Jump to content

User talk:Vanamonde93/Archive 8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10→Archive 15

May I ask you for your help?

Hi Vanamonde93,.. I am a student, and now I'm doing a research about Wikipedia as a free encyclopedia, especially how the encyclopedia help people with the right information.

As you know, I'm a new user in Wikipedia and I cannot make a big decision to edit an article. I've just read some article. And because I'm from Indonesia, I checked a company form Indonesia and searched Djarum article. But, i found something wrong on that article. On "product" section there's a picture on domestic "product". But the picture is wrong, it's Djarum Black international not a domestic product.

So, may I ask you for your help? May I delete this picture? Is it allowed? Or can you as an editor delete the picture? Thank you before.--Hesedandemet (talk) 03:15, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Hesedandemet, welcome to Wikipedia. That's an interesting issue that you have flagged. I took a look, and it's not just the image: "Djarum Black" is listed as a domestic product as well. You could simply remove both image and entry: but what would be a lot better would be to find a reliable source showing that Djarum Black is only sold internationally, and move it to the "international" section by citing that source. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 04:30, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Vanamonde93 Okay then, thank you for your information. I've tried to upload one image to Wikipedia, but it's not allowed for new user. So what am I supposed to do? Thank you. --Hesedandemet (talk) 08:01, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Hesedandemet: One thing you could do is to just stick around and keep editing until you've been here long enough :) if that's too slow, I'm sure you could find a willing editor at the WP:Help desk or WP:Teahouse. I don't do any image work myself, so I'd rather not get into it right now. Oh, and you don't need to link my name here, this is my talk page after all; it's only necessary elsewhere (no big deal, just fyi). Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 15:03, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Ooo okay, I will trying to edit more article and learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you for your help :) --Hesedandemet (talk) 09:28, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Reception section

Thanks for not taking offence at my reorganization of the reception section; as you said, it was essentially all your language, just resequenced. I think this sort of section is often a problem in Wikipedia articles on books and music, and I've been meaning to write an essay about it for a while. Would you mind if I used this essay as an example, quoting the before and after? One reason I'd like to use this particular case is that you're a good writer. It's easy to find cases where bad writers do sub-optimal reception sections, but I think some very good writers stumble too, and I'd rather use a good writer as an example. (Actually I'm thinking of using a much worse example too, but rather than embarrass the editor in question I will probably anonymize the text.) The essay would say, essentially, "Reception sections are hard and even good writers often make them listy; here's a before and after; here's how to go about rewriting this sort of thing". Let me know -- and it's no problem if you'd prefer I didn't. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:30, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Mike Christie: go for it, I've no objections. As I said, I've struggled with this problem myself, and such an essay would be useful to have. Essentially, I found that I was dealing with sources that all had a coherent organization of their own, but I had to pull apart their content and reorganize it in a way that was appropriate to Wikipedia: and even though I recognized this stumbling block, I couldn't quite make it across. Thanks for for the kind words about my writing. Vanamonde (talk) 11:23, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll let you know when I have something in good enough shape to look at. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:04, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Iraq War

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Iraq War. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Sorry for reverting you there - I actually meant to thank you. So, thanks! GABgab 18:49, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
GAB: No worries, I've made that mistake myself on occasion. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 03:28, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

DYK for The Dowry of the Angyar

On 16 August 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Dowry of the Angyar, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "The Dowry of the Angyar" was the first story set in the fictional Hainish Universe? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Dowry of the Angyar. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Dowry of the Angyar), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:21, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for getting this on the main page. The story entranced me when I read it years ago and I've thought of it since, but I couldn't remember the title. Jonathunder (talk) 17:13, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
@Jonathunder: Ah, you're most welcome. I find that so much of Le Guin's early Hainish fiction really sticks with me, and this is the earliest of it...Vanamonde (talk) 17:25, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 August 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:41, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Slut-shaming

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Slut-shaming. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

RiskAoA review

Vana, RiskAoA is being considered for deletion, would you mind reviewing it and contributing your 2 cents worth? you seem to have your ducks in a row. Thanks, GESICC (talk) 03:24, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

GESICC: I don't believe we have interacted before, and I'm not an expert on this subject, so to be entirely honest I am not sure why you are contacting me. Nonetheless, I took a look: and I'm struggling to find evidence of notability. I'll look some more, but at this rate it looks like I'm going to have to go delete on this one. I would also suggest that you read WP:TLDR; that discussion page is buried under walls of text, and that's not something many people take kindly to. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 05:06, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, I appreciate your effort. I don't know what other kind of news or notability it could possibly get myself, it's developed, released, used, what more is there to write? "RiskAoA continues to do it's job." ? LOL, not much of a headline. Certainly not in a non-DoD journal, either. Anyway, thanks. GESICC (talk) 13:14, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about the WP:TLDR, but I'd hoped the article would stand on it's own, unburdening you. GESICC (talk) 13:16, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Word for World Is Forest

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Word for World Is Forest you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Midnightblueowl -- Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:20, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Vanamonde93

Alright, answer the three questions, accept and transclude and we're away....cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:14, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Word for World Is Forest

The article The Word for World Is Forest you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Word for World Is Forest for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Midnightblueowl -- Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:41, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jill Stein

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jill Stein. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

The Copyeditor's Barnstar
For your precise edits in Morteza Avini. It was an outstanding job and I tried to learn the points lying within your edits. Thank you very much. Mhhossein talk 17:23, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Many thanks, MHossein, it is appreciated: thanks also for sticking with me. regards, Vanamonde (talk) 17:26, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Frankfurt School

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Frankfurt School. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Vaster than Empires and More Slow

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Vaster than Empires and More Slow you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Midnightblueowl -- Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:41, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 30 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

    • One more reason for the Indie lot to oppose you dammit... Why can't you be careful... :) You've handled the Rfa well and for that, my personal applause to you. See you around. Lourdes 01:15, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Vaster than Empires and More Slow

The article Vaster than Empires and More Slow you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Vaster than Empires and More Slow for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Midnightblueowl -- Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:41, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Your username - this is a quip, not a serious comment

I am aware of the derivation of the name Vanamonde, having been a Clarke reader since the year dot. But while Vanamonde may perhaps have analogues, they are not specified in the City and the Stars. Where are the other 91?--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 15:22, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Anthony Bradbury: the "93" is derived not from Clarke but from RL. I had a copy bought in that year. Incidentally, I first came across Vanamonde not in City and the Stars, but in Against the Fall of Night. IMHO it is a marginally better volume :) Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 15:31, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
OK; both are, of course ,the same story, with City being an expansion of Fall. It might be seen as better; as you will be aware, A C Clarke shared with John Wyndham a difficulty in actually finishing his stories in a satisfactory way. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 15:36, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes indeed I'm aware of that: having read both multiple times, though, I prefer the earlier volume. You're certainly right about the inability to finish, particularly with Clarke. The novels of his that I've read (and I've read a good few) have tended to be a detailed and engrossing picture, but without too much plot to go with it...Vanamonde (talk) 16:13, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
I read "rendezvous with Rama which failed properly to finish; and the sequels, which also stopped in the middle ("The Ramans always did things in threes"). "Childhood's end"" is one of the rare ones with a satisfactory finish.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 20:13, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
True. The Fountains of Paradise is another such, as were some of the space odysseys...Rendezvous with Rama is one of my personal favorites, to be honest; while you're right that it doesn't finish, just the nature of that idea (that ET would enter our system and then proceed to ignore humanity) was one that I found powerful. Vanamonde (talk) 20:19, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
WP:JAGUAR comment: Thanks for this little thread. This finally puts a name ("failure to finish satisfactorily", to paraphrase) for something I could never quite peg about why I couldn't get deeply into Clarke's work, despite the clear genius of much of it. Had kind of the opposite problem as Tolkien; The Lord of the Rings seems to effectively have about 7 endings, like someone had a gun to his head and made him keep writing. I disagree with Jackson & co. dropping the Scouring of the Shire from the film verseion, since as JRRT himself said, it was actually instrumental to the overall point of the work, but I guess they felt at least one ending had to go.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  10:04, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

COI and OUTING

Just as some general discussion points, I'll brain-dump this here, though there are more cogent multi-editor threads about this stuff at the policy pages and in various noticeboards and their archives. There's been a lot of hair-pulling about this policy conflict. Without even looking for examples, I keep running into conflicting administrative approaches, like I've run across people getting no warning at all for blatant, questionable-faith outing, just the edit redacted, in contrast to a hugely constructive editor being indeffed (briefly) for alleged outing that many of us, including admins, do no believe was outing; and half a dozen other back-and-forth interpretations and actions that I've noticed just reading around the last few days (some of the actions were older, of course). There's been been years of no qualms about WP:MEAT being exposed (including by admins) by noting the occurrence of a post in some off-WP specialist forum about a WP debate being immediately followed by a tide of "new editors" all supporting someone's proposal (or opposition to one), yet just two days ago I saw a very long-term oversighter insist that anything even vaguely like this is definitely outing, no matter what, citing policy for their interpretation but blatantly ignoring another part of the same policy that indicates their interpretation is extremist. If you'd had the time to dig into this the way you did with the infobox and GamerGate question, you might have seen a bunch of this stuff, too, and answered more in the "consensus seems to be in flux about this, so I might raise the issue at a noticeboard" approach, though I think your answer was okay, and I'm not lobbying you in any way to change it. (And maybe you did see it and it didn't affect your opinion or projected approach; I don't read minds of course.)

The principal quasi-issue I had with your #18 answer was the assumption of outing: Linking to a forum in which Company A solicited paid editing, later marked as done, and noting that these two events bookend the appearance here of an iffy article on Company A, should not be treated as outing in my view, unless the page in question reveals personally identifiable information about the apparent accepter of payment, that could pertain to the suspected COI editor on WP. If all it shows is some pseudonym like SnorkelWeasel99 accepting the work, then it seems extremely questionable to me that any outing has occurred, and I know a lot of the community would agree with this interpretation. Otherwise, probably hundreds of editors could have been blocked for "outing" in various MEAT, SOCK, and COI investigations, even HARASS ones involving off-WP actions. There's also the scenario where "JaclynBC" edits the article on Company A, and its website indicates that the PR officer of the company is one Jaclyn Byers-Corbett or whatever; it's highly questionable that people editing under their complete or partial but obvious real names can make a legit claim to being outed when their name is prominently associated with the subject. And so on. In this kind of case, I could have been blocked myself, for pointing out that someone editing an article on a new-religious movement was using as a user ID here essentially the same name as the founder of the NRM. As a former professional privacy activist, I take privacy (both ethically and legally) with much more seriousness than the average person, and I can tell you that many of the more extreme views on WP about outing are completely unworkable and not grounded in anything.

It's going to take time to sort this out in policy. Right now, in the wake of the really iffy block (since undone) of Jytdog, the pendulum has swung to the extreme side, but this cannot hold, since it will enable a gaming wave of epic proportions and hamstring the efforts against paid and organized PoV editing. See my user-page for my infrequent micro-newsletter that's mostly about this; I consider it the #1 threat to WP's long-term viability. The more important WP becomes as an information source, the greater the incentive and stakes for manipulating its content, including very "long-game" "civil-PoV" conspiracy, by everything from racist groups to national governments – even aside from all the "write an article about my own company" people who are a more frequent and trivial thorn. In the end, we're going to have to distinguish between connecting "I'll pay you to write about my company" job offers, that happen to include a pseudonymous username, from attempts to track down people's real names; and distinguish outing editors who are not public figures versus observing the clear fact that a COI editor either is a public figure or is masquerading as one. We can't even enforce the policy against impersonation properly under the present, temporarily nuts-o interpretation of OUTING that has arisen over the last month or so, with dicey changes being made to that page while discussion is still quite on-going. We also have the problem that WP:ASPERSIONS requires proof of allegation, so even dealing with sockpuppets and COI editors more generally would be hamstrung (that page is tagged as an essay, but as an operating principle it's de facto policy, regularly enforced by ArbCom and AE, especially with regard to any WP:AC/DS topic). Policy adjustments will surely have to be grounded in standard, established approaches to privacy (various terms of art and well-covered concepts: reasonable expectation of privacy, public figure, personally identifiable information versus pseudonymity and anonymity, the distinction between noticing a public fact and active harassment, the difference between noting fiduciary connections versus trying to shame or expose someone for what topics they edit, the difference between publicly disclosed facts – non-secrets – and digging up non-public information, the lower expectations someone like me, using my real name here and being a quasi-public figure myself, has versus someone editing as Kitten934 and never mentioning even their given name, etc., etc.). That's the not-terribly-concise nutshell of what some of the issues are. I don't expect to see this settle out for a year or longer. As a new admin, I would tread really cautiously in this area if I were you (more to avoid triggering waves of drama, not out of concern for backlash against you directly), and your answer suggests that you will – lots of mentions of warnings, not a lot of talk of hammering people.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  09:22, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

@SMcCandlish: that is certainly a lot of food for thought, thank you. Broadly speaking I agree with much of what you've said, or at least with the parts that I'd given a thought to before. I think I had sort of assumed that the information on the website contained personal information, but you're right, it gets complicated even if it did. I've been in arguments because of the username issue before: one of the folks I had had extensive interactions with changed their username midway through said interactions, and then proceeded to accuse me of outing when I didn't (granted, I was rather irritated at that point and was more pugilistic than necessary); which influenced my rather cautious response. I am not familiar with the jytdog case, but I did read up on the wifi-one situation when it happened, and that certainly raised concerns for me about civil-POV pushing (or civil COI), if you will. In any case, I certainly intend to take it slow (with most things, but certainly with this). Thanks for taking the time to explain. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 11:07, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for being amenable to me doing so; it was a helpful exercising in trying to write it all out. Now it'll be a matter of compressing it to a more palatable gist of bullet points, since we probably need one or more VPPOL RfCs on this.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  13:09, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jill Stein

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jill Stein. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Cool as a cucumber..

Cucumbers of coolness
For maintaining one's cool at the snakepit that is RfA. Congrats. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:49, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Many thanks, Cas, and also for the nom and walking me through the process. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 12:26, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry for missing your RfA, but many congrats from me. Wield the mop with care and thought; you will do great. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 13:37, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
The best comportment in an RFA I have seen since..., well, ever. Very well done. --Begoon talk 14:25, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Congratulations on your successful RFA! Though you had some interesting opposition, you nonetheless made it and you've earned yourself a mop. Now here's a cup of coffee for you to enjoy before you scrub the latrines. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 15:47, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Congratulations on your successful RfA! I gave the first support vote on the RfA, and I thought you would succeed. And also, thanks for your help on RFPP earlier. Now enjoy this and, as that funny gumball machine from Regular Show said (I used to watch this when I was younger) GET BACK TO WORK! 😜😉 Class455 (talk) 17:14, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Class455, many thanks; it's appreciated. Vanamonde (talk) 17:16, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Congratulations on your successful RFA! We have never spoken before, so I do hope this is the first of many interactions to come. You deserve this Barnstar, but more importantly, you deserve to be an admin! Zerotalk 19:28, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations

Congratulations Vanamonde the 93rd. Excellent RfA in more than one sense, one that has renewed my faith in the overall Wikipedia cohort. And, since I can never resist the urge to pontificate :), I hope the oppose !voters of a certain ilk have figured out how the community sees them and that they return with a new sense of what sourcing and balance mean on this encyclopedia. --regentspark (comment) 14:36, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks muchly, RP, and also for the nom statement and all your advice along the way. And I entirely share those sentiments :) Vanamonde (talk) 16:06, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Congrats from me too. When you get bored of scrabbling down the back of the sofa for the right template message for each block check out my Monobook.js. Some kind soul put a very useful script in there that gives a dropdown menu. ϢereSpielChequers 16:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
User:WereSpielChequers: I most certainly will. Thank you. Vanamonde (talk) 16:58, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Congartulations

You're now a sysop, what a difficult job! I think you can make it, as you did at the RFA. Hope you a good adminship. --Mhhossein talk 07:21, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Ditto, congrats Vanamonde93. Although I couldn't participate in the RfA (just found out about it now), I do appreciate that it was successful. Hope to see you around, especially on Pakistan (and South Asian) articles. Cheers! Mar4d (talk) 09:56, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Nice work and good luck! GABgab 13:35, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Your request for adminship

Hi Vanamonde93, I have closed your request for adminship as successful. Congratulations for your result and for your new place on WP:RFX100; however, because of the significant amount of opposition to your request (noting, of course, that a portion of it was weak in its foundations), my advice is bear any legitimate concerns in mind as you proceed. As always, the administrators' reading list is worth reading and the new admin help pages are most certainly available if you feel that you might require some practice with the tools in a safe environment prior to applying them elsewhere on the project. Good luck with your adminship! Acalamari 10:16, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Congrats..The admins' T-shirt for you. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:02, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, folks. The support is appreciated. I'll do my best to keep the floors clean, and I know there's a lot of good advice only a few clicks away...Vanamonde (talk) 12:25, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Nathan H. Lee

Hi Vanamonde93. Congratulations!!! I just wanted to ask you if you could move a page I created Nathan H. Lee to Nathan Hongwon Lee. For some reason only admins can create the page Nathan Hongwon Lee and as a result, I cannot move it. Thank you so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cieltohell (talk • contribs) 00:07, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Thanks, RP. Cieltohell: I can certainly move the page, but unless the content there is substantially improved, somebody is likely to nominate it for deletion again: and, given that it has been deleted many times before, odds are that somebody will for it to be protected so that you cannot create it again without admin oversight. Now, what I would suggest is that you work on the page in your userspace until you are absolutely sure it meets our notability standards, the most basic of which is WP:GNG: then, it can be recreated from there, and save everybody a lot of time and trouble. You can even use the articles for creation process, where you will get some help and feedback before the page is moved to mainspace. If you are agreeable, I will move the page to a draft in your userspace. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 04:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Priscilla Corner

Tonguetwister 79 (talk) 02:55, 4 September 2016 (UTC)respected vanamonde93 can the Priscillacorner Wikipedia page can't be restored?all hopes on you.if u can.thanks

@Tonguetwister 79: that page was deleted because a deletion discussion found it to not be notable. Therefore, my unilaterally restoring the page is not possible. If you wish to work on it as a draft (that is, a page that will not be visible as a part of the main encyclopedia) I would consider this: but you would have to convince me that you really want to improve the page in a way that follows our policies. You might also try WP:REFUND, if I'm not around. Vanamonde (talk) 05:14, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
They've sent him along to Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 September 4, since he didn't seem interested in just getting a draft. —Cryptic 14:41, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Rather, they sent Soumen491 there, since that was the account that he posted the WP:REFUND request with. Wow, talk about transparent. —Cryptic 14:42, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Cryptic: Okay, thanks. I wasn't aware of the "deletion discussion" limitation, but oh well: I guess they found that out. They don't seem to be willing to ask for a draft, they just want the article back, and their reason is "please," which is not going to cut much ice, I'm afraid. Vanamonde (talk) 17:07, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A Wizard of Earthsea

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article A Wizard of Earthsea you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics#Proposal_for_election_of_coordinators_for_the_project. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 14:17, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Congrats

Congrats
Congrats though I opposed but I'll still say. Take care with India related articles VarunFEB2003 16:04, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Yes, good luck and beware of saffron brigade socks! VarunFEB2003 stalker 20:28, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Poor discipline

I have been thinking about your unsavoury antics here on Wikipedia. I have come to the firm conclusion that you lack discipline. I hope this lesson does not have to be repeated. --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 22:27, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jarabulus offensive (2016)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jarabulus offensive (2016). Legobot (talk) 04:25, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 September 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors September 2016 News

Guild of Copy Editors September 2016 News

Hello everyone, and welcome to the September 2016 GOCE newsletter.

>>> Sign up for the September Drive, already in progress! <<<

July Drive: The July drive was a roaring success. We set out to remove April, May, and June 2015 from our backlog (our 149 oldest articles), and by 23 July, we were done with those months. We added July 2015 (66 articles) and copy-edited 37 of those. We also handled all of the remaining Requests from June 2016. Well done! Overall, we recorded copy edits to 240 articles by 20 editors, reducing our total backlog to 13 months and 1,656 articles, the second-lowest month-end total ever.

August Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 21 through 27 August; the theme was sports-related articles in honor of the 2016 Summer Olympics. Of the eight editors who signed up, five editors removed 11 articles from the backlog. A quiet blitz – everyone must be on vacation. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdlsk.

>>> Sign up for the September Drive! <<<

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:36, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

ISIL territorial claims

Good job with this. --NeilN talk to me 15:15, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Vanamonde (talk) 15:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations!

I bet seeing that gold star on The Left Hand of Darkness does your heart good. All your hard work made for a wonderful article. Congratulations! — Gorthian (talk) 00:17, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Seconding this - it was illuminating watching you and others transform this article into a form worthy of its subject. I don't edit in this area anymore, but once upon a time I uploaded and added the first edition cover art (gotta love the Dillons) and happened to still have this article kicking around my watchlist... thank you for your hard work, the results are fantastic! Antepenultimate (talk) 04:08, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! It was quite a bit of work, nice to see it pay off. Vanamonde (talk) 04:41, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A Wizard of Earthsea

The article A Wizard of Earthsea you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:A Wizard of Earthsea for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:41, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited A Wizard of Earthsea, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages David Mitchell, The Telegraph and Cloud Atlas. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:01, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jill Stein

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jill Stein. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pending changes

Hello. Congrats on the RfA. According to the page you just PC protected, PC protection shouldn't usually be used in the Wikipedia namespace. Regards. -- zzuuzz (talk) 11:26, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

zzuuzz: Hmm, that would be my bad. I'm sure I knew that, at some point...still wondering whether semi-protecting would be appropriate, but I've removed the PC protection. Vanamonde (talk) 11:31, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
OK thanks, I'm afraid my advice on this matter doesn't extend beyond general newbie educational value. Good comedy value though :) -- zzuuzz (talk) 11:35, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

RFA

You can disagree with my vote, but this type of accusation is injudicious. --Marvellous Spider-Man 09:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

And I am still facing problems with Stiki. --Marvellous Spider-Man 09:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
My account name was Rainbow Archer. --Marvellous Spider-Man 09:59, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
with respect, Marvellous Spider-Man, I have tangled enough with the OZ socks to be suspicious of anything that appears similar: and there were similarities, even if (as seems to be the case) they were coincidental. If you want more evidence of that, just look at the number of people who expressed suspicion at the SPI. I myself was nudged into filing a case because JJ mentioned his suspicions to me. It's nothing personal, nor does it have much to do with the RFA: you ended up going "support" at my RFA, after all, and there are several folks I respect who opposed me. Vanamonde (talk) 10:09, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
There's not much I can do about STiki: posting to the talk page of the tool would be the right thing to do, if you're having trouble. Incidentally, I've been having some, too. Vanamonde (talk) 10:10, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
AKS.9955 and Rsrikanth05 voted oppose. I might have seen Rsrikanth05's name in a chart which lists Stiki users. I voted oppose due to their statements. I changed my vote after reading Shawn in Montreal's comment it seems to be me there's a veritable firehouse of spam/soap articles coming from India. Marvellous Spider-Man 10:19, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Shawn is quite right, it's a real problem; but in my view an even bigger problem is the promotional language that gets into even non-problematic articles. Anyhow, thanks for the vote. Vanamonde (talk) 10:33, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
User account JJ is not registered. Who is JJ? Marvellous Spider-Man 15:19, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
"JJ" is Joshua Jonathan, who's been around for quite a while. FYI, I moved your question to the bottom to keep this thread chronological. Vanamonde (talk) 17:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Cissie Cahalan

Hello! Your submission of Cissie Cahalan at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Wasted Time R (talk) 12:24, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Antisemitism in 21st-century France

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Antisemitism in 21st-century France. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Have a good day

Request retracted. Have a good day.ZoeyZoey Wipf (talk) 18:07, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Zoey Wipf (talk) 18:01, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Zoey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zoey Wipf (talk • contribs) 01:45, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Request for advice/comments off-wiki

Hi there, I came across you by following the Talk pages of various articles on South Asian politics. From what I can see, you have been a veteran and extremely valuable contributor in this area. I am a new-ish wiki editor (who prefers to stay anon due to early experiences) and I wanted some advice on dipping my toes in South Asian topics - I tried once, in a relatively obscure article about a Marathi movie, and had to run for the hills! I am also a social science student and have been talking to wiki editors for my research, but mostly those who deal with science topics. I would really love to learn more about your experience with Wikipedia, and particularly editing these areas. IF you are willing, can you please email me at: thestudiousllama at gmail. I don't know how else to communicate with editors without creating an account myself. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.150.47.63 (talk) 03:28, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi There. I'm happy to answer any questions you might have. You need to have an account to use the "email this user" function, but the email I've linked to my account is vanamondec@gmail.com, which you are welcome to send any queries to. In general, though, I would recommend creating an account: there are several advantages to it, not the least of which is that you will be viewed with slightly less suspicion. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 04:54, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Murder of Milly Dowler

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Murder of Milly Dowler. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Vanamonde93. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Your warning to me

Wow, Mar4d certainly has a whole crowd of friends to form a gang and bully anyone who crosses his path. Please take a deep breath, and a minute to read my message to two other users here. I only want to say the same thing to you also.

I think @Mar4d: would be quite amused to hear me described as their "friend." The fact remains that the content you added was either unsourced, or sourced to a google-groups forum (or something). Those do not constitute reliable sources. Find such sources that support your content changes before trying to add the content again, else you are flirting with a WP:BLOCK. Vanamonde (talk) 15:24, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
You clearly have not read the article or the changes I made, therefore you are shooting in the dark "either this, or that, or something" ... be informed that I have not added much content in the first place. Mar4d is rubbing out whatever I have written for no reason except that he is following me around on all pages and rubbing out all my work. He started doing that after I removed the name of the so-called (unproven) "perpetrator" in the 2007 Samjhauta Express bombings case, and as a Pakistani, he has an axe to grind there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.186.110 (talk) 15:35, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Vanamonde93/Archive_8&oldid=1257773411"