User talk:Bilby

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
User
User
Talk
Talk
Gallery
Gallery
Contributions
Contribs
Email
Email

Contents

VisualEditor newsletter—December 2014[edit]

VisualEditor-logo.svg
Screenshot showing how to add or remove columns from a table

Did you know?

Basic table editing is now available in VisualEditor. You can add and remove rows and columns from existing tables at the click of a button.

The user guide has more information about how to use VisualEditor.

Since the last newsletter, the Editing Team has fixed many bugs and worked on table editing and performance. Their weekly status reports are posted on Mediawiki.org. Upcoming plans are posted at the VisualEditor roadmap.

VisualEditor was deployed to several hundred remaining wikis as an opt-in beta feature at the end of November, except for most Wiktionaries (which depend heavily upon templates) and all Wikisources (which await integration with ProofreadPage).

Recent improvements[edit]

Basic support for editing tables is available. You can insert new tables, add and remove rows and columns, set or remove a caption for a table, and merge cells together. To change the contents of a cell, double-click inside it. More features will be added in the coming months. In addition, VisualEditor now ignores broken, invalid rowspan and colspan elements, instead of trying to repair them.

You can now use find and replace in VisualEditor, reachable through the tool menu or by pressing ⌃ Ctrl+F or ⌘ Cmd+F.

You can now create and edit simple <blockquote> paragraphs for quoting and indenting content. This changes a "Paragraph" into a "Block quote".

Some new keyboard sequences can be used to format content. At the start of the line, typing "*  " will make the line a bullet list; "1.  " or "# " will make it a numbered list; "==" will make it a section heading; ": " will make it a blockquote. If you didn't mean to use these tools, you can press undo to undo the formatting change. There are also two other keyboard sequences: "[[" for opening the link tool, and "{{" for opening the template tool, to help experienced editors. The existing standard keyboard shortcuts, like ⌃ Ctrl+K to open the link editor, still work.

If you add a category that has been redirected, then VisualEditor now adds its target. Categories without description pages show up as red.

You can again create and edit galleries as wikitext code.

Looking ahead[edit]

VisualEditor will replace the existing design with a new theme designed by the User Experience group. The new theme will be visible for desktop systems at MediaWiki.org in late December and at other sites early January. (You can see a developer preview of the old "Apex" theme and the new "MediaWiki" one which will replace it.)

The Editing team plans to add auto-fill features for citations in January. Planned changes to the media search dialog will make choosing between possible images easier.

Help[edit]

If you would like to help with translations of this newsletter, please subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Subscribe or unsubscribe at Meta.

Thank you! WhatamIdoing (WMF) (talk) 23:37, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Christmas![edit]

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :)

The Signpost: 24 December 2014[edit]

Happy New Year Bilby![edit]

Incorrect photo attribution[edit]

Hi Bilby, I don't know that it would bother you, but in this Forbes article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnarcher/2014/09/17/the-ps4-and-xbox-one-are-already-out-of-date-round-2/ Your photo is incorrectly credited as "(Photo credit: Wikipedia)" instead of to you, directly.126.109.230.133 (talk) 05:33, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 December 2014[edit]

This Month in Education: December 2014[edit]

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:27, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 January 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 14 January 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 21 January 2015[edit]

Philip Nitschke[edit]

Hello, are you an admin here? I'm asking for your assistance as a 3rd set of eyes on what's happening at Philip Nitschke. Editor Claudio Santoz, who seems to have a poor grasp of English, is editing in material he has interpreted from a primary source, despite the availability of a preferred secondary source. The result is an unreadable shemozzle. Perhaps he should be encouraged to edit the section of Wikipedia in his own language? Jabba the Hot (talk) 02:45, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Johnmoor being discussed at COIN again[edit]

It would help if you could repeat what you mentioned earlier User_talk:Bilby/Archive_10#Nofel_Izz along with any new info you may have: Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Editor_Johnmoor --Ronz (talk) 23:40, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year![edit]

G'day Sunshine! Trust that you and yours are well and enjoying yourselves, and All the Best for 2015!
I'm interested by BarossaV's edits, and by my reactions to them. Although I'm not totally comfortable with his slash-and-burn approach, I have to admit that there's a lot of "stuff" on the various rail pages that really does need slashing & burning. Sadly, I'm genuinely ambivalent (i.e. confused) about where "the line" is. Any thoughts / comments / advice / whatever? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:18, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate closed[edit]

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

1.1)

(i) The community Gamergate general sanctions are hereby rescinded and are replaced by standard discretionary sanctions, which are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed.

(ii) All sanctions in force when this remedy is enacted are endorsed and will become standard discretionary sanctions governed by the standard procedure from the moment of enactment.

(iii) Notifications issued under Gamergate general sanctions become alerts for twelve months from the date of enactment of this remedy, then expire. The log of notifications will remain on the Gamergate general sanction page.

(iv) All existing and past sanctions and restrictions placed under Gamergate general sanctions will be transcribed by the arbitration clerks in the central discretionary sanctions log.

(v) Any requests for enforcement that may be open when this remedy is enacted shall proceed, but any remedy that is enacted should be enacted as a discretionary sanction.

(vi) Administrators who have enforced the Gamergate general sanctions are thanked for their work and asked to continue providing administrative assistance enforcing discretionary sanctions and at Arbitration enforcement.

1.2)

Uninvolved administrators are encouraged to monitor the articles covered by discretionary sanctions in this case to ensure compliance. To assist in this, administrators are reminded that:

(i) Accounts with a clear shared agenda may be blocked if they violate the sockpuppetry policy or other applicable policy;

(ii) Accounts whose primary purpose is disruption, violating the policy on biographies of living persons, or making personal attacks may be blocked indefinitely;

(iii) There are special provisions in place to deal with editors who violate the BLP policy;

(iv) The default position for BLPs, particularly for individuals whose noteworthiness is limited to a particular event or topic, is the presumption of privacy for personal matters;

(v) Editors who spread or further publicize existing BLP violations may be blocked;

(vi) Administrators may act on clear BLP violations with page protections, blocks, or warnings even if they have edited the article themselves or are otherwise involved;

(vii) Discretionary sanctions permit full and semi-page protections, including use of pending changes where warranted, and – once an editor has become aware of sanctions for the topic – any other appropriate remedy may be issued without further warning.

The Arbitration Committee thanks those administrators who have been helping to enforce the community general sanctions, and thanks, once again, in advance those who help enforce the remedies adopted in this case.

2.1) Any editor subject to a topic-ban in this decision is indefinitely prohibited from making any edit about, and from editing any page relating to, (a) Gamergate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. These restrictions may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.

4.1) NorthBySouthBaranof (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

5.1) Ryulong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

5.3) Ryulong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely banned from the English Language Wikipedia. They may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

6.2) TaraInDC (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is admonished for treating Wikipedia as if it were a battleground and advised to better conduct themselves.

7.2) Tarc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

7.3) Tarc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is strongly warned that should future misconduct occur in any topic area, he may be banned from the English Wikipedia by motion of the Arbitration Committee.

8.2) The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

8.3) Subject to the usual exceptions, The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is prohibited from making any more than one revert on any one page in any 48-hour period. This applies for all pages on the English Wikipedia, except The Devil's Advocate's own user space. This restriction may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.

8.4) Subject to the usual exceptions, The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely prohibited from editing any administrative or conduct noticeboard (including, not not limited to; AN, AN/I, AN/EW, and AE), except for threads regarding situations that he was directly involved in when they were started. This restriction may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.

8.5) The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is strongly warned that should future misconduct occur in any topic area, he may be banned from the English Wikipedia by motion of the Arbitration Committee. Further, the committee strongly suggests that The Devil's Advocate refrains from editing contentious topic areas in the future.

9) TheRedPenOfDoom (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is admonished for treating Wikipedia as if it were a battleground and advised to better conduct themselves.

10.1) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic ban preventing Tutelary (talk · contribs) from editing under the Gamergate general sanctions. This ban is converted to an Arbitration Committee-imposed ban. Tutelary (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

12) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic bans preventing ArmyLine (talk · contribs), DungeonSiegeAddict510 (talk · contribs), and Xander756 (talk · contribs) from editing under the Gamergate general sanctions. The topic bans for these three editors are converted to indefinite restrictions per the standard topic ban.

13) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic ban preventing Titanium Dragon (talk · contribs) from editing under BLP enforcement. This ban is converted to an Arbitration Committee-imposed ban. Titanium Dragon is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

14.1) Loganmac (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

15) Willhesucceed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

18) The Arbitration Committee urges that knowledgeable and non-conflicted users not previously involved in editing GamerGate-related articles, especially GamerGate-related biographies of living people, should carefully review them for adherence to Wikipedia policies and address any perceived or discovered deficiencies. This is not a finding that the articles are or are not satisfactory in their present form, but an urging that independent members of the community examine the matter in light of the case.

For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 00:46, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 January 2015[edit]

Ratel/Ticklemeister ...[edit]

Since you are not only an admin but someone who has interacted with User:Ratel perhaps it would be useful and you might be interested in checking this current investigation

--ClaudioSantos¿? 18:45, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

This Month in Education: [January 2015][edit]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:16, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription.

The Signpost: 04 February 2015[edit]

Doubt about deleted page - Thanks in advance[edit]

Hello Bilby, I am interested in the article Uscreen and noticed you deleted it. I just wanted to confirm with you if the deletion was entirely related to the user who created it, or if the content presents an anomaly or violation; if that is the case maybe I can edit the part that causes the issue.

The article title is Uscreen and the link is: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Uscreen&action=edit&redlink=1 Thanks for your help.

Regards, --Claudia wiki01 (talk) 02:20, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi. The article is borderline as to whether or not it could survive a deletion discussion, but it was deleted because the user who created it was previously blocked, and was using a different account to evade their block. Under those circumstances we are required to delete the content. Unfortunately, this then creates a second problem, in that it is difficult to assume that new accounts which recreate the content are independent. - Bilby (talk) 02:55, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. I understand your point; I am an independent user, I have other contributions but most of them are in spanish; I do not intend to break any Wikipedia policy/rule, so I submitted my article for review, I'd rather do this than get blocked. Do you think this is a good way to proceed?

Thanks again :) Claudia wiki01 (talk) 15:26, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Are you aware of the disclosure requirements for paid editing? My feeling is that the article is not viable, but even if it was, you would need to fully disclose your employer and your relationship with the article subject. - Bilby (talk) 10:14, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Woodson Michel[edit]

Why on earth was this page deleted? It had 5 independent sources; all fitting within the scope of notability. So it was created by a banned user. Your removal does more harm to the community than good. I see absolutely nothing wrong with the article. Please restore it or I will. Thanks Savvyjack23 (talk) 00:30, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Under WP:EVASION, we should delete articles created by banned or blocked editors if those articles are created in violation of their blocks. In this case, the editor runs a large sock farm to engage in undisclosed paid editing. This is against WP's policies and against the WMF's terms of use, hence my decision to both block the account and to delete the paid work. - Bilby (talk) 00:44, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
I should add that none of the sources were good - of the sources, only two appear to have been independent and non-trivial, and they were minor online publications publishing interviews, which therefore fall into the primary sources category. I can't see anything that would meet the notability requirements. - Bilby (talk) 00:54, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Well said; I withdraw my comment. However, it should be noted, that had I made a substantial edit (G5), I would have maintained my stance. Nevertheless, thank you for your contributions. Savvyjack23 (talk) 01:06, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree with you fully about the project coming first - blindly following policy can be as bad as ignoring it. :) I did check the history, but I apologise for not informing you of what was happening - I saw that you had added a category and wikilinks, but should have followed that up. - Bilby (talk) 01:30, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 February 2015[edit]

Wifione-paid editing amendment request[edit]

I've filed an amendment request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Amendment_request:_Wifione.

I think everybody has had their say at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wifione/Proposed decision, so perhaps this notice is just a formality.

All the best,

Smallbones(smalltalk) 16:01, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Is there some reason you felt it necessary to edit my talk page?[edit]

While I don't especially care about the comment in question, I am curious as to why you felt it was necessary to remove it. Titanium Dragon (talk) 01:08, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

My apologies - I think I was overly sensitive on your behalf. I read it as a subtle attack made in regard to the Wikipediocracy article, and overreacted on the grounds that too many people have been attacked on all sides of GG. - Bilby (talk) 04:23, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
It's alright; no harm, no foul. I was just wondering if something else was going on. Titanium Dragon (talk) 08:32, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 February 2015[edit]

Precious again[edit]

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

reviewing eyes
Thank you for reviewing in the Contributor copyright investigations/PumpkinSky! Paraphrasing (I hope not too closely): If everybody who reads this looked at one more article it could be over today. - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (18 August 2010)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:21, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Three years ago, you were the 31st recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:33, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 February 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 25 February 2015[edit]

This Month in Education: February 2015[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:25, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Amendment request archived[edit]

Hi Bilby, an arbitration amendment request you were listed as a party to has been archived to the Wifione case talk page. A motion was proposed but did not gain enough support among arbitrators. For the Arbitration Committee, --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 01:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Mark Kern - Better Balancing[edit]

Hello, I'm the one who originally put in the piece about Mark Kern and his petition, and I know you removed it because of balancing issues. I'm fairly new to this so I figured I'd seek some advice on how to better balance it. I've had people point me towards some additional sources so I was planning on reviewing it and rewriting it tonight. Is there anything in particular I should keep in mind? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kpdarcia (talkcontribs) 21:28, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

The problem is one of weight. A single petition doesn't exactly count for much, and shouldn't be given more weight that the rest of his career. It might warrant a sentence at this point, but that's probably as much as it is worth,unless it becomes more significant than it is at the moment. It is a common issue we hit with biographies - a single comment or action can be over presented to the point where it overshadows the rest of the biography. We need to consider each issue in terms of a person's overall biography, rather than in isolation. - Bilby (talk) 08:18, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Notice of amended RfC[edit]

There is an RfC related to paid editing on which you commented or !voted, which was just amended. See Wikipedia_talk:Harassment#RfC:_Links_related_to_paid_editing Jytdog (talk) 21:55, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 March 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 11 March 2015[edit]

YOGA Venture[edit]

Hi Bilby, I just took notice of your tag about deletion. Quite frankly, I am very surprised because I follow the example of similar articles in the same category Yoga stubs: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Yoga_stubs" . Many of these articles do not even have a single reference and are of lesser value. In my understanding, a stub article is expected to be expanded over time. My question is why would you discriminate among articles? I am looking forward to your understanding. Thank you. Patrickday357 (talk) 14:28, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 March 2015[edit]

.

BLP violation?[edit]

Hi Bilby,

First of all, thanks for your continued civility. I appreciate your response to my questions on the whole GG thing. Now onto my current question, why are my edits to the Violet Blue page being continually redacted? I have no desire to get into any type of edit war, but it seems everything I wrote is well supported by RS. Would it be acceptable to reference the SF Weekly article without explicitly mentioning the birth name? Thanks for your help. Marcos12 (talk) 03:42, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015[edit]

You've got mail[edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Bilby. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

--Dan.malanczyj (talk) 19:20, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

This Month in Education: March 2015[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription.

The Signpost, 1 April 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 01 April 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 01 April 2015[edit]

VisualEditor News #2—2015[edit]

VisualEditor-logo.svg
Did you know?

With Citoid in VisualEditor, you click the 'book with bookmark' icon and paste in the URL for a reliable source:


Screenshot of Citoid's first dialog


Citoid looks up the source for you and returns the citation results. Click the green "Insert" button to accept its results and add them to the article:


Screenshot of Citoid's initial results


After inserting the citation, you can change it. Select the reference, and click the "Edit" button in the context menu to make changes.


The user guide has more information about how to use VisualEditor.

Since the last newsletter, the Editing Team has fixed many bugs and worked on VisualEditor's performance, the Citoid reference service, and support for languages with complex input requirements. Status reports are posted on Mediawiki.org. The worklist for April through June is available in Phabricator.

The weekly task triage meetings continue to be open to volunteers, each Wednesday at 11:00 (noon) PDT (18:00 UTC). You do not need to attend the meeting to nominate a bug for consideration as a Q4 blocker. Instead, go to Phabricator and "associate" the Editing team's Q4 blocker project with the bug. Learn how to join the meetings and how to nominate bugs at mw:Talk:VisualEditor/Portal.

Recent improvements[edit]

VisualEditor is now substantially faster. In many cases, opening the page in VisualEditor is now faster than opening it in the wikitext editor. The new system has improved the code speed by 37% and network speed by almost 40%.

The Editing team is slowly adding auto-fill features for citations. This is currently available only at the French, Italian, and English Wikipedias. The Citoid service takes a URL or DOI for a reliable source, and returns a pre-filled, pre-formatted bibliographic citation. After creating it, you will be able to change or add information to the citation, in the same way that you edit any other pre-existing citation in VisualEditor. Support for ISBNs, PMIDs, and other identifiers is planned. Later, editors will be able to improve precision and reduce the need for manual corrections by contributing to the Citoid service's definitions for each website.

Citoid requires good TemplateData for your citation templates. If you would like to request this feature for your wiki, please post a request in the Citoid project on Phabricator. Include links to the TemplateData for the most important citation templates on your wiki.

The special character inserter has been improved, based upon feedback from active users. After this, VisualEditor was made available to all users of Wikipedias on the Phase 5 list on 30 March. This affected 53 mid-size and smaller Wikipedias, including AfrikaansAzerbaijaniBretonKyrgyzMacedonianMongolianTatar, and Welsh.

Work continues to support languages with complex requirements, such as Korean and Japanese. These languages use input method editors ("IMEs”). Recent improvements to cursoring, backspace, and delete behavior will simplify typing in VisualEditor for these users.

The design for the image selection process is now using a "masonry fit" model. Images in the search results are displayed at the same height but at variable widths, similar to bricks of different sizes in a masonry wall, or the "packed" mode in image galleries. This style helps you find the right image by making it easier to see more details in images.

You can now drag and drop categories to re-arrange their order of appearance ​on the page.

The pop-up window that appears when you click on a reference, image, link, or other element, is called the "context menu". It now displays additional useful information, such as the destination of the link or the image's filename. The team has also added an explicit "Edit" button in the context menu, which helps new editors open the tool to change the item.

Invisible templates are marked by a puzzle piece icon so they can be interacted with. Users also will be able to see and edit HTML anchors now in section headings.

Users of the TemplateData GUI editor can now set a string as an optional text for the 'deprecated' property in addition to boolean value, which lets you tell users of the template what they should do instead (T90734).

Looking ahead[edit]

The special character inserter in VisualEditor will soon use the same special character list as the wikitext editor. Admins at each wiki will also have the option of creating a custom section for frequently used characters at the top of the list. Instructions for customizing the list will be posted at mediawiki.org.

The team is discussing a test of VisualEditor with new users, to see whether they have met their goals of making VisualEditor suitable for those editors. The timing is unknown, but might be relatively soon.

Let's work together[edit]

  • Share your ideas and ask questions at mw:VisualEditor/Feedback.
  • Can you translate from English into any other language? Please check this list to see whether more interface translations are needed for your language. Contact us to get an account if you want to help!
  • The design research team wants to see how real editors work. Please sign up for their research program.
  • File requests for language-appropriate "Bold" and "Italic" icons for the character formatting menu in Phabricator.

Subscribe, unsubscribe or change the page where this newsletter is delivered at Meta. If you aren't reading this in your favorite language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thank you!

-Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk), 17:50, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

BLP concerns[edit]

Special:Diff/654891783 and Special:Diff/654895980 you voiced BLP concerns while reverting my disambiguation expansions.

What is the issue at hand exactly? I studied BLP after seeing this happened and before contacting you but cannot find an answer.

CVV is sourced by Milo Yiannopoulos on Breitbart.com in an article published 1 September 2014. Zoe is not discussed "primarily in the terms of a single event" so I don't think she falls under the WP:BLP#Privacy of names restriction, if that's what people are getting at. It has been widely disseminated, and is directly involved in the article's topic. Ranze (talk) 11:03, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 April 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 15 April 2015[edit]

I am not a paid editor. Kind Regards Cada mori (talk) 21:36, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Kati Agócs cleanup[edit]

I have noticed on the WP COI articles page of April 2015 that you have tagged the Kati Agócs page. I have made some changes to further improve WP:NPOV and I have removed the tag as instructed here. Thank you. Hansi667 (talk) 14:51, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate you taking the time to look into it. :) It is great to have it fixed. - Bilby (talk) 15:07, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Nostradamus article dispute[edit]

Following yours to my User page, here is my latest reply, ijn case you didn't see it on said page:

Thanks for that. Yes, the external links section has been the main concern. Aquillion started by deleting the link to the only site featuring Mario Gregorio's actual facsimiles of Nostradamus's prophecies, without which the whole project falls to the ground. Then he substituted a particularly crass 'Sacred Books' site which, as I pointed out, is riddled with disinformation from beginning to end. Then he questioned my reliability or reputation as a source, until I deluged him with third party references on which he has chosen not to comment. He is still questioning Mario Gregorio's reputability, even though the facsimiles that he is trying to remove are copies of Nostradamus's own editions! And now he is picking to bits the text of what he has only just realised is a Featured Article of eight years' standing. And all that from a Wikipedant who knows next to nothing about Nostradamus, his language, his prophecies, their publishing history or subsequent attempts to interpret them -- and appears not even to have read and understood the Wikirubric which uses terms such as 'generally' and 'common sense'. Frankly, I've had it up to here, and as far as I'm concerned he can use somebody else's research. Best to you, however!
His latest, BTW, is 'Removing external links to blogspot, the yahoo group, and prophecies.it, per my reasoning in talk' -- long after all this has been settled as per the Talk page (q.v.) The man clearly doesn't understand the points at issue (let alone Nostradamus!), such as that the Yahoo group is being referred to not as an authority, but as a piece of information for any readers wiching to take advantage of such a group (and who, unlike him, are not spooked by the word 'Yahoo'!).
In short, he seems determined to pull the page apart in any way that he can, without reference to reason or common sense. In fact I am beginning to suspect that he is a secret 'Nostradamus nut', determined to remove all the factual content he can. Can you help restore some sanity, please?"

--PL (talk) 16:16, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

To understand where he's coming from I'm afraid you're going to need to peruse all our correspondence on the Talk Page. But note especially where it starts (fake site included), and what he's now trying to resurrect in the article. Re his charges against the prophecies.it site, BTW, see this: I suspect he has been fooled by commercial sites pinpointing fake 'problems' and offering to sell him 'solutions' -- if indeed he's not just inventing supposed objections one after the other to try and devalue the article's factual content. --PL (talk) 10:18, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 April 2015[edit]

Removal justifications[edit]

I'm kinda confused how the issue of our previous discussion relates to this current issue. I don't really think what I added falls within the realm of discussing GG because even though there is some mention in these articles of GG, I am not citing them to discuss that, I am citing them as evidence that CalEx is being covered in the news over expelling a booth.

Unfortunately the only reliable sources I could find about the issue incorporate that info. I avoided discussing that info based on the topic ban, but I think that should still allow me to discuss the CalEx issue in broader terms, which I think I did. How much more neutral could I have made it?

Do you think the edit was actually an inaccurate one? Did I make any false claims in it? Would you have removed this if someone else had made it? Ranze (talk) 08:26, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm neutral about including coverage of the issue - it seems minor judging by mainstream press, but, as I am sure you are aware, it is a big deal in GamerGate due to the connection between GamerGate and the booth. Leaving out that connection doesn't mean that the event wasn't related to GG, and it falls under the scope of the topic ban. - Bilby (talk) 15:11, 26 April 2015 (UTC)