||If you need to talk to me, I can arrange a private meeting in my IRC channel, ##M007 connect
This user is temporarily inactive.
This may be due to the user's vacation, or other reasons. This does not imply the violation of any Wikipedia policies.
It took a few days off wiki, but I have decided to retire. The environment can be very caustic, and I feel that there are things with which I could spend my time which would be more productive. I apologise to those I have let down-J Milburn not least, and several others. I can continue with your GAR if you wish. I just cannot build up the enthusiasm to edit at the minute, I may return in a few months, but I am retiring for now (though I will still edit sporadically, perhaps on J's GAR and the Signpost, and I will finish off the things I am doing currently). I would appreciate people reading this to tell me why they choose to stay on Wikipedia, but I'm not sure if I will get any response. All the best, Matty.007 07:46, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry to hear you’re retiring, Matty. You’ve done a great job here, both as an editor and a tutor for new members. At the same time, it’s understandable that you get tired or "burned out" after a while. Editing is fun, but too much of it can have the opposite effect. Kind of like eating 10 cakes in one day, lol. As for myself, I make a few edits here and there in a moderate pace, which I think is the key to why I'm still active on Wikipedia. Best of luck and hopefully your interest will return someday again. Cheers! OscarL 09:55, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Let me give you my words of advice. Long-time contribution to Wikipedia can be stressful. Even if you only edit in obscure topics, and never come across any disputes, you can quickly realise that your hard work is rewarded by ... more work. It's an enjoyable hobby for regular Wikipedians, but fundamentally, Wikipedia is work. Fortunately, you are (barring exceptions such as admin accountability) not required to do anything more than what you want. Dropping a GA / FA nomination mid review is not a crime.
As for why I stay on Wikipedia - I love reading it. There's some junk, sure, but there is some utterly brilliant and engaging writing. One of the best "wikibreaks" you can have is stop editing and do nothing except read articles (I just browsed through Queen Victoria this morning). Don't necessarily worry about a green blob or a brown star - I have stated on several occasions that anyone who likes horror films should sit down for an evening and read The Holocaust from top to bottom carefully and see how worse real life can be - and that's only at B class. Just have a look at how good some of the things are that we've produced. Stay in "reading mode" for a month, and when you're reading to come back to editing, do so with a refreshed mind. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:29, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: Definitely, logging out and browsing wikipedia on safari with the reader function I find makes me more enthusiastic towards content. Overall we're really doing something quite extraordinary in terms of scope all on one site and it is up to people like us to build it. Sure, there's junk, but the range of articles and the sheer size of wikipedia is really quite staggering, and there's so much potential to be hundreds of times better than we are. Every new entry i start turns up multiple red links and so on, we're just getting started! The average quality and sourcing I find is definitely gradually improving, although I still have some days where everything seems utter crap. There's a lot of surprisingly decent articles on certain topics, and we're particularly good on things like current events, our articles are always the most comprehensive and informative on any recent event. The bottom line though Matt is that we need people like you to write decent articles on places like Jethou! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:23, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
- Hello Matty, it's a little sad to read this and I was also surprised because I thought you were doing so fine. I was thinking just the another day when I saw you got the 100 DYK nom award that your work here is very impressive indeed; you are relatively new by Wikipedia standard. Maybe you have taken upon yourself a bit too much (?) I see you are engaged in the WikiCup and have two adoptees in addition; that's a lot. I agree, sadly, about the editing environment and Wikipedia can be a pretty thankless place to invest work in. As for me, much of my editing frankly is quite lightweight so it doesn't cost me too much and I like to read a bit here; both articles and what's going on in the community. Sometimes I write a bit more substantional stuff and I hope to do more of that, but only when I feel for it. Best wishes to you whatever you choose to do, Iselilja (talk) 18:50, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Matty, just remember that when the going gets tough the tough get going!! Wikipedia attracts way too many sanctimonious self-righteous assholes, but remember that we're all in the same boat and most of us decent editors like myself, Ritchie, Eric, Sagacious, Tim, Cass, Scho, Rosie, anybody who is decent here would have walked out on wikipedia years ago if it wasn't for the love of content. I loved seeing your work on Herm and editing it, and seeing your enthusiasm for DYK. There's a definite divide among contributors, those who are constructive and those who exist to bully and pick holes in people. Please reconsider, and please stay and nom my articles :-) You're valued here more than you think. If you're finding the environment too caustic, chances are you've been spending too long on here for too long a period. You need a decent wikibreak I think and to come back refreshed. Wikipedia sort of acts like an energy suppresser and time sink. There's many days i barely edit on here and some days like today I feel very positive and spend hours on here. If I didn't have those days I don't edit extensively I'd burn out and want to retire too!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:16, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
- Matty, I've only just seen this - sorry, I've had my head buried in the sand with other things - as Dr. Blofeld says, producing good content is what is important and we have to try to continue and rise above the tendentious bullying. I know I've often found it hard to 'practice what I preach' and examples of me losing it are easily found but you've always been level headed - and I like to think that 'we've' had a lot of fun along the way ... The only means we have of kicking back against this is by (trying to) smile sweetly, pick ourselves up and carry on - honestly 'we' really are better and can work through all this [*/bullshit/rubbish - or insert any appropriate word]. Besides, who else is going to fix my archive templates? We've already lost Hafs, please let's not lose anymore? Besides, you know how bossy I am and I will just not allow it!! [petulantly stomps feet] AND, if you need even more reason, I'm even typing this on the iPad, so you know how strongly I must feel about it!! SagaciousPhil - Chat 21:06, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
- Oh Matty.007. I feel like a friend has left, and I genuinely hope you get a second wind and return. I've been laying back for a few weeks for reasons you know. You asked us to tell you why we stay at WP. Maybe it will help you to know how many times I've gotten up off the mat.
- I didn't do much editing for my first few years at WP. And when I did, one of my edits threw me into a pre-existing blood feud between an editor who was simply trying to guide me, and one of the most prolific repeatedly blocked sock masters. He and his suck-up fans went after me also . It was my first experience with the God Complex editor. I almost quit altogether and for a long streak would only edit logged off. I eventually got back up off the mat. It's a matter of what you want to accomplish, and learning to work around the overblown egos trying to be noticed. The God Complexers populate a wide spectrum of WP, from the incompetent basic level editor all the way up to the top of the Wikimedia chain. Every one of them thinks everybody is an idiot but them, and they love to dictate orders and wax extemporaneously about their perceived superiority to us mere mortals.
- I had just about made up my mind to quit altogether a little over 18 months ago because of such things. And then I ran across a really neglected article about someone who deserved better, that being Audie Murphy. The last 18 months have been the greatest learning experience in the world for me, not only for (thank you, Military History project) how to correctly put a quality article together, but how to focus on my own work while standing toe-to-toe with the God Complex and not blinking. And along the way, I grew an attachment to DYK. It may not seem like it at the moment, because I've stepped back from it due to you-know-what garbage. But I have some fond feelings about the old regulars over there, some we haven't seen for a while. And I keep plodding along. Hope you do also. — Maile (talk) 13:06, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
- Matty, you brighten my day with your positive contributions here. Don't let the place get you down, but don't retire, you do great work here. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:20, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
I am definitely going off Wikipedia for a few months, but may come back (I am just finishing a few things off first-i.e. a GAR). Maile spoke about our coverage, I am often shocked by our coverage of some major figures, such as sportsmen. As was spoken about by the Dr though, working here feels pretty thankless work at times. OscarLake, Ritchie, Iselilja, and Maile mentioned burnout, which it is entirely possible to be. At the minute I have swapped checking my watchlist for watching episodes of Dad's Army, a much more relaxing past-time. I think a few months off Wikipedia may do me good, and the Dr's suggestion about Jethou has struck a chord-I will be on Herm in a week. At the minute I am genuinely unsure whether to come back, but think it probable, there are good times with the bad-and I can count myself lucky to have people on here that I feel are friends. I don't want to be someone who says they will retire and doesn't, but saying I am going for good is too permanent for me. I think I will go for a few months and then review my position. Sorry for the rambling message, I was trying to get what I wanted to do straight with myself as much as anything first. I am unsure how to phrase this, but thank you very much to everyone here for their messages, it's given me some incentives to think about when I review my position. My deepest thanks to you all, Matty.007 19:17, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
- Well, then, we'll just take turns keeping your editing chair warm for you. Let us know when you sashay back our direction. Good luck, and happy relaxation to you. — Maile (talk) 00:20, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
If you completely stay away from the website for a month Matty, I mean not even checking in, then I'd say that is usually long enough for most regulars for a break. Sometimes it is best to do that and come back completely refreshed. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:12, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
- I missed this, would miss you. Take a break., The environment here is not ideal but will be worse without you. Recommended reading for your break, more food for thought on my talk, look for "Hope is precious and great joy is found in living" (which helped me), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:58, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
- ps: your question: I decided to stay because I don't let others make decisions for me. I made a red category for it, - see if it fits you ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:01, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
And then I browse our articles on jazz clubs and it seems most of them are in an atrocious state and quality is not improving.. We're a very mixed bag...♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:33, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
- If you decide to return after a break, that would be great for Wikipedia, but I know that you've got to do what's best for you. In any case, thank you for your wonderful contributions. I appreciate all of the kind words you've had for me, and I wish you the very best on- and off-Wiki. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:38, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you to everyone for their kind words. I have tried to stay off Wikipedia-except to try and close issues in things such as GAR I was conducting (which invariably led to 'one more fix'), and am going on holiday to the Channel Islands today. I'll try and get a nice picture of Jethou for if I want to expand the article. I will not make any edits until the 28 or later of August. I updated my WikiCup page in the (unlikely) event that I qualify for the final, which would surprise me. Thanks again for the support, and all the best until whenever I can't manage without Wikipedia any more (!), Matty.007 07:20, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
DYK for Odense
— Crisco 1492
) 14:07, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
DYK for Sophie Taylor
— Crisco 1492
) 14:08, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
DYK for The Boat Race 1990
— Crisco 1492
) 13:38, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, do you or @Rosiestep: want to nom this? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:13, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I'm off for my few months now, so it's up to you or Rosie. Sorry, Matty.007 19:37, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
DYK for The Boat Race 2011
— Crisco 1492
) 01:51, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 06 August 2014
DYK for Parsurameswar Temple
— Crisco 1492
) 13:36, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
DYK for Megan Fletcher
— Crisco 1492
) 13:36, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
DYK for John Gregorson Campbell
(talk · contribs
) 06:53, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
DYK for Končar-class missile boat
(talk · contribs
) 07:52, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2000 CECAFA Cup you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lemonade51 -- Lemonade51 (talk) 15:43, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
The article 2000 CECAFA Cup you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2000 CECAFA Cup for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lemonade51 -- Lemonade51 (talk) 21:03, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
||On 15 August 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Health issues in American football, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that concussions are the fifth-most common type injury in American football, possibly affecting over 100,000 players each year? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Health issues in American football. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
(talk · contribs
) 22:27, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Pretty sure this is going to essentially get reverted by the bot. Comment out the nomination templates on the talk pages instead. --erachima talk 07:15, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
- OK, thanks for the heads up, doing now. Thanks, Matty.007 07:16, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
GOCE July drive and August blitz
|Guild of Copy Editors July 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up
Participation: Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the 40 people who signed up this drive, 22 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: We reduced our article backlog from 2400 articles to 2199 articles in July. This is a new month-end record low for the backlog. Nice work, everyone!
Blitz: The August blitz will run from August 24–30. The blitz will focus on articles from the GOCE's Requests page. Awards will be given out to everyone who copy edits at least one of the target articles. The blitz will run from August 24–30. Sign up here!
Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis.
DYK nomination of Kingstonian F.C.
Hello! Your submission of Kingstonian F.C. at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 21:59, 28 August 2014 (UTC)