|This is Demiurge1000's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Demiurge1000.|
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21|
|This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.|
|I don't need talkback or mail templates. I check my email regularly, and if I post on your page, I watchlist it.|
- 1 Eastern Europe
- 2 Oorah Page
- 3 Teahouse Q & A
- 4 Citations Flag - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovative_Interfaces
- 5 New editor Wikicology
- 6 Misinterpreting each other at the Teahouse
- 7 Sitush block
- 8 About a username
- 9 Startup
- 10 Neutrality Flag on page
- 11 WikiProject Military history coordinator election
- 12 Islamic Human Rights Commision
- 13 Thank you
- 14 Hello and thanks
- 15 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
- 16 Thanks!
- 17 GOCE September 2014 bling
- 18 Books and Bytes - Issue 8
- 19 Re: Your message
- 20 October 2014
- 21 Monument to Wikipedia in Slubice
- 22 Thank you for the welcome
- 23 RFC/U
- 24 User:Zmflavius
I'm afraid I at least am still puzzled. Drmies edits a lot of things, but I have the impression that at the time you gave him the formal notification about discretionary sanctions regarding Eastern European topics, he'd mainly been working on Maup Caransa, and I don't see the connection there to Eastern Europe. Were you thinking of another article, or maybe even got the wrong discretionary sanction? Yngvadottir (talk) 17:31, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
- Morning Yngvadottir. I have been away, but now I have returned to answer your question. Actually, I have not returned solely for that purpose, but anyway, I'm here.
- Engaging in an editing dispute about what wording to use when describing someone being removed to, or killed in, a Nazi concentration camp, is relevant to the EEML discretionary sanctions firstly because most such camps (by the metric I randomly decided to use) were in eastern Europe, secondly because disagreements over such wording have been a feature of problematic editing regarding eastern Europe in the past, and thirdly because discussion of the camps themselves (and removal of people to them from various countries across different parts of Europe) is sometimes a component of problematic editing related to eastern Europe. EEML discretionary sanctions tend to be construed extremely broadly, hence my mentioning the occasion where Switzerland was included in them.
- Despite that, before he archived his talk page, I believe Drmies indicated that he had recently given formal notifications himself for these same discretionary sanctions. If this were the case, the notification I gave him would be unnecessary (as moot, although not Entmoot), and indeed, if I am reading the instructions correctly, on that basis should not have been given.
- Thank you for raising this matter, which I too have found interesting. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for getting back to me - I figured as much. But I think it would have been better to discuss it with him, for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that the Jewish population victimised by the Nazis were more widespread than you may be aware - Amsterdam was indeed a major Jewish centre - and there were many, many camps in many different places, with a variety of labels, in which people died (Labour camps, for instance. A year or two ago I wrote Reichsautobahn.) Rolling it up as an Eastern European issue could also be seen as an affront by the man's descendants - but I don't know that, of course. I hope next time this arises with an experienced editor with no history of bias in this area, you'll discuss it, if only because you might learn something. I can read the sources for that article with effort; Drmies could on request translate the relevant passages and explain the nuances. The upshot of all the arguing appears to have been that we won't have an interesting and salutary DYK about a Jew who got revenge by living well (and had foul taste in architecture). And that Drmies got hurt for doing a good thing. Both make me sad. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Demiurge1000, Thanks for your feedback. I am new to Wikipedia and am trying to figure out the linking/ref/cite options so I can link text within the article to references. Can you please tell what statements seem subjective or biased? I am interested in presenting an objective entry. Thanks much, Notableditor (talk) 20:14, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Teahouse Q & A
Thanks for answering my question. I've already got a new sandbox and have started playing! Writing articles is even more fun than editing, especially when I can do it on a subject that I'd really like to be teaching - if there were any college teaching jobs open in my area for someone without a PhD.Shandong44 (talk) 03:28, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Citations Flag - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovative_Interfaces
This article has a message about inline citations but I have updated a bunch of new citations with links to reputable third party sources. Can that flag be removed? Or how can I fix please?
- I've removed it, and requested a copyedit. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:25, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
New editor Wikicology
Hi Demiurge1000. Did you have a look at the latest article he had written? It seems fairly reliable on first glance but not when you actually start to research it. I normally don't "mentor" editors here and to be honest, I really have no wish to do so either. I don't know what I'm supposed to do now. Is this more your thing perhaps or should someone else take over the situation? I feel very sorry for Wikicology because, as was mentioned by Stalwart, Wikicology is an enthusiastic believer in this whole Wikipedia project and it would be a pity to not find a place for this editor to exhibit whatever talents they have. Unfortunately, writing articles seems more "miss" than "hit". - Takeaway (talk) 23:13, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
- @Takeaway: I haven't had time to look at the article, but I am willing to trust your summary of the situation. This kind of thing is very difficult. As you point out, enthusiasm at this level is important and not something to be thrown away, but there are major difficulties. A very heavy mentoring scheme would work (I have made it work before), but I don't have time to take that on, and there is a serious shortage of people who could or would.
- Incidentally, technically speaking you may be half right; there are non-English languages used within Nigeria, and different parts of the population are likely to be more fluent in those than in English. This doesn't really help much, though; it may be that Wikicology is fluent in the "broken English" that our article on the subject rather insultingly suggests is widespread, but there is no Broken English Wikipedia either. We could perhaps encourage him to concentrate on translating English Wikipedia articles to different Nigerian local languages? But perhaps not for us to say.
- You have been very generous and diligent in helping the situation, but you should probably disengage on Wikicology's talk page because (I haven't looked recently but) there is probably nothing good to come out of that conversation now. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:41, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
- After today's interaction, I wasn't planning on commenting on his talk page any longer. I don't think that there is much more that I can say to him than what has been said already there and on the ANI page. I thank you for expressing your trust in my summary of the whole issue. I wish it were different but unfortunately, things are as they are. Regards, Takeaway (talk) 22:49, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Misinterpreting each other at the Teahouse
I apologize for my words. I chose them poorly. My only meaning was that we should treat people with dignity and courtesy at Wikipedia. I did not make that clear, and it is no one's fault but my own that my comments were not chosen correctly. I didn't mean to imply that YOU were doing anything wrong, or that YOU were boorish or anything like that. Far from it, you're consistently one of the most respectful people here. My only point was that too many people at Wikipedia believe that they can act unprofessionally (and by that I mean boorish rude; and again, not YOU. Just people who are boorish and rude) and treat it like other people's problem. My only meaning of acting professionally is to accord others dignity and courtesy and to treat them in a way that is inviting rather than hostile. I hope that my words this time make my meaning clearer. And again, that we're having this conversation together doesn't mean that I think you are guilty of any of those things. My intent here is to talk with you about the topic, not at you as though you did anything wrong. You didn't. I certainly did, and I am entirely sorry for that. --Jayron32 21:15, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Jayron, thank you for this, it makes me feel a lot better. (I am well aware of how much you help others not just at the Teahouse but also at the Reference Desks.) I have been rather insistent on this topic because I have a problem with the word and how it is (sometimes) used on Wikipedia, and I think my somewhat strident (and in any case tangential) remarks have clashed with your rightly strong feelings about how it is important to act responsibly on Wikipedia. Despite your kind words, I am probably not the very most respectful or polite of people at the Teahouse (maybe I come in the top 20?), and I can certainly be abrasive outside the Teahouse. However, over time I have realised the value the Teahouse has, and I have adapted my earlier reluctant following of the "Teahouse rules", to a rather more willing promotion of its values.
- I'm a little too mechanistic in my approach to such things, but one of the ways I try to keep Wikipedia a little more professional (however one defines the term) is that help desk and Teahouse enquiries and the like should not be lingering two or three days without an answer. This sort of thing makes a big difference to how outsiders perceive how much we care about them - and therefore the likelihood of their involvement or support of Wikipedia. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:44, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
- In reviewing the comment made to Sitush , I can't see how was inflaming or baiting in any way. I don't understand the angry response to it. Perhaps there's some baggage between Demiurge and Sitush of which I am not aware. JoeSperrazza (talk) 13:51, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
- It's a little more complicated than that, and it would not be accurate to say I did not take it seriously. The threat did have a significant chilling effect (in more ways than one), but it didn't have me phoning up the police - which is what one should do if one is in real fear of immediate physical danger.
- I will perhaps have time to expand on that properly at some point, but I ought to say here that, following information relayed to me within the last hour, from my perspective a re-instatement of the block now would no longer serve a preventative purpose. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
About a username
- Egads, I of all people should have spotted that. The tone and volume of his comments eclipsed any thought of a diligent scholar poring over well-worn texts of Cicero, and instead had me assuming some impetuous individual with a witty transposition in the style of User:Ragesoss (not that Sage is impetuous, though). Having "DIE" in big letters as part of a major feature of the user page is an unfortunate coincidence too.
- Thanks, I will go and find out if my comment is still somewhere it can be struck. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:29, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Demiurge1000. You were kind enough to help me with the article that had been written about my company youngStartup Ventures.
I've since put up a lot of information about the company from third party sources on the talk page, but I see that there hasn't been much movement in the content. What can be done about that now? Thank you, Joe Joe Benjamin (talk) 20:09, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Neutrality Flag on page
Hi Demiurge1000, you kindly added a flag on the wikipedia page on myself I just updated, the flag signalling issues with neutrality. If you kindly look at the talk page you will see that the original page had many inaccuracies and I cut it down considerably. I merely edited it to comply with standards. Can we remove this flag? The latest edit that triggered the flag is due to the inline citations I added to comply with the previous flag. It does sound bad to have a flag on neutrality on top of the page, it looks like I created the page for my own benefit and this is not the case really. Let me know if you have any objection on the removal of the flag. Thanks. Damiano (talk) 18:29, 23 September 2014 (GMT) PS Thank you for your quick response, much appreciated. Damiano — Preceding unsigned comment added by Damianobrigo (talk • contribs) 17:21, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Islamic Human Rights Commision
Dear Demiurge1000, I have undid your deletion on the above titled page as it was neutral and had a greater level of neutrality than the previous pages. If you disagree with this please create a new section under the talk section of that page to bring it open to wider debate. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 21:17, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Dear Demiurge1000, THIS IS A NOTICE TO CEASE AND DESIST YOUR EDIT WARRING
Please refer to the three-revert rule states: An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert. Violations of the rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as an edit-warring violation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_warring
The edit that was made is not personal commentary from myself but information given under oath to the home office select committee. It is and will be placed within the UK's national archives and is public record.
Thank you so much Demiurge1000. I really appreciate your effort in making me a better wikipedian. I also thank you for discussing my issue with Jamie Tubers. To be sincere with you, am not really fluent in Nigerian languages, and am just learning to speak it. I understand that there are lots for me to learn here on English wikipedia, I think I have enough time to do so and am ready to learn . Please be my mentor and I won't disappoint you but if you are too busy for that, I will appreciate any experienced editor you can recommend. I know someday, you will be proud of me. Thanks. Wikicology (talk) 20:40, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello and thanks
- Thank you for your persistence! It seems likely the response would be at Wikipedia:Education noticeboard within a few days. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:55, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
|305||3.0||Big Brother 11 (UK) (talk)||2.0||2.0||2.0||2.0||2.0||Add sources|
|1,011||2.0||Kuomintang (talk)||2.0||2.0||2.0||2.0||2.0||Add sources|
|9||2.0||Limavady Grammar School (talk)||0.0||2.0||0.0||2.0||0.0||Add sources|
|4||1.0||Padua College, Melbourne (talk)||0.0||2.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||Add sources|
|226||1.0||Money (Pink Floyd song) (talk)||0.0||2.0||2.0||2.0||0.0||Add sources|
|7||1.0||Wahidin Soedirohoesodo (talk)||0.0||0.0||2.0||2.0||0.0||Add sources|
|32||1.0||Dominican Civil War (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||Cleanup|
|4||1.0||La Maddukelleng (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||2.0||0.0||Cleanup|
|16||1.0||Lionel Bernstein (talk)||0.0||2.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||Cleanup|
|1,944||3.0||James Garner (talk)||2.0||2.0||2.0||2.0||2.0||Expand|
|6||1.0||Béla Zsolt (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||Expand|
|4||1.0||Catholic Party (Indonesia) (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||Expand|
|4||1.0||Chile–Indonesia relations (talk)||0.0||2.0||2.0||2.0||0.0||Unencyclopaedic|
|119||2.0||Indonesia Raya (talk)||0.0||2.0||2.0||2.0||0.0||Unencyclopaedic|
|14||1.0||Dusi Canoe Marathon (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||2.0||0.0||Merge|
|764||1.0||Fully qualified domain name (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||Merge|
|23||2.0||Great Western Trains (talk)||2.0||2.0||0.0||0.0||2.0||Merge|
|5||1.0||Radin Inten II (talk)||0.0||0.0||2.0||2.0||0.0||Wikify|
|1||1.0||Margarita Kozhina (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||Wikify|
|25||1.0||Kennedy Scholarship (talk)||0.0||2.0||2.0||2.0||0.0||Wikify|
|4||1.0||Scholarships for Kids (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||Orphan|
|1||1.0||Annely Akkermann (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||Orphan|
|2||1.0||Richard Constant Boer (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||Orphan|
|13||1.0||Jimmy and Judy (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||Stub|
|9||1.0||Rhodes of Africa (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||Stub|
|5||1.0||Indonesian Cycling Federation (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||2.0||0.0||Stub|
|8||1.0||Robert Kekewich (talk)||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||0.0||Stub|
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:38, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
thank you very much for granting me access to my deleted page! It helped a lot! You can delete the page "vera dik" now.
GOCE September 2014 bling
|Leaderboard Award: 5K articles—5th Place|
|This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Demiurge1000 for copyediting a 5,000-plus-word article during the GOCE September 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations! Miniapolis 16:50, 5 October 2014 (UTC)|
|The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar|
|Thanks for copyediting a total of 11,569 words during the Guild of Copy Editors September drive! All the best, Miniapolis 16:50, 5 October 2014 (UTC)|
Books and Bytes - Issue 8
Re: Your message
You inserted to my talk page standard template of warning in case of removing content. You wrote a message, I should rather edit instead of reverting. I can't agree with You in 100 %. I use Huggle, which is a tool for dealing with vandalism or other unconstructive edits on Wikimedia projects. It is not created to edit pages (although it has got that kind of option), but to patrol recent changes. When I saw, the edit was not made properly (because of resources' syntax) I reverted it (basing on theAGF) and informed author in review summary what to change - that means to use Template:Cite web. That kind of reverts are, if I know the policies, ok. They blocks disabling poorly formated content and inform revison's author what to do (what to improve). So, thank You, for Your edits, but please also understand my opinion. Regards, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 17:47, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm XXN. I noticed that you recently removed some content from TinKode without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! XXN (talk) 22:34, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
- I've struck your templated warning as it's blatantly incorrect. Please read WP:BLP. Then, please act on it in the future. If you do not do so, you may be blocked from editing. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:36, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Monument to Wikipedia in Slubice
Demiurge1000, it's not too late. Słubice is only 1 hour drive from Berlin, one of the busiest air hubs of continental Europe, I'm sure you could catch a flight there. And there's plenty of cheap rail and bus connections between Berlin and Frankfurt (it's right across the river from Słubice, you can actually see Germany from where the monument will stand). Ryanair and Wizzair also fly to Poznań regularly (from Dublin, Bristol, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Liverpool and London, not to mention other places), Słubice is only 2 hours by train from there. You could contact User:Magalia who is going to the ceremony from Poznań. Unfortunately I won't make it there, but I really hope we'll have a chance to meet in person one day.
P.S. I'm trying to push two more articles on historical battles through the
eye of a needle FA process: Battle of Warsaw (1831) and the Warsaw Uprising (1794). I'm pretty sure you're fed up with Polish history articles after editing the article on Radzymin 1920, but just in case I'm wrong I'll leave those two links here. :) //Halibutt 23:30, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the welcome
Serialjoepsycho is currently harvesting diffs with the help of Roscelese for an RFC/U he plans to initiate against me. They are openly discussing me at her Talk page which includes making false allegations.   He publicly stated his intent and purpose for me back in July . I may have made a few newbie mistakes months ago, all minor and of no consequence, but I have always acted in good faith. The template on IPT was a violation of WP:BLPGROUPS because Emerson is inextricably connected to IPT. According to the current BLPN, I'm not alone in calling out the problems. BTW, the Islamophobia template was recently removed by an uninvolved editor who participated in the BLPN discussion Serialjoe initiated. The BLPN remains unresolved.  Serialjoe also initiated an ARB request a few weeks ago hoping to get me topic banned, but the reviewers rejected it. Based on my understanding about RFC/U, at least two editors must have contacted the user on their talk page, or the talk pages involved in the dispute, and tried but failed to resolve the problem., I have no idea what "problem" they're trying to resolve (or create) because if anything, I've been the target not the shooter. His behavior has elevated to the point he made demands on my talk page - referred to them as suggestions, I believe. An uninvolved editor who happened to stop by commented on his behavior.  Shouldn't I be the one initiating the RFC/U?
Thank you for your kind welcome to WP. As my usage of certain WP terminology would indicate, I am a previous editor from the 2009-2011 time period during which time, the Golden age or the silver age or whatever WP community consisted of 30000 active editor/writers etc+ with a nice balance between wikignomes wikifairies wikijanitors and all the long-forgotten terms of a more open and optimistic time. From 2012-2014 (present), I've monitored or occasional IP-edited minor points of grammar or janitorial type tasks without being involved in the community, but the impression that I developed, and which was confirmed by several other old wikifriends and members of the wiki community is the existence now of the 300 core editors plus 2000 "article campers" who monomaniacally protect "their" articles to express their POV. With renewed access to the WP project, I'm concerned that in my first ten edits, I've already encountered another "article camper" User:Zmflavius whose edit history reveals nothing but a continual and relentless, possibly drug-addicted or teenage adderall-ADHD type personality monomaniacal stance of pushing a pro-KMT, pro Chinese-British or Chinese-American POV. His talk space is filled with numerous numerous numerous warnings and official WP advisements against his behaviour, yet before another edit war begins, I was wondering what mechanism there is in place to deal with this problem of the POV camper? This seems to be the general cancer infecting WP in our current late stage, and before all the fireworks all go off, I'd just like to know your general take. Thank you, -Augustabreeze (talk) 05:46, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:YoungStartup_Ventures. Missing or empty