User talk:Yodin/Archive 2016

Archive 2010

←

Archive 2014

Archive 2015

Archive 2016

Archive 2017

Archive 2018

You've got mail!

Hello, Yodin. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Brill.
Message added 22:07, 1 January 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 22:07, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

And the same for JSTOR. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:35, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

FYI

Re: your edit, you stated that no edit summary isn't a reason to revert - yet if you look around the project you'll see that it actually is, quite often and regularly. With this particular editor, you'll note that multiple editors have reverted him for this very reason and he has been warned about it repeatedly. You also said check the article - that is what the editor should have done. It's not my job (or anyone else's) to vet this editors contributions by checking source articles, providing reliable sources when needed and supplying edit summaries to explain his edits. This is just enabling him, not helping him. Have at look at the histories... - ^theWOLFchild 03:18, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Oh, welcome back after the block! As you can see, I'm no newbie, but the only two instances I've seen of reverting "just because they didn't put an edit summary in" have been yours. It completely goes against the very idea of an encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and we have a duty as editors to check if the edit stacks up before reverting. Why? Because, as in this instance, they might be right, and you might be wrong. You've recently been warned about your behaviour here, so if this is what you've been waiting to say, I suggest you either learn the lesson, or move on. ‑‑Yodin^T 19:48, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

TWL Questia check-in

Hello!

You are receiving this message because The Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Questia. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

• Make sure that you can still log in to your Questia account; if you are having trouble feel free to get in touch.
• When your account expires you can reapply for access at WP:Questia.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
• Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, email us and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services The Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thanks! 20:25, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Help from a seasoned user, please?

Hey there, Yode,

(Please keep this section for reference, but archive it soon because of... "reasons." Okay?) Man, these idiots are still thinking that I'm a sock of that other guy. I've tried to conform many articles to the rule that we had been talking about, but they'd rather wreck good work done, in the name of their precious politics, than keep the work that was already done to improve the project by helping it follow its own rules. With the clout that you have (but without giving me credit, LOL!), will you please go in and revert their latest reversions back to where I had them, from this list of articles (plus, maybe help work on several more)?

The supposedly "impossible-to-edit to MoS standards, except by a long-estabished editor" articles:

1. Latest reversion of The B-52's
2. Last July 23 edition of The Byrds
3. Latest reversion at The Birds (band)
4. Latest reversion at The Blow Monkeys
5. July 13 reversion at The Black Crowes
6. Last July 29 edition of The Shins
7. Last July 23 edition of The Beau Brummels
8. July 25 edit, right under page protection, of The Clash

And then... ones that haven't been MoSed yet: Many of the bands from the third list down and further, here: [1]. The easiest way to spot the "The __[Blank]__" and turn them into "the __[Blank]__" is to use a browser like Firefox that has "match case" and "highlight all" as two of its "Find (on this page)" features, and then type or paste "The __[Blank]__" band name into it (remembering not to include any spaces before or after).

Thanks for any help you'll be willing to give me on this! Those guys are really being short-sightedly ridiculous! Will you help me out, please? And will you please reply here (I'll keep a bookmark to the archive so I can still get to it easily after you've archived it)? 97.117.52.73 (talk) 12:35, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

And now one of the asses is going through and undoing ALL this work:[2] But to what end: making the encyclopedia break its own rules? We might as well erase that part of the MoS! Those stupid idiots think "politics rule over improvements," which is absolutely ridiculous! Ughh, I have a violent statement in my mind about them, and him in particular, but I'm not sure that if I say it, _you_ would also be against me for crossing some sort of line. Anyway, I think if you revert all those, when he sees that you're well-established, he'll leave them in place. Would you agree? 97.117.52.73 (talk) 14:32, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Three years ago ...

peace
... you were recipient no. 570 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:00, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fear the Walking Dead: Flight 462, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Walking Dead. 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) 10:14, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Yodin. 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)

Strange stories about Strange Stories

Thanks for your work to straighten out Strange stories from a Chinese Room! I apologize if I made things worse by trying to handle it myself before I realized that I was in over my head. I got lost in the Redirects and double Redirects, but I think it's ok now (including the links to the Chinese, Norwegian, and other Wikipedias that were lost when the article was frivolously renamed). Userfahne Contributions] shows that he has not quit his other contributions, which stretch the boundaries of AGF. Cheers!ch (talk) 20:35, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

That's ok CWH, glad you stepped in, and thanks for all of your other editing! Also good to see from his talk page that lots of admins are now aware of what he's doing (not to mention he seems to have given up at least on the Strange renamings for now – hope I don't jinx it!). And it does somehow feel like it could be the prelude to some modern cyber-horror story! :) ‑‑Yodin^T 22:55, 10 November 2016 (UTC)