Jump to content

User talk:Gatoclass: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Mbz1 (talk | contribs)
22,338 edits
m Reverted edits by Mbz1 (talk) to last version by Gatoclass
Line 454: Line 454:


::::: Well if you're sure none of the other sources you propose to use mention the conflict, I don't see a problem with it. However, someone may question the notability of the product, based on that piece, as it seems to be a startup company and there are countless startups with a good product. [[User:Gatoclass|Gatoclass]] ([[User talk:Gatoclass#top|talk]]) 16:38, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
::::: Well if you're sure none of the other sources you propose to use mention the conflict, I don't see a problem with it. However, someone may question the notability of the product, based on that piece, as it seems to be a startup company and there are countless startups with a good product. [[User:Gatoclass|Gatoclass]] ([[User talk:Gatoclass#top|talk]]) 16:38, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
::::::Thanks Gato, I am sure about the other sources. They mention no I/P conflict. If the article is nominated on deletion I will neither vote nor comment on this AfD.I guess I still have to clear it up with my banning administrator. Listen, I do appreciate the time you're spending on my articles and me.--[[User:Mbz1|Mbz1]] ([[User talk:Mbz1|talk]]) 17:12, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:24, 29 April 2011


Monday
15
July
03:07 UTC
RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 00:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online


The Signpost: 3 January 2011

Happy Gatoclass's Day!

Gatoclass has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
so I've officially declared today as Gatoclass's Day!
For being a great person and awesome Wikipedian,
enjoy being the star of the day, Gatoclass!

Signed, Neutralhomer

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, click here. Have a Great Day...Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist A-Class and Peer Reviews Oct–Dec 2010

 Military history reviewers' award 
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period Oct–Dec 2010, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. AustralianRupert (talk) 05:54, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Kundalini yoga and multiple accounts

Hello Gatoclass. Kundalini yoga is the subject of renewed enthusiasm from editors who seem to be followers of Yogi Bhajan. At least three of the participants (Fatehji, RogerThatOne72 and 66.65.62.138) are the same editor, according to YellowMonkey's CU findings from last September. YM's information was given on his own talk page, and it is linked from the discussion at User talk:SpacemanSpiff#Kundalini yoga. I'm thinking of opening a formal WP:SPI (since I'd quite forgotten about this evidence). If you are familiar with sock issues, would you agree that all three incarnations of this editor should be blocked? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 05:51, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Ed, I'm not that familiar with socking issues but I think I could support a move to have these accounts blocked if they are proven socks, they have created a lot of disruption on associated articles already and if they are socks then that only makes the behaviour more reprehensible. In fact I think there is probably good cause to block the accounts on SPI/COI concerns alone, due to their relentless advocacy of a particular group. Please note that I won't be able to respond to further messages quickly as I don't currently have access to the net except by brief visits to internet cafes where I am typing this, a situation that I may not be able to resolve for a few weeks yet. Regards, Gatoclass (talk) 06:19, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Fatehji, in case you want to comment there. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 19:28, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors

Hi Gatoclass! Since you've been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, I wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador.

Ifyou're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors during the current term, which started in January and goes through early May. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE.

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 19:07, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

[1] Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:24, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

February 2011

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Israeli animal spy conspiracy theories. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Sandstein  18:40, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose, at their own discretion, sanctions on any editor working on pages broadly related to the Arab-Israeli conflict if the editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article ban. The committee's full decision can be read at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles#Final decision.

The block and the warning are on account of your two reverts today, [2] and [3], in violation of Wikipedia:ARBPIA#General 1RR restriction, as discussed at the end of this thread. This block is not an arbitration enforcement block for the reasons explained there.  Sandstein  18:44, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Gatoclass (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have been an editor here for almost five years and an admin for the last two. In all that time I have maintained a clean block log. Six weeks ago I was obliged to relocate to another state to arrange a funeral, during which time I had only occasional access to the internet. Naturally I have been emotionally distracted by these events and after six weeks away, had completely forgotten about the 1RR restriction recently imposed on I-P articles. I did in fact recall the 1RR restriction a couple of hours after making the second revert, but by that time someone else had already reverted my edit so I had no opportunity to self-revert. This block was heavy handed and completely unnecessary as I could simply have been reminded of the 1RR restriction or given a warning, and I think a user with my record would be entitled to such a courtesy. Since this block is plainly serving no purpose and compromises an otherwise clean record, I therefore request that it be overturned. Regards, Gatoclass (talk) 02:41, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Your explanation is sufficient to convince me that you will not continue reverting, regardless of whether or not I find the explanation credible. The block is therefore no longer necessary and is lifted. But please remember that it is your own responsibility, as an editor and especially as an administrator editing in the area of conflict, to know and comply with the applicable restrictions, which explicitly provide that "Editors who violate this 1RR restriction may be blocked without warning by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence."  Sandstein  06:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

block log barnstar

The block log Barnstar
(award details) - I would like to use this opportunity to thank User:Gatoclass for his fine contributions to wikipedia over the years and welcome him to the contributors that got a little heated club and allegedly made that caring extra revert. Many thanks, wear your record with pride, respect to you from Off2riorob (talk) 02:46, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dropping by...

I was sorry to see your news when I dropped by your talk page earlier to see what was going on, and I offer my condolences. I hope for happier days for you ahead. With very best wishes, BencherliteTalk 22:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Bench, your thoughts are very much appreciated. Gatoclass (talk) 01:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the block and had typed up a response back, but I decided to avoid the drama. I was very surprised to see you blocked without a warning when it didn't appear that you regularly work in this area (thus probably not familiar with the 1RR restriction like I wouldn't be). Royalbroil 02:32, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I did know about the 1RR restriction, but having barely edited here for the last two months, it momentarily slipped my mind when I returned to make a few edits. At the time the 1RR was proposed, I did raise an objection to the "warning not required" clause, but it never occurred to me at the time that I might have cause to personally regret its inclusion. Gatoclass (talk) 06:15, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW as the editor that you reverted, I didn't think a block was warranted either. Especially since others started carrying on after your second edit I don't think it really served any purpose that a warning wouldn't have. I think that's the only page relating to the I/P conflict that I've worked on and I had forgotten the 1RR rule as well. Hope we can work together on less heated issues in the future. Qrsdogg (talk) 02:51, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it wasn't really a "heated" issue for me :) I just made a couple of reversions of what I saw as a needlessly provocative comment. A couple of hours later I suddenly remembered the 1RR restriction, but by that time someone had already reverted me, so I couldn't self-revert. I did think of adding a note to the page apologizing for the error, but knowing how opportunistic some people are in this topic area, decided not to do so in the hope it would be overlooked. In retrospect, it would have been better to leave a note, but it's easy to be wise after the event. Gatoclass (talk) 05:39, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

user name

Idly curious about the etymology of your username? Gerardw (talk) 12:07, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See this thread. Gatoclass (talk) 12:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Gerardw (talk) 12:52, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem :) Gatoclass (talk) 13:31, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Gatoclass, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Gatoclass/SB/SB. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

  • See a log of files removed today here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK favor

Hi, I see you are active right now, and a major DYK admin helper. I have a time-sensitive favor to ask. This semester, I am a Campus Ambassador for Wikimedia at Simmons College. Basically, as an experienced Wikipedian, I am helping the students in a class who are creating content on Wikipedia as part of their class curriculum. You can see more about the program, part of Wikimedia's Public Policy Initiative at outreach:Public Policy Initiative. (I don't mean sound official, obviously the title carries no extra weight on Wikipedia itself.) You might also check out WP:AMBASS and WP:CAMPUS, and my specific course is at Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy/Courses/Spring 2011/Public Relations Seminar (Marlene Fine). Anyway, I say that by way of introducing and justifying what I was about to ask, because it is out-of-process. As you can see from the course page, one of our students' milestones will be to try to get their articles on DYK. In the past, apparently, that was a major perk for students, and really motivated them—which is partly what the project is about, to excite new editors and gain long-term contributors.

Last week, I was using an article being drafted in my sandbox as an example of how to create their own sandboxes, so tonight I thought of getting that article on DYK in time to coincide with class time. It would probably surprise them to see it on the main page, and would give them firsthand knowledge of what they are working toward. And now the hitch: the class is Wednesday, 1 pm EST (10 hours from now), and I haven't even nominated the article (having just come up with the idea), so I can't go through normal channels. The time puts it in queue 2, if I read the times right, which is already full. It looks like there is room enough to bump a current hook down half a day. I think it's for a good cause, but I am not sure how big of a deal that would be (for the editor bumped down, and for doing it out-of-process).

I might have a dozen DYKs myself over the past 5 years, so I'm not exceedingly familiar with the culture there. The article that I have been writing is Lincoln Ragsdale, which is longish and I think should be pretty safe as far as DYK standards go. My idea for a hook, though I am not picky, is "...that Phoenix civil rights leader Lincoln Ragsdale helped coordinate and fund a lawsuit that produced the first court decision declaring school segregation unconstitutional in the United States?" The hook is cited and I will of course review a DYK nomination, as required. If it would make you uncomfortable, it's not a big deal, but it would be really, really awesome if you could help me out. :-) I leave it up to you. Thanks! And sorry that this was long. Dominic·t 08:36, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, I had missed on copying them over when I was working offline. It is now fixed. Thanks for looking at it so promptly. Dominic·t 09:07, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much! :-) Dominic·t 09:28, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

Hello! I think the issue I raised over at Sandstein's talk page is pretty serious. Thanks a lot for your comments. Given your vast experience here may I ask your advice as to where I should raise it? I think if left unchecked this can do serious damage to the project. - BorisG (talk) 12:09, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a wider discussion, you could try WP:AN I guess (not AN/I, that's for emergencies). Gatoclass (talk) 13:31, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your advice. Yes I want a wider discussion, but maybe I will wait for more comments. In the meantime there is a new thread over at User talk:Sandstein on exactly the same issue, with stronger arguments for Sandstein's approach. We shall see. - BorisG (talk) 14:01, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Gatoclass, thanks for working on the article. I raised one more question at the talk's page.Could you please address it there? I'd like to add you as the article's creator for DYK. Is this OK with you? Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:19, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, why not? I think the article is in reasonable shape now. Gatoclass (talk) 16:33, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
done.Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:08, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why not?

Thanks for your comment. I am not sure why did you remove it. Listen, would you like to help me with this article? Why we only work together on some I/P related articles? Why not to work together on something funny like this one is? Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:24, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the offer. But I have a number of my own articles I am in the process of writing, and I'm afraid I don't have time to take on yet more content creation. I really only do substantial work on other people's articles when I see problems with them at DYK that I think need to be rectified. Gatoclass (talk) 07:47, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:48, 7 March 2011 (UTC) 03:04, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 March 2011

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

New article you might be interested in

Hi Gatoclass, here's a new article: Stoning murder of Israeli teens. May I please ask you to help me to make it DYK ready? Thanks for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:16, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the offer, but probably not. I have a lot of content creation of my own I'm working on right now, and I really don't want to get distracted from it. Your article looks to have some POV issues, I might try to give it a tweak or two at some point, but that's probably all I'll be able to manage. Gatoclass (talk) 05:44, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Thanks for sticking up for me, or at least against the actions took by HJ Mitchell against me. Passionless -Talk 08:38, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Gatoclass (talk) 09:16, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bloodlands DYK

I hope you can pass the DYK soon :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 01:30, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I've been very busy with my own content creation over the last few days. I haven't forgotten your nom and I intend to take another look at it shortly and hopefully get any potential problems quickly sorted out. Gatoclass (talk) 01:37, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am fine with your edits, thanks for further expansion! I presume you'll pass it now? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:49, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

Welcome back

Added a link to the Northerner, one of the ships on your page User:Gatoclass/SB/Novelty_Iron_Works. Fascinating reading, thanks !! Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:24, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you enjoyed it :) It's been a fun company to research, but there's quite a bit more to do before the article is ready for mainspace. Gatoclass (talk) 03:57, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
From someone who has worked at a now modern copper works, those images are awesome. Nice job tracking those drawings down.Cptnono (talk) 06:30, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks :) Gatoclass (talk) 06:42, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

[4] I could see the hand of the Master!--Mbz1 (talk) 01:08, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'd hardly describe myself that way, but thanks for the compliment. I've given the hook another slight tweak and added a possible alt, BTW. Gatoclass (talk) 01:22, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I meant it, Gato. and please believe me I really appreciate your help. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:36, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Today is a day of "thank you". Now my "thank you" is for this comment, a comment of a wise man. Honestly I wish somebody would have given me such advise before I filed that AE against you a year ago :-). Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question

It is acceptable behaviour to leave notes like "Note XXXXX is an account created today" at a !vote, right? Thanks, Passionless -Talk 17:51, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that would probably be okay. Gatoclass (talk) 02:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pawtuxet class cutter

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Pawtuxet class cutter, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.unblocked.org/surf.php?q=aHR0cDovL2VuLndpa2lwZWRpYS5vcmcvd2lraS9TcGVjaWFsOkxvZy9tb3Zl.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 10:36, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

Murder of Koby Mandell and Yosef Ishran

After Murder of Koby Mandell and Yosef Ishran was noted on the DYK talk page, I followed your edits. Wikipedia needs folks who are even-handed and willing to get in the middle of the emotionally-charged debates. You handled the matter with diplomacy and balance. Good work. Cbl62 (talk) 05:17, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Cbl :) Gatoclass (talk) 05:52, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I just noticed that you cleaned-up/copyedited quite a few small errors I introduced in my last round of edits something like 18 hours ago. Thanks for that; I suppose I must have been a little sleepy. Best,  – OhioStandard (talk) 01:39, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WT:DYK Rebecca Black hook - the situation was confusing from my side, partly because both your threads were started around my logout time. Thus most action occurred during the offline time, and those 14 hours were short, after which I saw a note that you fixed the article. Second time, I did consider withdrawing - surely your voice was a reason good enough for that - and then saw an edit by Mbz1 with a summary "changed as requested by gato", and left it undecided. Can't express it in few words, but something was missing in the air for a rapid reaction, perhaps a clear-cut formulation of the POV problem and why is it serious. Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 08:34, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to make it clear. Under "POV content" User:Gatoclass meant that I added to the article two exact quotes from 2 RS New York Times and The Globe and Mail, the quotes that are supported by at least CNN; Associated Press and USA Today. The only way to respond such claims was to ignore the request, and ignored it was. At least I am glad Gato learned his lesson. With Robert Kennedy in Palestine (1948) he pulled the hook out himself. Now he asked for one to be pulled out.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:57, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just to be clear, the only reason I didn't pull the hook myself is because of the possible wikidrama it would lead to after Sandstein unwisely and quite incorrectly in my opinion cautioned me to avoid such actions. Your own behaviour in that instance was so far beyond DYK's normal bounds that I felt justified in simply dropping the hook, and I still feel my action was defensible. But you shouldn't imagine by my actions that I have in any way conceded the point, and I reserve the right to pull such hooks in future should I feel it to be necessary.
Other than that, this wasn't a discussion about the merits of your edits or mine. It was a discussion about process, and for the moment at least, it's been resolved. Gatoclass (talk) 16:14, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the difference between Sandstein and you is that Sandstein is uninvolved and you are. Even forgetting that Sandstein advised you "unwisely and quite incorrectly", if you pulled the hook out yourself, it would have meant that you used (or rather misused) your administrative tools while editing in the area you are involved in. It was very wise of you do not pool this hook out yourself.
Ok, let's talk about different matters, shall we. Have you seen that the hook you came up for the article I wrote generated more than 22,000 hits? Thanks again for helping me out with that hook.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:55, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, well I'm pleased that hook was promoted, and on April Fool's, because if I say so myself, I thought that was a pretty good hook, and I think the page hits confirm that :)
As for the other matter - you are in error to claim that I misused my administrative tools in that instance as I dropped the hook from Prep, not from the Queue itself. You don't need admin tools to edit Prep, anyone can do it. Gatoclass (talk) 17:05, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm well aware that your hours of "duty" were not conducive to a response to my request matsci. You are probably the last admin I would want to hold responsible for this SNAFU. My initial comment was not intended as a criticism of you in particular, it's just that your response to the Black request acted as a catalyst for my complaint. And you are probably right that I should have expressed my original request more firmly. But please, don't for a moment think I want preferential treatment - I make mistakes like everybody else, and you are fully entitled to question my actions (which is why I struck part of my last comment as inappropriate). So don't hesitate to question any future such request I make if you need to - I can assure you I won't hold it against you. It was only the lack of response I got to my requests that I found upsetting, because it left me totally in the dark as to why they were ignored. So thanks once again for your response - I really do appreciate it. Gatoclass (talk) 09:33, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Its true that WT:DYK is quite passive on making decisions these days - perhaps because the old-timers are mostly elsewhere (me included), and new reviewers are hesitant to delve in controversies. I guess a few more little events of this kind might trigger me to return to the past DYK activity :-). You made a good point that we (I) should request clarification in such cases instead of staying silent. I should keep it in mind in the future. Materialscientist (talk) 09:40, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you are right about that, I feel quite redundant at DYK since the establishment of Quid Pro Quo. That's something else to blame you for. Just kidding - it's worked fantastically well, and kudos to you for coming up with it ;) Gatoclass (talk) 09:52, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strange, for me the Quid Pro Quo was never a factor, maybe because I don't hesitate to get involved in an on-going review if I feel something is odd or can be improved there. We also know who can be trusted (more or less :) and who should be checked, thus there should be plenty of work for you at any time at T:TDYK :) Materialscientist (talk) 10:03, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't had as much time to put into DYK recently. But it's great to be able to walk away from it and not see it all fall apart. And QPQ is a major part of that, so either way you still get a brownie point. Cheers, Gatoclass (talk) 10:15, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A favor?

Hi Gato, Could you please fix the hook "... that Clubfoot George was executed by vigilantes because they believed that he was innocent?" here, and remove the wikilink to the word "innocent". It is April 1 hook. There's no reason to disclose what "innocent" means in the hook itself. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:58, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if that's the right idea, it looks like most of the hooks we have up now do sort of clue the reader in with a wikilink-like how Africa and Titanic are linked. Qrsdogg (talk) 06:37, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would not have linked Africa, but Titanic is the main article. It should have been linked.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:51, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Suez Crisis

Unfortunately your edit to the introduction of the article on the Suez Crisis removed the main reason why Israel inavded Egypt (in order to prevent the attack expected in 1957). This information is vital to the article and has been reinstated. (92.7.15.220 (talk) 18:04, 2 April 2011 (UTC))[reply]

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

Thanks!

I'd like to thank you for avoiding requesting to topic ban me. It was a fair and a kind thing to do. Maybe even more fair would have been to say that you see no reason for prolonged topic ban for me, but... anyway...Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I decided not to add to the evidence against you on the basis that you have usually been co-operative in working to improve your DYK submissions. Generally speaking, you have been far from the worst editor I have encountered in the topic area in question. That doesn't mean that I myself do not have serious concerns about some of your editing though. In fact, only a few days ago I was mulling starting a full arbcom case against you myself, after your changes to the Koby Mandell article just an hour or so before it was due for main page exposure. I decided not to do so on that occasion on the basis that your explanation for the late reverts was not unreasonable given your typical editing pattern - but it was still an unduly aggressive edit in my opinion.
I'll refrain from giving voice to my other concerns regarding your editing at this time, since you are in the middle of an AE case, but suffice it to say that, regrettably, they have been sufficient to deter me from adding a word in your favour, which I otherwise might have done. Gatoclass (talk) 05:31, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, user:passionless added the link to your arbcom comment to AE request. So in the end you did add evidences against me without actually adding those directly to AE :-)
I wish you took me to arbcom. I am more than sure the case would have been declined.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:19, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My very last article

Here it is. I liked what I saw from this film, and wanted to write an article about this for quite some time. Now I have no more time left. Tomorrow I will be topic banned and I would no longer be allowed to work on such articles.I tried to do my best with it, but I am so tired of that AE thing. If you have a time, could you please take a look at it? Maybe you could fix my English, remove POV, if any, and to add something to it? If you have no time, that's fine too. Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:03, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1660 Safed Massacre

Thanks for your clear and calm edits to (and move of) 1660 Safed Massacre. I assume you have the page watch-listed but wanted to alert you that (following your removal of the inappropriate Dolan book) I made an edit identifying the two remaining sources for "near total destruction" as Zionist. Jacob de Haas actually served on the Zionist Organization propaganda commitee and Theodore Herzl Foundation self identifies as such on its web site. I also could not verify that de Haas actually asserts a Safed massacre, as Google Book won't give me the relevant snippet if its there. More details on the Talk page. I would welcome your involvement in the debate/revert cycle that will probably now occur. Jonathanwallace (talk) 12:26, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you think those sources are bad, you should have a look at Safed Plunder. The history section is so poorly sourced and inaccurate I was going to delete it outright, but that would leave the article with no topic so for the moment I've tagged it instead. Gatoclass (talk) 12:56, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, can you please elaborate (preferably on the article's Discussion page) which sources you perceive to be problematic and why? Thanks.—Biosketch (talk) 13:10, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, just give me a few minutes. Gatoclass (talk) 13:30, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for USRC Wayanda

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Pawtuxet class cutter (160/3 DYKs)

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for USRC Kankakee

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for USRC Pawtuxet

The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for USRC Levi Woodbury

The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

DYK review

Hi Gatoclass. I just noticed that you reviewed my DYK nomination for Wharton Reef Light. Indeed I forgot to cite the relevant source inline. I added it now so the nomination should be fine. I'd appreciate it if you had a look. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 18:17, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

New article

Hello Gatoclass, I wrote a new article Start-up Nation: The Story of Israel's Economic Miracle.I did add some negative reviews of the book, but I was not able to add some others because adding those would have been a violation of my topic ban. So, I promised I would let you know about the article, in case you'd like to add some more negative reviews. The sources is there already. You'd see them in references. You only need to add something in, if you would like to do it.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:07, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that article is a violation of your ARBPIA ban. One cannot discuss Israel's "economic miracle" without discussion of the I-P conflict, as you yourself tacitly admit by this very post of yours. If you've nominated this at DYK I will oppose its promotion on those grounds. Gatoclass (talk) 06:10, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please read here, and also, if you are to read most reviews, you'd see there is no ban violation on my part, and besides, if you believe there was a ban violation, please file AE on me, and have me blocked and article deleted, DYK is not the right place to punish an editor.--Mbz1 (talk) 10:40, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well I'm glad to see you at least had the sense to consult with someone before moving the article into mainspace. However, I believe user 2/0 has erred in approving this article for mainspace in contravention of your ban, and I don't believe a more experienced AE admin would have allowed you to do so.
I don't want to have to haul you to AE over this as I already stated that I thought the article was probably created in good faith; however, your expectation that I add all the bits pertaining to the I-P conflict so you can skirt your ban is not acceptable to me, least of all as a DYK nomination. If you insist on taking this forward at DYK I will have little choice but to initiate an AE case. Gatoclass (talk) 10:52, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I insist on DYK. As I and btw another editor said DYK is not the right place to punish an editor. By declining a valid DYK you are declining the knowledge,you are punishing wikipedia's readers, not me.I have never said the article is one-sided. It does represent all reasonable views of all notable reviewers with no violation of my ban. I'll send you email in a sec. --Mbz1 (talk) 11:26, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A ban is a ban. It doesn't mean you get to go on writing articles pertaining to the topic area and nominating them at DYK in the expectation that other users are going to add the missing content. That would just make a total mockery of your ban. I have no intention of being party to such gamesmanship, and if you insist on the nomination, this will in all likelihood end up at AE. Gatoclass (talk) 11:49, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Gato, I have done nothing wrong. I insist on the DYK nomination.--Mbz1 (talk) 11:54, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I will request a ruling on this at AE. But it will have to wait until tomorrow now. Gatoclass (talk) 13:25, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
May I please ask for a personal favor? Tomorrow is the last day of Passover. Could you wait until the day after tomorrow please? Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:30, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, not a problem. Just let me know when it's over and I'll follow it up then. Gatoclass (talk) 13:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is kind of you. Thanks. The day after tomorrow at about this time would be find.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:08, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I mentioned you here.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:40, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So are you going to proceed, if I may ask please?--Mbz1 (talk) 14:14, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm mulling it over. I could without the drama, but on the other hand, I don't want to be presented with the same sort of problem a week or two down the track. If you were to agree not to do this sort of thing again, or perhaps to consult me first if you have doubts about a topic, I'd probably be just as happy to forget about it. If not, then I guess I will have to ask for a clarification. Gatoclass (talk) 14:22, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(intend)I agree up to the end of my topic ban to consult you first, if I have doubts about the topic, but only, if you please remove your opposition for my hook now. There is no valid reason to decline the hook.Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:37, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, but I will want to make a few tweaks to the article first, as you originally suggested. It might take me a day or two to get around to it as I'm a bit busy right now. Gatoclass (talk) 14:43, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, but could you please replace your "delete vote" with "possible vote" and specify at the nomination's that you request a few days to "make a few tweaks to the article" before it is promoted.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:08, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sure, I'll do that in a few minutes. Gatoclass (talk) 15:11, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, the only thing that is bothering me now is my absolutely beautiful defense that I spent a few hours to prepare, and that nobody is going to see it now :-) I guess it shout wait until the next time :-) ,no worries, just kidding, as I promised I will consult you first, if I have doubts about the topic, and I definitely will respect your suggestions. Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:57, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Vladimir Velichko

Hello! Your submission of Vladimir Velichko at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that 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! PhantomPlugger (talk) 18:12, 25 April 2011 (UTC) This hook is currently in DYK Queue 5 and has an error. I am notifying you because you were the last administrator to comment on the article. PhantomPlugger (talk) 18:12, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2011

As promiced

Hi Gato, As promised I'd like to ask you, if you would mind me writing an article about so called Israeli emergency bandages that is a medical bandage that is used to stop bleeding. If it is OK with you I will write the article in my user space, and notify you before moving it to main space. Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:30, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Was it invented from experiences with, say, treating victims of terrorist attacks, or of soldiers in wartime? Has it notably been used for such victims? If so, I believe it would be an infringement of your ban. Gatoclass (talk) 05:32, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If I am to write this article, there will not be a single word about the I/P conflict at all. As I said I was going to write it in my user space for you to see, and if you say "no", I will not move it to the main space.--Mbz1 (talk) 11:54, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little sceptical that an article on such a topic could reasonably avoid discussion of the I-P conflict. Can you post me a list of sources? It might give me a better idea of what the topic entails. Gatoclass (talk) 12:03, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I emailed you the source.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well if you're sure none of the other sources you propose to use mention the conflict, I don't see a problem with it. However, someone may question the notability of the product, based on that piece, as it seems to be a startup company and there are countless startups with a good product. Gatoclass (talk) 16:38, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gatoclass&oldid=426600561"