# User talk:NativeForeigner

Note: Archives are below in template as well. New archives will appear in header.

Header ripped off from Anonymous Dissident (Thanks)

 Please, be my guest, and whack me with a large trout if the situation demands it.
 This user replies where he likes, and is inconsistent in that respect.
$\lnot \mathrm{TB}$ Please refrain from using the dreaded Template:Talkback on this page multiple times in the same discussion (I'll have it watched after the first template)

Vote!

Formerly Redskunk (talk · contribs)

The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer Godot13 (submissions), whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.

Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup points.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail), The ed17 (talkemail) and Miyagawa (talkemail) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

## Message on DS review page

Hello NativeForeigner,

I've left the message below the DS Review page [1], and hope you and all the other arbitrators will take a look and leave a note indicating that you've looked at the discussion of the important issues with DS, with indefinite bans, and with the phrase 'broadly construed' which have been raised throughout that page. NinaGreen (talk) 22:03, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Two arbitrators, AGK and Roger Davies, have added occasional comments to this page concerning the significant changes which have been suggested here, all of which are quick, easy and effective fixes which would (1) drastically reduce arbitrator and administrator workload; (2) permit the reduction in the incredibly high number of administrators (1400), as a result of (1), and allow for the elimination, almost entirely, of WP:AE; (3) improve Wikipedia's public image; (4) improve the general atmosphere on Wikipedia, making it more collegial and far less adversarial; (5) significantly improve editor retention. However are the other 13 arbitrators at all aware of these suggestions? The lack of any comments from them in this review suggests they may not be. Could the other arbitrators just drop a note here to indicate that they are aware of the suggestions? Obviously change can never take place if the people who can effect if aren't aware of the problems which have been identified in this discussion and the suggestions which have been made for fixing them.

## FYI

A proposal has been made to create a Live Feed to enhance the processing of Articles for Creation and Drafts. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to create a 'Special:NewDraftsFeed' system. Your comments are welcome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:21, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

## A barnstar for you!

 The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar I just opened Recent changes for a routine patrol and surprise! I see half the page is filled with you blocking numerous spambots in seconds ;) Job well done! That's what one calls a Defender of the Wiki :) -TheGeneralUser (talk) 22:41, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! NativeForeigner Talk 19:51, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Still cleaning up after this account. Just wondering, when you block s.o. for hoaxing, why not revert the hoaxes? — kwami (talk) 06:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

I generally try to when I notice it. I'm not sure why I didn't in that case, I'm sorry for not having caught it. NativeForeigner Talk 06:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

## Comment placed on Roger Davies' Talk page

I've placed the comment below on Roger Davies' Talk page under the heading 'Correction to collapsed discussion' and am copying it here because the point is obviously one of vital concern to all arbitrators. NinaGreen (talk) 18:49, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Roger,

This is your fourth edit since you were asked to back off yesterday. Whatever benefit there might have been in your contributions has been lost in the - to put it mildly - freeranging nature and inquisitorial tone of your comments. You have singlehandedly provided about half the commentary over the last month, sometimes derailing discussions, stopping others in their tracks, and contributing greatly to bloat. Please now step right back.

## Since you dealt with this before

Could you take a look at this? New suspected account, the same phrases, sources, arguments, sentences etc. [3] --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 22:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

## The Bugle: Issue XCV, February 2014

 Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Rabaul in World War II and Australia in World War I

If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:28, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

## Chace Watson

Don't know if you've seen my email yet, but I started a cu.wiki page for him: here. INeverCry 18:24, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I just saw it. I'll look into fleshing it out. NativeForeigner Talk 18:25, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

## User:Qjahid

Greetings,
Should i leave a note under Qjahid's entry in the AfD discussion that this user was confirmed to be a sockpuppet of Usaeedi and was blocked? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Or should i best wait for an admin to do so? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 21:43, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Feel free to do so, link to the spi. NativeForeigner Talk 21:54, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

One last thing,
Am i authorized to add the sockpuppet headnote on Qjahid's user page? Because i'd still prefer an admin like you to perform these tasks, not me. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 22:25, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I'll take care of it. NativeForeigner Talk 23:07, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks and i apologize if i kept bothering you about this. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 23:30, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
No problem, I"ve been busy as of late but this really wasn't a big deal :) NativeForeigner Talk 00:06, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

## Requesting rangeblock

I am writing to you for two reasons. 1. You list yourself as willing to perform rangeblocks and 2. your involvement, about ten months ago, in a sockpuppet investigation into 089baby (talk · contribs). (See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/089baby/Archive), as I feel a rangeblock is necessary for containing his sockpuppetry. Recently he has taken to IP hopping, using registered accounts only for creating articles. All the IP's he's used are in the 36.27.0.0/16 range, with the third number ranging from 192 to 203.

As evidence, I point to the timeline of account usage. From 6 November to 4 January, 9 different accounts of his blocked were blocked in as many weeks, and then he stopped all of a sudden. Assuming I haven't missed any, the next sock wasn't registered until a month later. From 10 January onward, there was dramatic increase in edits to articles frequently edited by 089baby from IP's in the range in question, there having been only around 20 edits to article on Cambodian football (his subject of interest) in all of 2013. Add to that the fact that the only edits made by the two most recent socks Kakalara (talk · contribs) and were to create the same five articles, with all other edits to these article, except some routine maintenance, coming from IP's in the range.

I have already posted on the Administrators' noticeboard about this, but the post has gone unanswered for two days. Additionally, I have also contacted and who both also have some involvement in this case. Thank you in advance. Sir Sputnik (talk) 08:03, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

And so ends the most competitive first round we have ever seen, with 38 points required to qualify for round 2. Last year, 19 points secured a place; before that, 11 (2012) or 8 (2011) were enough. This is both a blessing and a curse. While it shows the vigourous good health of the competition, it also means that we have already lost many worthy competitors. Our top three scorers were:

1. Godot13 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer whose high-quality scans of rare banknotes represent an unusual, interesting and valuable contribution to Wikipedia. Most of Godot's points this round have come from a large set of pictures used in Treasury Note (1890–91).
2. Adam Cuerden (submissions), a WikiCup veteran and a finalist last year, Adam is also a featured picture specialist, focusing on the restoration of historical images. This month's promotions have included a carefully restored set of artist William Russell Flint's work.
3. WikiRedactor (submissions), another WikiCup newcomer. WikiRedactor has claimed points for good article reviews and good articles relating to pop music, many of which were awarded bonus points. Articles include Sky Ferreira, Hannah Montana 2: Meet Miley Cyrus and "Wrecking Ball" (Miley Cyrus song).

Other competitors of note include:

After such a competitive first round, expect the second round to also be fiercely fought. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2, but please do not update your submission page until March (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail), The ed17 (talkemail) and Miyagawa (talkemail) 00:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

## Removal of my edits

What exactly did you change of my edits?[1] I couldn't find anything AFAIK in your contribs list. --The 4D Government (talk) 23:11, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

The 4D Government. If you click here it will show a list of edits you have made. Most of them are blue and they provide a link, but some of them are grey and crossed-out. Those crossed out ones are the ones that have been redacted. CorporateM (Talk) 22:37, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I emailed him to this effect. NativeForeigner Talk 22:41, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Awww, sorry I can be a bit of a nosey Talk page stalker. I noticed your comment on the ToU and was just sort of browsing around. CorporateM (Talk) 23:57, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
No, it's all good, thanks. NativeForeigner Talk 23:58, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Oh, thank you. The 4D Government (talk) 01:56, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

## New proposal

To a member of the AC, I urge you to read this that I wrote.

There's been support for Snowden because people are against spying. In Wikipedia, checkusers are spying all the time. Wikipedians who hate other wikipedians sometimes try to falsely brand them as socks and get the checkuser to spy on them....or they just accuse. This poisonous environment got me to stop editing Wikipedia years ago. I thought I'd finally say something.

The key may be for a bunch of people to be considered "wise editors" for a term of a few months. There, they can try to get people to compromise and talk. Wikipedia is not a vote but editors try to make it a vote all the time.

Help make WP a better place and not a spy agency and poisonous den. ComingBackAgain (talk) 01:55, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

## Arbitration request motion passed

An Arbitration Clarification request motion passed. You contributed to the discussion (or are on the committee or a clerk)