User talk:King of Hearts

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

King of Hearts's status: Traffic lights red.svg
I will reply to your message
within 1 week.

Old talk is at /Archive.

Please note that I will usually reply to messages on this page, unless you ask me respond elsewhere.

Please use the link provided in the blue box above which says "Please leave a new message."
This way, you will be able to give your comment a subject/headline.

Please keep your comments concise. I do not want to read an essay.

The Fappening[edit]

The Fappening is real. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.134.189.170 (talk) 07:32, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey,

My message got caught up in your (rightful) removal of vandalism on the articles of deletion page for "The Fappening". I still would like clarification on why this was deleted. It meets notability criteria, though it was improperly sourced. I'd be happy to add sources if I were allowed to remake it.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.70.61.118 (talk) 07:38, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I didn't see any links to any images, it was just a page explaining the name of something that WILL be remembered. If you were concerned over things that might be added why didn't you simply lock down the page and make any changes require approval? please stop using acronyms that even Wikipedia does not know in your deletion log. It explains nothing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.221.63.194 (talkcontribs) 07:52, September 1, 2014‎ (UTC)

I did not delete it due to the potential for images to be added. I deleted it as non-notable web content. I see that news articles are now starting to come out, but they seem to be merely celebrity gossip with no indication of the lasting importance of the event. -- King of ♠ 08:52, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
I disagree, it will surely have lasting changes to security policies of cloud based storage/backup. How is this any less henious an invasion of privacy than the hacking of Sarah Palin's boring personal email account or perhaps the phone tapping of Angela Merkel. Perhaps the title is not quite the best but this is newsworth and wikiworthy. Are you worried comment here will promote the issue? Same is surely true for terror related articles.82.43.99.224 (talk) 18:01, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
I fully agree. Not only are we confronted with hundreds of gossip-like articles, but main technology as well as main social newspapers and blogs are starting to debate about this event. We will see law suits (already announced) and debates about web security. The deletion of this article was an act of vandalism and an attack on freedom of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.113.162.160 (talk) 18:22, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

This is a major news event with implications for web security and personal privacy. Its deletion was an error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.212.243.68 (talk) 19:08, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

The only reason it even got deleted was because it was called 'The Fappening' instead of something serious sounding like 'August/September 2014 Celebrity nudes leak'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.80.129.31 (talk) 19:55, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-36[edit]

07:49, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

stop dleting the fappening, its a current topic!![edit]

Louie Hodges — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.185.93 (talk) 16:22, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Massive security breach.[edit]

The fappening is going to be very significant. Apple's iCloud is rumored to have played a role in this. This is not so much about the nudes as it is about the security breach that can affect everyone who uses cloud services. Legal documents were also in the mix, passports, important Documents, things of that nature.

By removing this you are suppressing the truth that this can happen to anyone. People are not reporting on the bigger issues in main stream media, Wikipedia is the only option.

Please reconsider your position and restore the page, this is a major issue pertaining to cloud security. And rather we like it or not, "The Fappneing" is going to be the name — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.54.14.60 (talk) 18:15, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

The Fappening[edit]

Hello I was wondering why The Fappening was taken down? I was going to make my own page of it until after a long time finding there was a current one that was deleted. It is a really big event and new phrase I think Wikipedia could really use it with all the shallow internet users mixing in with the deep end advance internet users. Trying to make the world a better place Noblesse1Oblige (talk) 20:29, 1 September 2014 (UTC) Noblesse1Oblige

Involved admin protecting AFD page[edit]

Please don't pre-emptively protect the afd page, as we don't pre-emptively protect articles especially because the SPA template could just so easily be applied. Plus, you are an involved administrator since you created the afd in the first place, you should not be the one protecting it. Tutelary (talk) 20:55, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't consider myself sufficiently involved to bar me from protecting it since I no longer have an opinion on whether the article should be deleted, and made no such argument either way in the AfD. Having closed a lot of AfDs, I have experienced how hard it is to sort through an AfD where over 2/3 of the !votes are SPAs. I know a flood of SPAs is inevitable here, so that is why I protected it. -- King of ♠ 21:01, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Again, pre-emptive protection is specifically disallowed by WP:NO-PREEMPT. Pre-emptive full protection of articles is contrary to the open nature of Wikipedia. Where has the vandalism occurred as of yet? Again, you are an involved administrator for this case because you created the afd page and are specifically !voting to delete in your nomination statement. Unprotect the page. Oh, and do point me to the policy/guideline that SPAs opinions are invalid/should be protected against. Tutelary (talk) 21:09, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Where did you get the impression that I am !voting to delete? -- King of ♠ 05:30, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 September 2014[edit]

Wangath Temple complex- A technical point[edit]

Hi, Thanks for the hismerge for this article. I want to discuss a technical point. You deleted MainArticle and then moved the UserSpaceDraft to Mainspace and finally restored the deleted revisions of MainArticle. A histmerge done this way, display the most recent version of UserSpaceDraft. Any changes made into MainArticle before histmerge are essentially reverted. Wouldn't deleting UserSpaceDraft, followed by moving MainArticle to UserSpaceDraft, restoring deleted revisions, and finally moving UserSpaceDraft to Mainspace be better? This way the most recent revision of MainArticle will be displayed. However, this involve one extra step. --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 05:17, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes. I guess I learned how to do it in 2006, stopped doing them for a while, and kind of forgot the proper way to do it. When I picked up on doing histmerges again I just sort of pieced together a way that worked but wasn't the most efficient. -- King of ♠ 05:20, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-37[edit]

09:33, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 September 2014[edit]

Tech News: 2014-38[edit]

08:34, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles - GA Cup[edit]

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup
Symbol support vote.svg

WikiProject Good articles is holding a new competition, the GA Cup, from October 1, 2014 - March 28, 2015. The Cup will be based on reviewing Good article nominations; for each review, points will be awarded with bonuses for older nominations, longer articles and comprehensive reviews. All participants will start off in one group and the highest scoring participants will go through to the second round. At the moment six rounds are planned, but this may change based on participant numbers.

Some of you may ask: what is the purpose for a competition of this type? Currently, there is a backlog of about 500 unreviewed Good article nominations, almost an all time high. It is our hope that we can decrease the backlog in a fun way, through friendly competition.

Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors! Sign-ups will be open until October 15, 2014 so sign-up now!

If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the four judges.

Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

To receive future GA Cup newsletter, please add your name to our mailing list.

SPI[edit]

As you previously acted on a Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kauffner SPI, are you able to take a look at this latest one? Is actively editing in several short term discussions RMs/AfDs etc. and removing notifications of the SPI. Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Request for unprotection[edit]

I noticed that you fully protected the redirect page List of rocket, mortar, bombing and infantry attacks by Israel in 2009 five years ago. I'd like to ask you to reduce the level of protection from full protection to semi-protection. Semi-protection should be enough to prevent vandalism and most other troublemaking while still allowing editors like me to perform maintenance on the page.

Thanks for your consideration. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:58, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Done. Actually, a bot beat you to the double redirect fixing. -- King of ♠ 07:44, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 September 2014[edit]

Tech News: 2014-39[edit]

09:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Jolicloud redirect removed post-AfD[edit]

Jolicloud may need your attention. An AfD you resolved in 2012 created a redirect, which has recently been deleted a few times. Not sure if we're at edit war stage: another editor has stepped in as well. The original article is all but unimproved. Thanks. Barte (talk) 14:23, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I think he's gotten the memo now. If there is more reverting I will protect the page. -- King of ♠ 02:27, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. Barte (talk) 04:12, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

You're invited! Litquake Edit-a-thon in San Francisco[edit]

You are invited!Litquake Edit-a-thonSee you there!
Amy Tan.jpg
  In the area? You're invited to
   San Francisco Meetup # 22
GG-bridge-12-2006.jpg
  Date: October 11, 2014
  Time: 1-5 pm
  Place: 149 New Montgomery Street, 6th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105
  prev: Meetup 21 - next: Meetup 23 | All SF meetups & events

The Edit-a-thon will occur in parallel with Litquake, the San Francisco Bay Area's annual literature festival. Writers from all over the Bay Area and the world will be in town during the nine day festival, so the timing is just right for us to meetup and create/translate/expand/improve articles about literature and writers. All levels of Wikipedia editing experience are welcome. This event will include new editor training. RSVP →here←. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:31, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 September 2014[edit]

Tech News: 2014-40[edit]

09:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

An old block matter[edit]

Just fyi, there was an old block issue brought back to my attention today that I felt I should keep you updated about. See here on my user talk. Fut.Perf. 13:52, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

User_talk:Peter352#2nd_chance[edit]

Hi, King of Hearts. I read your message at User_talk:Peter352#2nd chance. I'm confused by it. I see no record of the user ever requesting an unblock. What prompted your message? Jason Quinn (talk) 00:45, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

I handle requests on WP:UTRS. -- King of ♠ 03:47, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Ah, of course. Thanks for the reply. Jason Quinn (talk) 04:26, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 October 2014[edit]

Tech News: 2014-41[edit]

06:10, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Tombstoning listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tombstoning. Since you had some involvement with the Tombstoning redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Fiddle Faddle 19:49, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 October 2014[edit]

Tech News: 2014-42[edit]

08:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Quick question[edit]

Hello King of Hearts,

An SPI I filed awhile ago appears to be stale (see: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/E4024). Can you please check it out and let me know what you think? The reason why I come to you is because you've closed a previous SPI on the very same account. This time around, I've provided even more evidence. I would greatly appreciate it if you can just give it a quick glance. If not, happy editing! Étienne Dolet (talk) 01:23, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

The master[edit]

In Turkish Wikipedia they blocked me for about one year claiming I was User:Tapfereritter and then they said sorry, mistaken etc and lifted the block. I hope you won't do the same to me again here or to anyone else. Note that I never ever requested block revision etc. Neither do I request an answer. All the best. --E4024 (talk) 07:42, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 October 2014[edit]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/E4024[edit]

Hi King of Hearts. In closing the SPI, you mentioned lack of DUCK evidence. I thought that there were many examples of identical edits is many areas. What was the weakness of the evidence? Thank you for your time. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 06:41, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't have asked for a check if I still would have blocked even with a negative result. While there's a significant overlap of interest and certain stylistic features, it really requires indisputable behavioral evidence to override negative technical evidence. -- King of ♠ 16:35, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you King of Hearts for the clarification. I can see your point regarding overriding the negative CU evidence. All the best. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 17:25, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Though I respect King of Heart's decision as well, I would like to have his decision reviewed. If possible, what is the procedure to do so? Étienne Dolet (talk) 19:04, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
You can email the checkusers list for a reevaluation of the situation. They would be the best bet for weighing behavioral against technical evidence since they actually know the specifics. -- King of ♠ 21:16, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Expiring on or before 25 October 2014[edit]

Korean Central Television and Madison De La Garza? --George Ho (talk) 05:45, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Due to the very low activity on both articles, I don't think it justifies reprotection. -- King of ♠ 21:09, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-43[edit]

13:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 October 2014[edit]

Tech News: 2014-44[edit]

05:20, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 October 2014[edit]