https://www.jstor.org/stable/175562?seq=1 Danielbr11 (talk) 22:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Danielbr11: This is not how Wikipedia works. Im an equal among the other 40K active editors. I cant step in and pre-clear a source. If you are confident your edit is supported by verifiable sources, you should simply make it. At that point, it's subject to being changed or reverted if an editor thinks it's not verifiable, or in in contradiction with some other policy. If that happens, do not take it personally. Thats just how it works on Wikipedia. An alternative, and given the nature of List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll is what I recommend, is to suggest your edit on the talk page and seek the advice and consensus of other editors.

Abortion???!?!?!?

Wow. Crazy. I was driving home/cooking dinner or I would have got it for ya. Sorry you had to revert, but at least it should be over now. . . On that page anyway. Nightenbelle (talk) 00:38, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Nightenbelle: The entire situation is so crazy, I don't quite know how to react, beyond the revert. My reaction was to ask this [1] on The Teahouse. It's just so incredibly outside of the norm. But, yes, stopping the madness via a block seems called for. Rklahn (talk) 00:47, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Well, although your account has been here a long time, looking at your edit count- I'm guessing you haven't been very active. This is.... normal disruption to an extent. Daily users decide WP is the place they are going to sell their POV and may of them get lost in their belief they are right and can't/wont adhere to NPOV and accept we are an encyclopedia. This is not the place to right wrongs. THey had some good points- the numbers for the deaths of indigenous people are probably grossly off. There were millions of deaths under communist regimes. I get their anger at those things... but there is a time and a place. This isn't it. But- as soon as this issue is resolved, a new person will come along with a new soapbox and it starts all over. As a DRN volunteer- I see a lot of it. Sometimes, like this one, its something I'm passionate about and I end up involved (I don't mediate if it touches on a passion of mine so I can stay neutral) Usually- I just unhook my brain, deal with the issue, and have opinions on other sites. *shrugs* I'm used to it. And I'm going to start calling myself the ninja kangaroo- because my role at the DRN has brought me to the ANI a couple of times now because a DRN hasn't gone the way someone wanted and they pulled me on there. As long as I stay professional and try to notice and admit my mistakes.... hopefully I'll avoid any blocks myself. That and once I hit a certain level of passion- I take my happy butt off WP till I cool down. Except once. Once I got mad enough that I got warned by admins... but no one's perfect. Nightenbelle (talk) 01:01, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
@Nightenbelle: I think part of my approach has been because of my usage pattern. Yes, I created my account a long time ago, left for a long time, came back, and even then, would not call myself incredibly active. So, I had some sympathy for a while there. Now that I know from your comments that this is more common than I thought, I think Im going to report apparent disruptive behavior faster than I did in this case. Thanks for your thoughtful reply. Rklahn (talk) 01:11, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
until they posted the desire to open a 2nd arbcom followed by the abortion edit- I really thought they were reachable. But yeah- if they are doing personal attacks and just straight wasting everyone’s time not accepting consensus and policy- it’s probably not worth your time. Nightenbelle (talk) 12:53, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Teahouse logo

Hi Rklahn! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Danielbr11 Disruptive or newcomer?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.


The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Taking a break for a while - 20210218

I was in a protracted dispute with an editor who would make controversial edits on controversial subjects, and had no intention of positively contributing to Wikipedia. It took a lot out of me, and Im taking a WP break.

Ive cleared my watchlist, so to get my attention, its going to take a ping or edit to my talk page, and even that may not work for many days.

Good luck to all of you, and please, let's just work to make Wikipedia better. Rklahn (talk) 20:56, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Been stuck at 499 edits for a few days, looking for the magic 500

So I can get extended confirmed. Rklahn (talk) 05:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

21:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Read-only reminder

A maintenance operation will be performed on Wednesday August 25 06:00 UTC. It should only last for a few minutes.

Also during this time, operations on the CentralAuth will not be possible (GlobalRenames, changing/confirming e-mail addresses, logging into new wikis, password changes).

For more details about the operation and on all impacted services, please check on Phabricator.

A banner will be displayed 30 minutes before the operation.

Please help your community to be aware of this maintenance operation. Thank you!

20:33, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2021

News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia

15:59, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

15:19, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

15:32, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

18:30, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2021

22:20, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

16:29, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

15:29, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

20:52, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

20:07, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2021

20:27, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

20:35, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

22:05, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

20:01, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2021

News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia

21:14, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

21:58, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Unblock Request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Rklahn (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Caught by a colocation web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is 34.83.196.11. Being used as a VPN with authentication to protect my privacy, particularly my location. IP has been statically assigned to me. I was logged into Wikipedia. I can understand blocking anonymous users from colocation IPs, but registered users? Rklahn (talk) 16:23, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Partial accept. It is not generally permitted to use a VPN to edit, as vandals and spammers use them to evade detection and blocking. Your IP address is not visible to the public on Wikipedia when using an account(unless you provide it as you did here, you may use WP:UTRS for private requests). If you have a need to use a VPN, you may request an IP block exemption per the instructions at WP:IPECPROXY. As you are a longtime user, I will give you a short term exemption so you can resume editing. Something longer term you will need to request. 331dot (talk) 17:59, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

  • @331dot: Thanks for the quick action. Did not realize this was as big a thing as it appears to be. My privacy concerns are more about other sites than Wikipedia. And at that point, we are talking more convenience than need. Not sure exactly what Im going to do at this point, but thanks for pointing out the options. Rklahn (talk) 16:09, 12 December 2021 (UTC)