User talk:FeydHuxtable

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Movicons2-hello.gif Welcomebanner.gifA B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10... 100... 200
Fun and interesting pages


Hello, FeydHuxtable, and welcome to Wikipedia! I am Avi15 and I would like to thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Crystal Clear app ksmiletris.png   Introduction
 5    The five pillars of Wikipedia
Crystal package utilities.png   How to edit a page
Crystal khelpcenter.png   Help
Crystal Clear app ktip.png   Tips
Crystal Clear app ksokoban.png   How to write a great article
Crystal Clear app kedit.png   Manual of Style
Nuvola apps konquest.png   Fun stuff...
UncialB-01.png   Be Bold
Face-angel.svg   Assume Good faith
23   Keep cool
Presa de decissions.png   Have an experienced editor adopt you
Symbol neutral vote.svg   Policy on neutral point of view

And here are several pages on what to avoid:

No-spam.png How to not spam
Red copyright.svg How to avoid copyright infringement
Octagon-warning.svg What Wikipedia is not
Stop hand.svg Make sure not to get blocked, which should be no problem after reading this

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), which are produced by clicking on the Button sig.png button; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Also, I think that you might want to join the the adopt-a-user project, where advanced editors can guide you in your first experiences here; so check it out if you want. Again, welcome! 


You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try.

Fix spelling and grammarLearn how

More...
Fix wikilinksLearn how

More...
Update with new informationLearn how

More...
Expand short articlesLearn how

More...
Check and add referencesLearn how

More...
Fix original research issuesLearn how

More...
Improve lead sectionsLearn how

More...
Add an imageLearn how
More...
Translate and clean upLearn how

More...
Click here to reply to this message.

This welcome message was sent by Avi15 at 13:34, August 3, 2008 (UTC)

Contents

Response to Hunger in the United States[edit]

Thank you for your support in my plans to revise the page. I want to first say I am sorry if I offended you. I did not mean to slam the page and was simply wanting to share my thoughts. Please note that I'm in the process of making changes, so if you see something that is not perfect please don't immediately delete a significant portion of my work. If you have any suggestions or comments feel free to share them with me. I really do want to help improve the page and hopefully draw more traffic to it ~~MBouchein — Preceding unsigned comment added by MBouchein (talkcontribs) 04:20, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Archiving: I tend to delete content on this page after about a month. If you prefer a lasting record Im always happy to come to your talk page.

Big welcome to the article rescue squadron[edit]

Hi, FeydHuxtable, welcome to the Article Rescue Squadron! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying and rescuing articles that have been tagged for deletion. Every day hundreds of articles are deleted, many rightfully so. But many concern notable subjects and are poorly written, ergo fixable and should not be deleted. We try to help these articles quickly improve and address the concerns of why they are proposed for deletion. This covers a lot of ground and your help is appreciated!

If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you.

And once again - Welcome! Ikip (talk) 19:26, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Ikip/89 -- full list of rescuable AfD discussions


FeydHuxtable, if you need any help at all, please let me know. Happy to see you as a new member! Ikip (talk) 19:26, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome! Im impressed with how you guys operate. ARS seems to be the place to be and to be seen at :-) FeydHuxtable (talk) 10:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Hunger in the United Kingdom, FeydHuxtable!

Wikipedia editor Theopolisme just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Looks good, thanks for the new article! Have you considered a WP:DYK?

To reply, leave a comment on Theopolisme's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Council[edit]

Yes, probably a non-starter. OK...maybe no "probably" LOL! Funny thing though. Right after I wrote that I noticed that someone was proposing a "committee" for BLP issues. Who knows what will be accepted or rejected on Wikipedia these days. Just trying to get new editors to understand COI and other more basic concepts of policy and guideline seem wasted on deaf ears these days. So many are here just to make a point or fix a perception of their company or as actual paid marketing staff.--Amadscientist (talk) 20:00, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I never really attended an Occupy GA, until I helped to organize a very short lived version of an OWS demonstration in my own town. Our group considered the fact that we lived in our town and owned homes and worked in the area to be our "occupation". We didn't protest, we demonstrated and we actually worked with the local authorites to insure we were not doing anything that would put a single person in harms way. But...it fell apart because of the very things you mention and all due to a single person that refused to accept the consensus others.--Amadscientist (talk) 20:39, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps its a common feature of quasi anarchist communities. Jimbo's idea to start Wikipedia was so timely, fitting so well with the wider need of internet users, and so well protected by positional factors from rivals, that the project survives and even thrives despite these issues. Although probably a lot less efficiently and with much more unnecessary distress caused than if we had good old fashioned hierarchy, lol. It might even be better if the community doesnt fix RfA, as it will force the Foundation & Jimbo to act, setting a useful precedent. Thanks for the chat, its been most interesting! FeydHuxtable (talk) 20:54, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
I agree. One last classical analogy...Rome began as a Monarchy, became a Republic and then went back to singular rule...which then attempted to resurrect a dual leadership that split the empire. Hmmmmmmmmm. Wikipedia I and Wikipedia II perhaps. LOL! (I wonder how close to reality that will turn out to be? I'm no oracle but....)--Amadscientist (talk) 22:38, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Maybe Wikipedia needs a King. Someone to take Jimbo's place. Someone with a far-ranging vision that doesn't get stuck in the mud of drama. Winston Churchill-like. Protective to a fault. A final arbiter. Completely trusted by the Wikipedia Society. Some enemies, sure, but would see them as just a pack of wild un-trained dogs nipping at his/her heals. ```Buster Seven Talk 13:34, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Shadow banking system[edit]

Hi there, Feyd. I left a reply at Talk:Shadow banking system with a suggestion to add some sources, if you're game. I wish to avoid direct editing, but I'd also like to avoid being annoying! Hope to see you back there when you have a moment. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI)

Hey, I appreciate your update on the page over the weekend. I can leave alone the request on which we don't see eye-to-eye, and I've actually got some additional improvements in the works. I've just posted a request to update the first, fourth and fifth paragraphs of the article's first section: mostly adding citations, but also making a few changes for clarity. Would you mind looking at them? Thanks, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 15:37, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for taking the time to participate in my RfA. I hope that I will be able to improve based on the feedback I received and become a better editor. AutomaticStrikeout 22:53, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Andy Haldane[edit]

Firstly, for info only, I've plagiarised your wikiotter. Re Haldane, the article needs expanding. Any chance of a good photo? I'm familiar with uploading -as I suspect you are. Regards JRPG (talk) 13:14, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Nice work on Credit theory of money[edit]

Hi Feyd, Just want to say that you've done a bang up job with Credit theory of money. I've just read through it and am really impressed with what a nice article it's turned into (especially considering the conspiracy theory inspired malarkey that used to be there). Great job! LK (talk) 06:21, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks LK! The kind words are most appreciated, especially coming from your good self. Ive been finding the concept useful, to think Id not have paid it much attention if it hadnt been for the Colonel. Quite a coincidence you should mention this now, have some interesting RL work going down involving this. It might all come to nothing depending on events next week, so wont bother you for now, but if things go as planned I might email you as I suspect youd find it pleasing to know. Thanks again. FeydHuxtable (talk) 15:12, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Simone Weil[edit]

Thanks for your comment Feyd, I'm glad you found it useful. Whether Weil would have eventually been sent to France is debatable (inevitably some recruits were weeded out during the training courses) but SOE did send some pretty unusual agents into France. (SOE2009 (talk) 17:43, 7 November 2012 (UTC))

A barnstar for you![edit]

Editors Barnstar Hires.png The Editor's Barnstar
For Chonga. Great work--you put me to shame. Drmies (talk) 15:41, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I agree, excellent expansion efforts and quality improvement work. :) — Cirt (talk) 18:25, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much[edit]

Feyd, thanks very much for your comment about my research, here. It's really most appreciated. Thanks again, — Cirt (talk) 23:14, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Feyd...[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, FeydHuxtable. You have new messages at Northamerica1000's talk page.
Message added 10:54, 14 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, FeydHuxtable. 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.Northamerica1000(talk) 13:02, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Happy Bobs 'yer Uncle Day[edit]

Happy Bob's 'yer uncleThanksgiving, FeydHuxtable!
As we Pilgrims sit down at the dinner table and say our thanks, I would like to give thanks to you for your wonderful contributions and wish you a very happy "Bob's 'yer Uncle day" or what ever your next Holiday is in Jolly Old England. May your turkey or venison or goose or ham or beast of choice satiate you until next year! TRA! Buster Seven Talk 17:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)}
A traditional Thanksgiving dinner.

Shadow banking system[edit]

Hi there, Feyd. It's been awhile since you looked at a previous request of mine for the Shadow banking system article and I've made another couple of requests there, one of which has been resolved and another that has not yet received any reply. I wondered, given your interest in the topic, if you'd be willing to consider the latest change that I've proposed for an update adding citations and further context to the Shadow banks' role in the financial system and their modus operandi section. My request is here on the Shadow banking system Talk page. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 20:48, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks so much[edit]

Feyd, thanks very much for the Barnstar over at Wikimedia Commons, I really appreciate it! I hope you're doing well! Thanks again, — Cirt (talk) 07:58, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

You're most welcome Cirt, hope all is well with you too. FeydHuxtable (talk) 14:21, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar'd[edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
For coming back to help out on Shadow banking system and especially for the thought and energy you put into reviewing my contributions, I am extraordinarily grateful. WWB Too (Talk · COI) 22:12, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Chonga[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Woohoo! Drmies (talk) 03:25, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Information[edit]

I noticed your username commenting at an Arbcom discussion regarding civility. An effort is underway that would likely benifit if your views were included. I hope you will append regards at: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questionnaire Thank you for considering this request. My76Strat (talk) 08:36, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation. I'll give it some thought and maybe contribute in the next week or two. FeydHuxtable (talk) 17:43, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome![edit]

It's great to see how active the community seems to be! Tpafla82 (talk) 18:14, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Brands[edit]

Fredmeyer edit 1.jpg
Hello, FeydHuxtable.

You are invited to join WikiProject Brands, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of brands and brand-related topics.
To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:44, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas FeydHuxtable[edit]

Happy holidays![edit]

Honningkager.jpg

Hello Feyd: Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia and friendly disposition, and have a happy holiday season! Northamerica1000(talk) 12:35, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Holiday cheer[edit]

Christmas tree.svg Holiday Cheer
Michael Q. Schmidt my talk page is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings.

Happy Holidays to you and yours[edit]

I've run out of cards and all the stores are closed. Have a very Merry Holiday Season and a wonderful and peaceful New Year. ```Buster Seven Talk 15:02, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

2013[edit]

Happy New Year 2013.jpg Have an enjoyable New Year!
Hello Feyd: Thank you for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 15:13, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

An invitation for you![edit]

Featured article collaboration.svg
Hello, FeydHuxtable. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's article for improvement. If you're interested in participating, please add your name to the list of members. Happy editing! Northamerica1000(talk) 10:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Feyd[edit]

You should drop me an email some time, we should get to know one another. best, —Tim /// MutantPop@aol.com /// Carrite (talk) 01:58, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Please take a look at this article[edit]

I reviewed your vast experience and wanted to contact you about helping to resolve a dispute. I'm being teamed up against by a group of self-avowed libertarians. I don't care that they are libertarians (or if you are) except for the fact they are using their ideology to skew the Koch Industries article. When I post positive things about Koch, they don't blink an eye, but if I dare put up anything critical, it gets deleted and frowned upon without balance. I'm trying to round up some disinterested third party input so I'm not getting steamrolled by biased editors. My goal is to make the article more informative and encyclopedic and that's it. Here's the current critical part of the Talk Page. Thank you. Cowicide (talk) 20:48, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I see it's been just yourself versus 4 editors who all seem to be either Libertarians or conservatives. But from a quick look, wikipedia policy is broadly on their side, and the articles not too far off from NPOV (something that can be very different from the truth). So sorry but I'd advise disengaging. I'll try to give you a more detailed and helpful reply later. FeydHuxtable (talk) 08:59, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
I was expecting to post some advice on the advantages of assuming good faith when dealing with Libertarians. But checking your recent interactions , it looks like my advice would be unnecessary. Im not up for getting involved directly with KB articles, but if you wanted to know my general thoughts on the matter I'd be happy to either email or continue this discussion on your talk page. FeydHuxtable (talk) 16:40, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
(stalker) I was just passing by when I saw this. Sad to say, without looking, I was sure I knew who at least one of the editors was. ......I just looked........I was right. You would be better off trying to "herd cats".```Buster Seven Talk 01:37, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
Very true Buster. You remind me of an article I've been looking at about honest politicians. If there's a task that makes even coordinating wikipedians look easy, its trying to forge consensus with political activists, who tend to make even the average editor look softly spoken and unopinionated. Any many think politicians are incompetent as they often find it far harder to get things done than say in a well run work place. No wonder many turn into habitual liers, as without that or supernatural charm or force of personality they might as well be farming felines. FeydHuxtable (talk) 07:48, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) case evidence phase closing[edit]

This is a reminder to all parties as well as to those who have submitted evidence, that the evidence phase of this case closes at 00:00 UTC on 23 February 2013, which is in just over seven hours from now. For the Arbitration Committee --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 16:47, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Homeless kitten[edit]

User:Occono just gave me a kitten but, as I'm allergic to cats, perhaps it will be more welcome here :) Warden (talk) 21:20, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

It certainly is Colonel. It wants to watch over my talk for a while, and then it can find a permanent home over at kitten central. FeydHuxtable (talk) 21:24, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Iris cat.jpg

April 2, 2013, Kitten award for Kgrad[edit]

Thanks for the good words ! It's nice to know that my editing is appreciated. Having grown up in a grammar-conscious house, I enjoy improving any text. Kgrad Kgrad (talk) 00:38, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Breakfast[edit]

Breakfast!.jpg
Hello, FeydHuxtable.

You are invited to join WikiProject Breakfast, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of breakfast-related topics.
To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 17:32, 6 April 2013 (UTC)


Thanks North. Im not usually up for joining new projects as you know, but as this one seems to have been created by one of most impressive model editors, I'll probably make an exception. I'd like to write an article on Breakfast Clubs, to complement our coverage of other food aid facilities like Food Banks and Soup Kitchens. Will join the project once I get a few hours to research and write it. Thanks again for the invite! FeydHuxtable (talk) 22:02, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello Feyd: Thanks for the kind words, and for signing on with the project. When your article is published, please feel free to post it at the New articles section at the project page. Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 08:40, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Editor of the Week[edit]

Editor of the week barnstar.svg Editor of the Week
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week, for willingness to help other users out by editing and simply being friendly. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

FeydHuxtable (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is a man of Peace, a WikiOtter. He does not have an abundance of edits but the ones he has are purposeful. He has created half a dozen articles on noted economist John Maynard Keynes and has worked extensively on others. Always respectful to his fellow editors, Editor Huxtable is a true example of what a collaborator should be. This is an editor that obviously works at the hard choice of resisting drama and focuses instead on the article. Insightful, reasonable, and a healthy partner in the editing process. I am proud to nominate him for Editor of the Week. ```Buster Seven Talk

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Recipient user box}}

Thanks again for your efforts! Go Phightins! 18:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


Project editor retention.svg
Editor of the week.svg
Otters.jpg
FeydHuxtable
FeydHuxtable is a WikiOtter
 
Editor of the Week
for the week beginning April 28, 2013
With us since 2008, FeydHuxtable is an editor who prefers to stay under the radar and away from the drama. He believes that Nothing lasting is founded on force and never forgets that there are real people behind the usernames who edit Wikipedia. He calls himself a WikiOtter, and is willing to help other editors by being friendly. He has been with the Article Rescue Squadron since 2009 and has been responsible for rescuing many articles from AfD. He is a true example of a friendly and hardworking editor all of us should emulate.
Recognized for
Work at Article Rescue Squadron
Notable work(s)
Good article Currency war
Nomination page


  • A sincere thank you for the gift of your time here. One of the nice things about the Editor of the Week program is it gives me a chance to go through and check out the contributions of a recognized editor, and what I found was highly constructive edits and sound reasoning in discussion. It isn't about quantity of edits, it is about quality, something you obviously already "get". Glad to see you recognized for your dedication over the years. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 23:27, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
  • What I said in my nomination is so very true. I am proud to call you a Wiki-friend. ```Buster Seven Talk 23:36, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you for being such a great editor to Wikipedia!! :) Congratulations! You deserve it! TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:11, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
~blushing~ Thanks all! I really appreciate this award. Buster, thanks especially for the very kind nomination, and I'm equally honored to count you as a wiki friend too. I'm not sure I deserve to be called a man of Peace, but it's nice to hear :-) . FeydHuxtable (talk) 08:17, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
In considering the matter, I notice that Feyd styles himself a WikiOtter, which seems appropriate. Myself, I'm more of a WikiDragon and it is said that "...a WikiDragon and a WikiOtter working in collaboration could potentially form a powerful team that could accomplish nearly any goal". There's even a meeting place to bring them together. By coincidence, I have just created a fresh topic which Feyd might wish to playfully explore. This combines economics with biological insight, rather like the WikiFauna concept. And IIRC, Feyd is quite tall too — it all makes sense...
Warden (talk) 11:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Colonel, it's certainly an honor to have worked together with yourself as a team, saving many valuable articles from destruction. If only I had the heroic character needed to venture into AfD more often. It is quite a conincidence about the your new creation - the Lucy Kellaway piece was one of the first articles I read on Monday, as it was featured on the front page of the FT. I was glad to read that for business success going bald is seen as a positive, lol. FeydHuxtable (talk) 07:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
  • As a mark of awesomeness, you also get to keep this cool box you see on the right, and have bragging rights to display it anywhere you want :)
You also get your own place in our very own Hall of Fame.
[Some technical problems with the box still remain, but we promise to sort them out ASAP ;) ]
Cheers,
TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:03, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Congratulations on EOTW! A special note...you are the first recipient to receive this since this went onto the community portal! Thanks for helping out!--Amadscientist (talk) 21:45, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks again all. It's especially good to know about the community portal. I hope it raises awareness of the mighty Article Rescue Squad, a project that contains several editors who are much better model wikipedians than me. This editor of the week initiative has to be the single greatest wiki invention since barnstars, if not since ever! FeydHuxtable (talk) 07:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey Feyd[edit]

You mention several editors who are much better model wikipedians than me. Why dont you pick one or two, do a little research, and nominate someone. Take it from me, it is truly a good feeling to acknowledge a behind-the-scenes editor. TRA! ```Buster Seven Talk 12:09, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I know it Buster. In fact I couldn't agree more that the behind the scenes / social side of Wikipedia is both very rewarding and vital to our mission. Im glad I come across as a content builder, but I've never been totally focused on it. One of my first edits back in 2008 was to join the kindness campaign. I was lucky that one of the first editors I encountered was the phenomenal Chris the speller , which set a positive tone at the start of my Wikipedia experience. I've since been frequently awarding barnstars to good editors, and last year I wrote an essay on the value of positive recognition. Im not sure about nominating any of my fellow squad members though. The problem would be that while I think they're brilliant, others find them controversial. I not sure how I could write a nom that would be both sincere and non provocative. I'd hate to be the one to bring division to your lovely and peaceful part of Wikipedia! I do have some ideas about how to ensure ARS heroes receive the recognition they deserve, but I plan to wait until the conditions are right. Dont want to risk doing more harm than good. FeydHuxtable (talk) 13:52, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
I agree on both counts. I was extrememly lucky to have Alastair Haines as a mentor who set me on a focussed and happy Wiki-career. Early on I tried to create a squad of Wiki-knights that would go around defending the down-trodden masses. ITs still a good idea and I may ask you one day to Join (SHHHHH!. Its a Secret!) Also, my long time WikiFriend Editor Writegeist is a true character that no one else understands. I would love to give him an EotW Aaward but he would not get past the guards at the gate. Controversial and willing to stick his neck into a noose to get a laff.```Buster Seven Talk 17:44, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Writegeist certainly seems to be quite a character :-) . FeydHuxtable (talk) 10:40, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, and have some pierogi![edit]

07559 pierogi ruskie, sanok.jpg Pierogi Award
Thanks for your support of my RfA. It didn't succeed this time, but that's no reason not to have some nice pierogi. Cheers, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:25, 3 May 2013 (UTC)


A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
A barnstar for your creation of the new School breakfast club article. Thanks for working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of breakfast- and school-related topics. Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 04:16, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, FeydHuxtable. You have new messages at Northamerica1000's talk page.
Message added 12:59, 18 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Northamerica1000(talk) 12:59, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Northamerica1000's talk page. Message added by Northamerica1000(talk) 13:54, 18 May 2013 (UTC).

Long time no see...[edit]

...hope you're doing well. Drmies (talk) 16:07, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Oslo breakfast[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you :-)[edit]

Thank you Feyd, haha, I remember it back when I review the article history and saw Northamerica1000 contribution to rescue it from deletion. You and him are a very great rescuer editors! :-) — иz нίpнόp ʜᴇʟᴘ! 23:07, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Hunger topics[edit]

Per your idea creating a Wikipedia portal based upon topics related to hunger, here's some links I located. While you have likely seen some of these, perhaps you haven't seen them all. Wikipedia has a great deal of coverage relating to this important topic, as evidenced below.

It appears that there are many more Wikipedia articles available. Again, as time allows, I can assist in the development of a portal to cover this under-reported and vitally crucial topic. Sincerely, Northamerica1000(talk) 07:21, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks ever so much for this North, you're right I didn't know about all those articles. Im not expecting to have a clear couple of hours to work on this for the next 7 days, but should do the following weekend. There's no deadline, but Im going to set myself a target of cop June 9th to create the portal, or at minimum, to post on my talk or subpage the full info you advised per this diff. FeydHuxtable (talk) 08:00, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for replying! Here's a few more pages that are useful:
 – Northamerica1000(talk) 02:05, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

KW block length[edit]

The discussion at this thread is about a single edit, which, unless I missed something, has nothing to do with RfA. I accept that an editors complete history is relevant to determining the appropriate block length for this edit, but I think it is an abuse of process to propose anything related to RfA in this thread. If someone wants to create an RfC, which can cover the waterfront, they should do so, but using this one edit to propose remedies unrelated to the original incident is not something I think should happen.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 00:04, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

For me there's a strong relationship with RfA. If you read the overall thread, 'Request for Adminship' / RfA was mentioned about 10 times prior to the problematic edit. Although I don't think KW is helpful at RfA, I've no strong desire to see him topic banned, his presence might hasten the radical reform that process needs. I made the proposal as a sort of compromise solution, as I'd hate to see him remain indeffed. As I implied, KW is an all too rare scholar, and I like him due to our shared interest in topics like Simone Weil, universal reconciliation, and his defense of a certain excellent but sometimes misunderstood editor.
Maybe I was being pessimistic, but prior to my comment it seemed there was strong endorsement for an indeff. A community consensus for an indeff can be effectively a permaban, even when some say "indeff doesnt have to mean infinite". I couldnt defend KW by making light of the comment, as I did think it was extremely OTT,the sort of thing that drives editors away, or at least discourages essential intergenerational collaboration and mentoring. Anyhow, while I can't agree with you at all here, its good some are unequivocally taking KW's side , and thanks for the comment. FeydHuxtable (talk) 08:26, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
You bring up a good point I glossed over, that the block and subsequent block duration discussion was not a standalone thread but a subthread of the iban discussion. I'm not a fan of ibans imposed in this way, so while I looked at the earlier material, I didn't study it, and didn't appreciate that it involved RfA that much. That complicates the situation.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 11:56, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Indeed. Im gutted to see the indef its still in place. At least the AN was closed in such a way that Keifer can easily get the block lifted if he makes a commitment to take care to avoid the appearance of making such insinuations again. FeydHuxtable (talk) 22:39, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Portal:Hunger relief[edit]

Portal:Hunger relief updated. Scroll down and view the categories and topics sections. It's a start. Cheers, peace, Northamerica1000(talk) 13:27, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much North. Great selection of articles, all of those are either examples of hunger relief or highly relevent. A shame some of them are only stubs or have unsightly tags, but as you say, it's a great start! :-) FeydHuxtable (talk) 13:37, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Workmanship[edit]

I was musing about barn raising in another discussion recently. Here's a barnstar for yours too:

Order-of-the-Red-Star.jpg The Workers' Barnstar
Awarded for outstanding workmanship. Warden (talk) 15:18, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

This week's articles for improvement - 22 July 2013 to 28 July 2013[edit]

This week's article for improvement is:

Tourism in the Caribbean

San Andrés Island Colombia.JPG

A beach on the island of San Andrés, a tourist destination in the Caribbean


Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Vote for future TAFI selections.

posted by Northamerica1000(talk) 12:22, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


Thank you![edit]

Just want to say a big thank you for giving Occupy (book) its GA review! Much appreciated! Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:02, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Invention[edit]

Pod lípou návrhovou cs znak.svg
Hello, FeydHuxtable.

You are invited to join WikiProject Invention, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of inventions and invention-related topics.
To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:05, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind reply at my talk page, and happy editing! Northamerica1000(talk) 06:58, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool update[edit]

Hey FeydHuxtable. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 22:09, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Clarification[edit]

I provided some of the sources cited on Talk:Bradley_Manning/October_2013_move_request, but not all of them. Josh Gorand (talk) 10:49, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Evidence phase open - Manning naming dispute[edit]

Dear FeydHuxtable.

This is just a quick courtesy notice. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 19, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Seddon talk 23:40, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: Simone Weil[edit]

Ti ringrazio, ma il merito è soprattutto di MLWatts. È stato lui a capire quali sono i criteri adatti per caricare alcune immagini di Simone Weil su Commons. Speriamo che almeno queste non vengano cancellate. :-) Ciao --Spinoziano (talk) 16:16, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the barnstar you awarded me! I'm glad the pictures I uploaded to Commons were helpful for many articles in different languages... making sure they were out of copyright took some doing, but it was worth it. Cheers, --M.L.WattsWatts up? 11:34, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Bradley Manning/October 2013 move request[edit]

Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:28, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Kinetic architecture[edit]

Dear Feyd, I understand your point and will find the best way for Jose Leonidas Mejia's contributions to be included at the article. A blog is not enough and I agree. But I will insert the link on Arkinetic House, that Jose Mejia invented as one of his contributions to kinetic Architecture. Thanks again and see you around. kitaro —Preceding undated comment added 18:01, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Dear respectable Mr. Feyd Huxtable, Please give me a hand on a revised editing at Kinetic Architecture as I added again the following paragraph to the Historical view point, so you can see my grammar and make possible the content of this editing to be part of the whole article.You did a nice change on some words in September 2013 and would like if you approved my suggested editing to that portion:

History ..... In 1989, Architect Jose Leonidas Mejia from Columbia, did improved the concept in a deep application. He experimented with multiple displacement of the structure to make the building to transform every day with different shapes. Mr. Mejia is working on an experimental project he called "The Arkinetic House", which is feed by renewable energy sources as Biomimicy is a concept that he says is relevant to imitate nature into architectural designs. http://kinetic-architecture-jose-l-mejia.blogspot.com/2010/02/kinetic-architecture-of-jose-leonidas.html kitaro

Your opinion is valued at WikiProject Breakfast[edit]

Please see Want to be a guinea pig for Flow?. XOttawahitech (talk) 14:44, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Changes to Energetically Modifed Cement Page[edit]

Dear Feyd:

I have been editing the Energetically modified cement page since Jono2013's sad demise. Jono2013 has not returned since he collapsed in May.

I am writing to you because, having read certain entries, you had an insight into "self-healing" so I thought you might find the EMC page interesting. I have spent entire weekend adding a section on pozzolanic chemistry, also with a short sub-section on EMCs' self-healing (autogenous effects). It is all fully-referenced and you may find it interesting.

Also, you may find some of the papers mentioned in the autogenous section regarding Hagia Sofia, very interesting.

On account of Jono2013's work the page was rated a "B" by the Chemistry portal. I have done a lot of work since, and want to drive that rating higher. I think you are the type of person who will "appreciate" the full enormity of the requirements for writing a decent page on applied material sciences, the implications of the subject-matter of article, and also the "multi-disciplinary" approach needed in order to fully capture matters in the article.

I.E., I think it is already a very good page but you may have thoughts.

I also plan to write about EMC Activation itself. This will require a deeper analysis of mechanical activation theories, which are not fully understood. Then again, 200 years since its advent, and Portland Cement's role in concrete formation is not fully understood either.

Kind regards 213.66.81.80 (talk) 08:14, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

God jul på dig!
Hello Feyd!

Thank you for your message and kind offer. I am sorry I have not been able to respond but I have been very busy especially with xmas approaching. In Sweden we have it one day earlier than in UK and so it has been busy busy busy. I have not been able to contact Jono. I don't know what happened there but if I do manage to hear from him I will be sure to pass on your kind messages.

Regarding your thoughts, well I am going to be away in the mountains here in Sweden (no internet!) for at least until after the New Year so I would not want you to ruin your xmas break working on EMC!

Why don't we "re-convene" in New Year sometime? By all means if you have a suggestion for the intro section to the page, then why not drop it on my talk page and we can have a play with it together before posting it live? I will get back to you as soon as I can but I do not know when that will be as in the new year I must travel to China in first full week back and I do not want to be accused of using multiple addresses and get blocked. So whenever you feel like it -if you feel like it- have a go some time in the New Year and let's take it from there!

Thank you to you once again and kind thoughts with you and your family during the festive period.

God jul och ett gott nytt år! mvh 213.66.81.80 (talk) 22:08, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas[edit]

Santaclausjf.JPG Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and yours. ```Buster Seven Talk 19:13, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year FeydHuxtable![edit]

Fireworks in Jaén (cropped).jpg
Happy New Year!
Hello FeydHuxtable:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 03:12, 1 January 2014 (UTC)


Peace sign.svg


Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, FeydHuxtable. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Breakfast#Are_we_ready_to_Flow_here.3F_News_and_a_request_for_confirmation.
Message added Ottawahitech (talk) 16:19, 3 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disambiguation link notification for February 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Injustice, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Boilerplate (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:59, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Hunger in the United Kingdom[edit]

Thank you for creating this article. I've added the "Europe topics" template at Hunger_in_the_United_Kingdom#External_links; can you believe your article is the first article on famines in a European country? Through I wonder if the Category:Hunger and Category:Famines may not overlap; I've written Famines in Austrian Galicia a while ago. I wonder if articles discussing hungers and famines in a given country shouldn't be renamed to a certain standard, i.e. what do you think about renaming your article to Famines in the United Kingdom? (If you reply here please WP:ECHO me, thanks). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

@User:Piotrus I might have supported your RfA again if I could have got a nice kitten like everyone else. The rename you suggest is out of the question, over 95% of the article, and over 95% of the sources, are about hunger not famines. I shouldn't have to explain the difference between hunger and famine to a professor of your obvious talents and knowledge. If someone like you rushes about the wiki making random suggestions without taking the time to assess situations first, you run the risk of being annoying or even coming across as a troll, as per some of the diffs on your RfA. A shame as to me you come across as someone of the highest potential ( I don't just mean on Wikipedia). Many would respond to the hazing you've had at RfA by becoming more cynical and perhaps embittered. But perhaps you'll be courageous enough for a little painful introspection, and come out with less ego and so much more ability to read (and change) situations. FeydHuxtable (talk) 00:30, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Your thoughtful hazing here is noted, and added to my ongoing introspection. Thank you for the constructive elements found within. Cheers, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

New article[edit]

Hello Feyd: Here's a new one I created today, feel free to improve it if interested: List of public house topics. Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 13:25, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much for that North, it looks great. I was just checking in and don't have time for any more wiki work for a while, so just pinging pub loving editors @User:Andrew Davidson and @User:Edwardx as they might like to appreciate/ work on it too. FeydHuxtable (talk) 13:33, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
It's all good. Thanks for taking a look, and hope all's going well for you and yours in your part of the world. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:34, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Citadel spread[edit]

Hello there Feyd! – Per your interest in hunger relief topics, check out and feel free to improve the new Citadel spread article. NorthAmerica1000 13:36, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2014[edit]

Hi Feyd. In case you are not aware, there is an upcoming campaign to improve coverage of LGBT-related topics on Wikipedia, culminating with an international edit-a-thon on June 21. See Wiki Loves Pride 2014 for more information. If you are interested, you might consider creating a page for a major city (or cities!) near you, with a list of LGBT-related articles that need to be created or improved. This would be a tremendous help to Wikipedia and coverage of LGBT culture and history. Thanks for your consideration, and please let me know if you have any questions! --Another Believer (Talk) 16:29, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Data doubling[edit]

I was interested in your 12 hours quote. The ref you gave in turn referred to an IBM document, designed to sell IBM services, written in 2006, that said "it is predicted that" data will double every 11 hours, with no reference (or mention of the Internet of things). Of course, as you will be aware, doubling every 12 hours is an increase of a thousand fold every 5 days, or a billion-billion-fold every month, so the claim is ludicrous on its face. If you have any further information on where this claim originated, though, I'd be interested to know. All the best: Rich Farmbrough21:46, 16 June 2014 (UTC).

Hi Rich. No, I don't have further info on the IBM claim. I agree it seems unlikely the 12 hour rate could be sustained, on reflection perhaps I should have not have included that claim as it's not necessary to the main point about exponential growth. Was a little excited to see Idot had finally (IMO) cracked the riddle about the forces driving the death spiral across all the different language wikipedias. If you're interested in this sort of thing, then in case you didn't already see it, the recent cicso report about data growth over the next few years is much more believable. Here's a nice summary with reference to Internet of things. All the best to you too. FeydHuxtable (talk) 04:44, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

I noticed an old comment of yours...[edit]

...at an AfD someone linked to, and I just wanted to drop by and say that I admire your position regarding BLPs of folks who don't want one. I don't know how popular a position it is, but IMO it's a kind and decent one, and I just wanted to tip my hat to you. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 18:03, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Can't believe Im being thanked for a delete vote! For what it's worth it's still my view that the subject's preference should be decisive in case of borderline and even intermediate notability. Some very moral editors seem to take the opposite view, so I guess there must be complexities Im not seeing. Thanks for the appreciation! FeydHuxtable (talk) 15:53, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject TAFI[edit]

Today's Article For Improvement star.svg
Hello, FeydHuxtable. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's articles for improvement. Feel free to nominate an article for improvement at the project's Nominated articles page. Also feel free to contribute to !voting for new weekly selections at the project's talk page. If interested in joining, please add your name to the list of members. NorthAmerica1000 16:39, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

We're back baby[edit]

[1] shall we rework the article? (for other stuff too)Lihaas (talk) 12:21, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Keep it comings.Lihaas (talk) 20:18, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Are you seeing the yen? talk about a currency war..From 79 to 113 in about less than 5 years? that's almost a 40% depreciation!Lihaas (talk) 19:18, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
WE AINT don't yet...Lihaas (talk) 10:35, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Halloween cheer![edit]

RfA[edit]

Hi Feyd: Since you're interested in the RfA process, a matter of note is that several people who contributed to my first RfA (RfA1) in early November 2012 were later blocked for various reasons or even banned from Wikipedia. I'm interested in learning your opinion/perspective regarding all of this.

Meantime, I continue to perform in the management of AfD discussions, including closing discussions, relisting discussions, adding deletion sorting, managing AfD logs, etc. with absolute objectivity and precision, and have never been blocked. I find the irony of some of this to be slightly humorous, but only ever so slightly (e.g. being opposed by some as not being competent by those who were later found to be incompetent per Wikipedia processes). What would you think? NorthAmerica1000 12:50, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey North. I find it much too tragic to see much comedy value - as said before I think you have the qualities to be one of the best admins ever. (This is not to say I think you'd be good in the even more advanced roles. You're too peaceful a person to be much of a tactician, and an Arbritator needs good tactical awareness.)
Other than KW and Automatic, Im not familiar with those accounts, but in the general case I did say even five years ago that serial opposers seem to especially despise friendly and helpful candidates. So for that reason it was not a big surprise your first RfA had so much opposition. I especially exempt good Kiefer from this criticism. We had quite a few things in common, I think he was an excellent chap for the most part, we even talked off wiki about a possible meetup in Sweden, as I sometimes visit there. Must admit though he could sometimes be rather aggressive, and did have high standards for RfA. I remember he always used to label even Kudpung's very moderate reform project as "RfA deform". AutomaticStrikeout is quite different - Id say he is a very good natured person, but way too young to have the tactical awareness to understand RfA. Not a good nominator for you at all. Spartaz on the other hand would be perfect, and now is still a good opportunity if you wanted to take the risk. Bit of a shame you don't want anyone talking to TParis, although you did give good reasons not to to Stalwart. I was thinking months back that if it was possible to talk to TParis face to face, he could probably be talked out of any false perceptions he might have about you. So I kept checking the wikimania attendance list to see if he was coming, as then I'd have made a point of going. Ah well that's in the past now. I think there is a chance a 2nd RfA would succeed even if Paris decides to attack. And he may decide not to on his own. I've never understood why he attacked your first, before that I'd perceived him to be a man of honor. And on paper you should in many ways be an ideal candidate by his standards - he makes a big deal of liking folk who are open minded, and good at recognizing others point of view, a quality you have in abundance. Btw I emailed you a week back to advise on RfA tactics. You are only the second person I've ever offered my free services as a campaign manager! Not sure if you didn't reply as you only like to talk on wiki. Anyway hope this is of some help. FeydHuxtable (talk) 13:36, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Feyd. A brief note: As I stated here, I don't mind if anyone else notifies TParis ("Do however you please outside of this talk page"), but I'd rather not because that user has stated in the past that he prefers to limit communications between ourselves (diff). See additional diffs I provided at the discussion linked above for more context. I remain neutral, so if that user changes their mind about the matter, then so be it. However, commentary at the end of the discussion here (second post from the last), appears likely be about me (although not certainly), and doesn't inspire confidence. NorthAmerica1000 01:44, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
I think you're right North. I'd seen that thread before, but not the comment near the end, as I was focusing on the reasons folk were declining to run. Based on this up to date info, probably best to not to say anything. On the bright side, if the person in question appreciates they're not objective where you're concerned, it's more likely they'd not involve themselves in any 2nd RfA, or at least not attack it too forcefully. FeydHuxtable (talk) 14:04, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Pinging User:Stalwart111 here per the above. NorthAmerica1000 22:28, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Appreciated. As on NA1K's own talk page - I'd be keen to see him run again and would happily put myself forward as a nominator or co-nominator. My only concern is that I spend plenty of time around here in contentious AFDs and subsequent ANI discussions. There are plenty of people who dislike me for reasons completely unrelated to my desire to see NA1K given the mop. I'd hate to have that process (the "campaign" as Feyd nicely puts it) derailed because of irrelevancies. In the same regard, I'm familiar with most of those accounts but none of their reasons for leaving (forced or voluntary) had anything to do with NA1K as far as I'm aware. I'd object strongly to any suggestion that NA1K isn't suitable for adminship because he was previously supported by those no longer part of the community. Spartaz would be an outstanding nominator if you could get him on board. Stlwart111 23:06, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Agreed that Spartaz would be ideal. Unless Im totally misreading, he has already said he's up for nominating North: I have reviewed your closes and for this reason I'm suggesting we make this official following on from his previous statement "If you are interested in being nominated please let me know....." .
North as your co campaign manager with Stalwart, I recommend if you're up for taking the risk, you post on Spartaz's talk saying you're ready to stand if he's still willing to nom. And ask Spartaz if he thinks a co nom from Stalwart would help. I personally think it would, but Spartaz can write a very powerful solo nom, and there are a few that think having more than one nominator is over baking. FeydHuxtable (talk) 23:52, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Data... please.[edit]

Hey there. I'm a very visual person. Could you give me a table with active editors, failed RfAs, Passes RfAs, failed RfBs, & Passed RfBs per month? I could turn these numbers into predictive graphs showing a few things that might help your case. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 17:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Email[edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, FeydHuxtable. 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.NorthAmerica1000 03:32, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Some thoughts on your RfA proposal[edit]

I know this discussion has only just opened, but with the flurry of activity so far, I've been reflecting on it and my own stance since I've opined there. It's pretty clearly met with some serious disagreement, but at the very least, there are some ideas on the table that I hope can be productive takeaways so far based on my read of things:

  • Many editors who want RfA to be maintained still recognize where you're coming from in this proposal. I certainly do. Even though they disagree with this approach, I think these are editors you want to seriously consider working together with on the other side of this proposal if you want to see something happen.
  • Many editors are flat out not going to accept abandoning the process without some alternative done or in the works. This point can be debated based on the premises you laid out in your proposal (perhaps another waste of time), but I don't think this is unreasonable even in consideration of past failures to arrive at a new model for RfA.
  • Anna Frodesiak and many others agreed that they aren't convinced there are significant problems with how RfA works. This is fair, since claims for declining participation in RfAs lack evidence outside of personal observations and self-reporting, which, speaking as someone with research experience, are not the greatest methods of data gathering for the kind of claims being made. (I saw you note there was "non anecdotal evidence" somewhere-- but looking WP:RFA2011 and its associated pages, I didn't see anything like that.) It might be good to consider identifying folks who might consider running an appropriate study, like a factor analysis, perhaps through an Individual Engagement Grant.

This is all to say, there is a lot of work ahead, as I'm sure you expected no matter what the outcome of this discussion was. I, JethroBT drop me a line 14:33, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

The decline worries many of us. It is the cause that is in dispute. Being certain about the reasons for the drop in numbers seems like the best place to start. I asked for views here. What are your thoughts? A study? A simple poll? A survey? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:42, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
@Anna Frodesiak: Sorry this has spilled onto a couple of pages. Let me express a couple of thoughts on methodology:
  • One approach is to conduct an exploratory factor analysis. We've advanced ideas about why adminship has been declined already: Some of these factors deal with the specific editor (attitude, preparation, interpersonal factors), some of them deal with the system (instances of behavior that disrupts the process, that bad questions are permissible, degrees of harshness in opinions, general expectations). Some deal with the behavior of other admins and editors (the degree to which they invite and nominate). There is also the case that some of these factors interact with each other (i.e. problematic factors in the system might create bad attitudes about RfA), which is fine, because I doubt any of these factors are completely independent from other ones. Researchers would need to think hard about what things go into what factor and how to measure them, but this approach might allow us to look at what factors were most responsible for the decline.
  • If we do a survey asking folks about why they chose not to engage in RfA, I think a hugely important thing needs to happen is that editors needs to avoiding reading into responses or conclusions as though they mean something else entirely. That comment about how someone says "RFA is too hostile" really means "I don't actually want to take on that job" just isn't a valid unless there is context suggesting it. (There are, of course, responses that can be multiply interpreted, e.g. "I am afraid to do an RfA" could be because it's hostile, or because they simply don't like being visible, or because they feel like their chances are slim because no one will nominate them, or whatever).
I, JethroBT drop me a line 16:53, 30 October 2014 (UTC)


I agree with all you say, except the possible implication that I might be taking part in the future hard work. IMO if you play a prominent role in a reform effort and it fails, then especially if you're a fairly low profile editor like myself, you become a liability to future attempts. So the best thing you can do is get out of the way, at least for several years. This is why I took no part in RFA2011 even though I've long strongly felt the brokenness of RfA is one of the biggest reasons our community is less collegial than it could be, and doesn't achieve it's full potential. (Id previously took a big part in the sept 2009 reform efforts. ) So no more serious RFA reform work for me until at least 2019.

Thanks though for the message and for supporting the proposal, it's good to know there's others who see the RfA beast as a serious issue. FeydHuxtable (talk) 16:10, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Brilliant Idea Barnstar Hires.png The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
I may not agree with your proposals on RFA reform, but you've stimulated the most in-depth discussion on the topic that I've seen for some time, and for that you deserve considerable acclaim. Thanks for having the nuts to propose something very much outside the box. Yunshui  15:49, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank so much Yunshui, I love the barnstar. Although editor Townlake deserves one much more than me. I lack the imagination to conceive such a genuinely new approach to the RfA problem - it was Townlake who originally made the proposal on the RfA talk page, Im just his point man. 718smiley.png FeydHuxtable (talk) 16:10, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

RfA Talk[edit]

Reading of the RfA proposal at the Village pump and elsewhere caused me to revisit my failed administrator attempt and to re-live a rather painful period in my WP-life. Since then I have been silent on many important issues that concerned me before I withdrew. I think I was thrown under the bus by the first oppose and never was able to recover. In hindsight I'm glad I didn't make it. I know I thanked you at the time for your support and your rebuttal to some of the opposes, but let me thank you again. I know there are good editors that suffer the bad results of a failed attempt at "adminship". The support is easily forgotten but the sting of the opposes lingers on. ```Buster Seven Talk 19:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for inadvertently being the cause of painful memories Buster! I hope you're also able to see the marks left by some of those stings as badges of honor? The brightest light casts the darkest shadow. c.f. John 3:20 , John 15:18 . At least you're still here and remain a positive presence. As you'll know several good editors savaged at RfA just withdrew completely. It's not just candidates that suffer due to the current system, it's the existing admin corps, the wider community, even the serial opposers themselves. On the bright side, no harmful thing lasts forever, and only Love endures in Eternity. FeydHuxtable (talk) 21:59, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

RfA[edit]

Hi Feyd: After significant consideration, I have decided to move forward with another request for adminship. Per your previous input regarding this matter, please see the Request for adminship discussion I have started on my user talk page. Thanks for all of your input, and I look forward to hearing from you. NorthAmerica1000 12:28, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Feyd, this seems like a nice place to say hey, I got nothing against NA1000; I like them a lot better then I did three years ago, in the Occupy time and all. But to vote for them in RfA takes more than that. Since the admin tool has so many applications I simply need to see more experience in all kinds of areas--and such experience often follows from the creation and discussion of different kinds of articles. AfD is an important area, but it's not the only one--just look at all the "civility" and admin abuse cases on ANI. Drmies (talk) 22:03, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
It's always nice to see you here Drmies. I think I see what you're saying, and I agree. Like you I know of no evidence North would be good at making the touger admin calls such as distinguishing tool misuse from firm but useful adminship, or dealing with our talented but sometimes uncivil FA writers. If anything, I'd guess they'd struggle with that sort of thing. But that's by the by, North just wouldn't be the type to try muscling in on the more challenging sort of admin work. They're mostly a cautious person, who'd stick to the mop and bucket side of adminship, like backlogs, maybe some anti vandal work, and mainly deletion processes where they clearly do have the experience and communication skills to satisfy the vast majority of editors who might take issue with their closes - one of many examples. Granted, there's an element of faith in trusting that North will stick to the things they're good at, but if there's one thing RfA stats these last few years show, it's that there simply aren't enough good candidates who posses the qualities to be an ideal all rounder.
To address the other reason you gave for opposing, North did actually reflect on the lessons of their first RfA in detail and ask for further input on lessons to be learned. As many have noted they've changed their behavior based on feedback from they first RfA. I can see why you suggested North may lean towards recentism, but they sometimes show a good feel for history in their article work too, for example History of breakfast. Which brings us back to cookery. Another reason North's fave topic could be seen as non trivial is that pleasure from eating becomes an essential sex substitute for those older people not lucky enough to stay active in the bedroom. We all need regular doses of pleasure in one form or another to stay sane in this wicked world. Im not sure if this is enough for you to support, but perhaps you could consider withdrawing your oppose? Adminship is too important to the health of our project for us to miss out on good new additions to the corps. FeydHuxtable (talk) 23:47, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Feyd. (Did you just call me old???) I looked at those notes and they make me think that NA won't break the project if he gets the tool. But I can't withdraw my oppose, though I appreciate your asking, because of--well, the things I've mentioned before. If I had seen more of NA in other venues (not just ANI, though that would have been helpful) I might well have felt differently, but again, in their note to Stalwart, nothing but deletion is brought up, and there are so many other things to do. As far as I can tell, we don't need more admins to clear up AfD and CSD and all that. We need admins to settle disputes, to close contentious RfCs, to block and unblock, to monitor and patrol SPI, to keep an eye on ArbCom pages and AN/ANI, to make decisions in light of the ever-increasing list of articles that fall under discretionary and general sanctions, to (semi-)protect articles, to deal with BLP matters... And like it or not, NA will be installed, if it happens, with a complete set of tools, not just deletion, and I have no idea if they'll put that block tool, for instance, to good and not excessive use. (Not using it at all is also not helpful.) I simply want to see more. Let's not stare ourselves blind on my comment about some food article or other; I think too many people misread that, and in the end that's not where it's at. NA, if you're reading this, good luck. Drmies (talk) 00:19, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome. Certainly was not meaning to call anyone old, after seeing yourself and Andrew discuss the various sex articles I just thought I'd add another reason why cookery can be of increasing interest to some of our readers. I hear what you're saying about North's fave topic not being your main reason for opposing. FeydHuxtable (talk) 20:27, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, FeydHuxtable. You have new messages at Philippe (WMF)'s talk page.
Message added 23:17, 6 November 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sorry for the horrid delay. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 23:17, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Time_to_replace_RfA[edit]

Hi Feyd. Just reading through your proposal at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Time_to_replace_RfA and it appears that there has been a good discussion but the time has passed beyond when the vote should be closed, the majority view seems against the proposal and the turnout has also been insufficient to justify such a significant change. For these three reasons do you agree to close the debate? AndrewRT(Talk) 21:35, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey Andrew. I agree with your first two points. Im surprised it hasn't been closed already. I'd be up for closing it once Im able to give the debate a good 40 mins attention so I can sum up the outcome. Obviously the consensus is clearly against the original proposal, but a sizable proportion of the 'Maintain' votes are open to changing RfA if an alternative was decided upon first. The current debate is not well structured to produce consensus for such an outcome - much as I respect lTopGunl's good intentions, their counter proposal would have had a much better chance if they had closed the other two options first . It's probably too late for that now and would be best to close the whole debate, possibly re-presenting TopGun's plan in fall 2015, assuming our net decline of active admin continues. It would be tomorrow evening at the earliest that I'd close the debate - it's obvious the debate has produced no consensus for any sort of change, but I think whoever closes should carefully read everyone's input first so they briefly sum up the balance of views. No objection at all if yourself or anyone else wants to close before I get round to it. FeydHuxtable (talk) 23:37, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the ping. I guess I was a little late to observe the impromptu structuring of the proposals (and start a dedicated section for something that was being supported); I admit it would have given some steady course of action if it was even better structured. With that said, I am confident that it will still be taken into account regardless of the fact that many old comments that would have been in this subsection still lay in the old one(s) as they express their intent per se. I'm not an admin, so didn't think an NAC was appropriate as the discussion seemed to be atleast a bit contentious. --lTopGunl (talk) 08:11, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome TopGun. I hope you don't mind too much that I've close the whole discussion. With hindsight, I agree your proposal would have had a vastly bigger chance of success than mine & Townlake's. But as we made ours first, for now most of the oxygen available for RfA reform has been used up, and IMO leaving the discussion in place would do more harm than good. If you're not happy with this, you're welcome to revert my close. I'd love for some kind of direct change to come out of the discussion, I just feel that time for that has passed. If you wait for the current recruitment efforts to run out of steam and relauch your proposal, I think you might be onto a winner. FeydHuxtable (talk) 12:21, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
The discussion wasn't structured well for a clear consensus, so it was the right thing to close it. the linked proposals are already independently being worked on. Hopefully they'll get consensus given that this discussion did conclude that another parallel was needed. Cheers. --lTopGunl (talk) 11:52, 23 November 2014 (UTC)