User talk:Sven Manguard

Looking for something that was here? Check the archives: 2010 · 2011: Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4 · 2012: Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4 · 2013: Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4 · 2014: Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4 · 2015+
Fast navigation: Commons · Wikidata

---

Quick Link Bar
Monitor
File Mover Permission Requests
File Size Reduction Requests
Sandboxes · Subpages
Work
Backlog board
Category:Articles with missing files
Chinese Dynastic Period Article Improvement

I'll be back after the New Year

Hey all, if you have requests for me, please note that I really won't be around until the new year. RL calls and stuff. Cheers, Sven Manguard Wha? 23:07, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Re:WikiCup Question

Nope, sorry. The nomination and promotion both have to be in 2012, and you have to have done "significant work" on the article in that year. J Milburn (talk) 23:27, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Responded on your talk page. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:56, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Re:Sign up

Re:Sign up

Is it required to find proof that image on the mouse pad is free to keep this file? Bulwersator (talk) 14:07, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

The mousepad as a whole is an original composition (literary and artistic), meaning that it is copyrighted, irregardless of the status of the image on the left. I'd judge that the image is non-free, meaning that it cannot be transferred to commons. Right now it's also orphaned, and we don't allow non-free images to be stored on Wikipedia if they're not being used. If you intend on using the image soon, please add a fair use rationale to it and change the licesne. If not, please list it for deletion at FfD (or ask me to do it). Feel free to use this message as an FfD justification. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:53, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Bulwersator (talk) 21:27, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

• YA question - is it possible to move File:MillstoneCrest.jpg? PD-text is bogus, PD-Old is impossible - it may be less than 100 after death of author Bulwersator (talk) 14:47, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Why is PD-old impossible? If it was published in 1863, it's over 100 years old. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
    • "with a copyright term of no more than the life of the author plus 100 years." - maybe author was still alive in 1912? Bulwersator (talk) 20:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
      • I'll handle this. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:04, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
• PS - what about placing something like this on Wikipedia talk:Moving files to the Commons (I copied list of reviewers)? It is really helpful to ask about commons and/or copyright Bulwersator (talk) 14:47, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
  • In the last drive, users willing to offer advice and users who were reviewers were two seperate lists, and in all honesty, I believe they should stay that way. Therefore my recommendation is that you ask each editor individually if they'd be willing to be on the list, and if they say yes, add them. I'd also look at the list of people willing to offer advice from the last drive, and ask those people as well. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
• Is it OK to tag File:Grand Theft Auto Advance.svg as PD-text? Bulwersator (talk) 14:51, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
  • I don't see why not. File:Grand_Theft_Auto_logo_series.svg is PD-text itself, and File:Gameboy advance logo.svg is PD-textlogo (although I just changed that one myself). Together I'd say that the best choice is PD-textlogo, rather than just PD-text, alhough they're pretty much functionally identical. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
• File:SAM penny 50MHz.jpg - is it OK to AGF and keep this as own work? Editor was SPA, so maybe he really created the image using Scanning acoustic microscope (she/he started article about this), maybe it was school assignment and she/he uploaded file using random licence... BTW, I watchlisted Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Sven Manguard 2 Bulwersator (talk) 14:14, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
  • There's no evidence from where I'm sitting that there's anything wrong with it. No TinEye hits, editor is in the right area edit wise, and it's the only upload. An SPA that is constructive is a good thing. I'd say transfer it. Sven Manguard Wha? 19:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
    • Yes, I used here SPA as positive rather than "Block evading, trolling, spamming and drunk SOCK editing on behalf of Syrian government" Bulwersator (talk) 20:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2012 WikiCup

Hello, and welcome to the 2012 WikiCup! The competition officially begins at the start of 2012 (UTC) after which time you may begin to claim points. Your submission page, where you must note any content for which you wish to claim points, can be found here, and formatting instructions can be found in hidden comments on the page. A bot will then update the main table, which can be seen on the WikiCup page. The full rules for what will and will not be awarded points can be found at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There's also a section on that page listing the changes that have been made to the rules this year, so that experienced participants can get up-to-date in a few seconds. One point of which we must remind everyone; you may only claim points for content upon which you have done significant work, and which you have nominated, in 2012. For instance, articles written or good article reviews started in 2011 are not eligible for points.

This round will last until late February, and signups will remain open until the middle of February. If you know of anyone who may like to take part, please let them know about the comeptition; the more the merrier! At the end of this round, the top 64 scorers will progress to the next round, where their scores will reset, and they will be split into pools. Note that, by default, you have been added to our newsletter list; we will be in contact at the end of every month with news. You're welcome to remove yourself from this list if you do not wish to hear from us. Conversely, those interested in following the competition are more than welcome to add themselves to the list. Please direct any questions towards the judges, or on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn (talk) and The ed17 (talk) 17:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_December_23#File:Don-2-3d-poster-shahrukh-khan-srk-04.jpg

Hi Sven, hope you're well. A user contested the deletion of File:Don-2-3d-poster-shahrukh-khan-srk-04.jpg on my talk page. Since you nominated the file for deletion, perhaps you'd like to weigh in? Regards, FASTILY ^{Happy 2012!!} 10:09, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Typhoon Dot (1989)/GA1

Just lettin' you know that I've replied to all of your comments for Typhoon Dot :) Cyclonebiskit (talk) 22:31, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

My Commons transfers

Hey Sven,

I've transferred some files to Commons today, which are currently listed here. I haven't done much of this before – maybe one or two files – so I'm unsure as to whether or not the transfers are acceptable. Could you check them? (BTW, don't feel bad about Irene; things come and go.) Thanks.

HurricaneFan25 — 18:42, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

This is a common mistake, but information about the transfer does not belong in the information template. In several of your transfers, the en.Wikipedia uploader and yourself were listed as the authors, and that is simply incorrect. The en.Wikipedia edit history and any documentation of the transfers belongs outside of that template. I just list it below that template. I recommend that you use the tool For the Common Good which handles the transfer information for you. Sven Manguard Wha? 19:45, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Meh (I don't like Windows though I have a Windows PC; I use a MacBook to edit). I moved a file though adjusted some things – does this look good? HurricaneFan25 — 22:46, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

That one is perfect. This is also Sven Manguard 13:25, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Lansdowne riot.jpg

Hi Sven, I'd like your opinion of a non-free file I uploaded in May 2011, File:Lansdowne riot.jpg. I uploaded it because I thought it was a unique historic image, and would be appropriate for fair use on an article about the riots. I thought that the low resolution copy would not infringe on the original market role of the copyright holder. After re-reading the non-free content guideline, I am not sure that it is allowable under that guideline. Can you take a look at it when you have time, and let me know your judgement about it. The problem is, that the image itself is not discussed in the content of Lansdowne Road football riot. This is the only non-free image I have uploaded, and looking back, I should have asked more experienced editor about it. Thanks, Quasihuman | Talk 18:01, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

In all honesty, I don't see much value to the image. The 2x4 in the crowd is all that really indicates a riot, and it's not really apparent even there. If you managed to find an image of the crowd doing the fascist salute, which was discussed in one of the sources, that would come closer to meeting NFCC #8, but I personally wouldn't have uploaded the image in question. That being said, I personally wouldn't put the image in question up for deletion. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:02, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your opinion, I agree, uploading it wasn't the best idea. I think I'll G7 it. Also, good luck with your RfA! Quasihuman | Talk 18:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Good luck

I honestly never thought you'd run! I'll do a full review later and will post my vote then, but I thought I'd just leave you a note here wishing you the very best of luck. Worm^TT · (talk) 13:00, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate the kindness. Sven Manguard Wha? 13:06, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Good luck with your RFA! Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I would be glad to support a great user who can give lots of advices and maintaince work. I like his enthusiasm and he is actually involved most of Wikipedia. So good luck on your RfA! --Katarighe (Talk · Contributions · E-mail) 15:06, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

You as an alternate account running for admin.

Please review WP:SOCK, specifically "...when applying for adminship, it is expected that you will disclose past accounts openly, or to the arbitration committee if the accounts must be kept private. Administrators who fail to disclose past accounts risk being desysopped, particularly if knowledge of them would have influenced the outcome of the RfA."

Please confirm that you have notified the entire committee the username of your past accounts. Hopefully an arbiter will be along to confirm the details of your past accounts. Thanks. Hipocrite (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I've responded to this concern at the RfA. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:44, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Adam Cuerden, Shoemaker's Holiday

Is there a nutshell version of this? Would it trouble you if he were back, or are there any restrictions on his editing? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:25, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, my this diff just popped on my watchlist, causing me to see the section just above this one. Unrelated. Goodness. Well, now that I've caught up and see you're at RFA, I don't suppose I'll be getting an answer to my question, considering the timing. Sorry to trouble you. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:03, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Even if I were not running at RfA, I'd be loathe to talk about Adam. It wasn't a bright chapter in my history here. To the question of "Would it trouble you if he were back", the answer is "yes", and please tell me what the account is. I don't have any intention of interacting with him, but considering our past, I don't want to be surprised if we run into each other again. Most importantly, if he's back, he needs to be transparent about his account history. It must seem hypocritical that I'm saying this, considering my RfA has the potential for derailment because I'm not willing to reveal my onw old account, but the issue in this case is that there was a first account named Adam Cuerden, but using RTV, that account was moved away, allowing Adam to create a second account named Adam Cuerden which didn't have linked history to the first. I'm all for CLEANSTART, but what happened in this case was abnormal. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for responding, and I'm really sorry to have inadvertently put you in this position during your RFA. The first thing I posted this morning when I started editing was the query here, after reviewing an editor's contribs, and the last thing I usually check after catching up in the morning is RFA and articlehistory errors. I will let this drop for now, and possibly revisit as evidence becomes clearer. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:56, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

It's okay. Please keep me in the loop. Sven Manguard Wha? 19:22, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Were there any restrictions, bans, blocks, anything that I should know about or that he shouldn't be breaching in a Clean Start? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:54, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

A whole bunch of shit was done through ArbCom, which I have an incomplete picture of. I know about the RTV because I stumbled upon it by accident, and was subsequently told that the RTV is a small fragment of a much larger ArbCom mess. You need to talk to John Vandenberg, he's not ArbCom anymore, but he knows the case very well. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:02, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Your RfA

Sven, I am in this terribly strange position regarding your RfA. I am, unfortunately, in the opposition but literally 10 cm away from being 100% strong support. I respect privacy in the fullest sense, but you're asking to be put in a place of public trust and the public has a compelling reason to care about the unrelated things you did six years ago. I don't want to know, I honestly don't care, but I feel as though it is in the community's best interest for 'someone' to know, y'know what I mean? Satisfying either condition as I submitted on your RfA would move me instantly to the fullest support imaginable.

And, I have to admit, I admire your bravery and integrity for being frank an open about your previous account. If you hadn't mentioned it, the RfA would pass with near-unanimity, I feel. You deserve to be commended for revealing the account's existence and sticking-to-your-guns concerning your privacy. I firmly hope it doesn't sink your RfA, we need more admins like you. I feel almost guilty that my hands are tied and I can't (yet) support you. But the gumption, the moxie, deserves recognition. For that, you get this:

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		per above Achowat (talk) 17:01, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

For everything else you do around the project, I hope you get "The Mop". Achowat (talk) 17:01, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

A bitter fight, unfortunately, but you stayed classy through-and-through. You get a beer on me. (Not a Template WikiLove .svg picture of a mug of beer, but a free invitation to have me buy you a pint of your preferred lager next time you're in New England and feeling WikiSociable). Achowat (talk) 19:50, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Just noticed the RfA now, sorry I didn't have a chance to weigh in. I would have supported. Skyrim is a good place to unwind! Will look for your next Request. The Interior (Talk) 20:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

• I would have supported. --Guerillero | My Talk 21:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Email

Check it, I've sent you one. (though it's just past 5am here so I may not see the reply for an hour or so). Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!}

• Replied. Probably best to watch it. I reply pretty quick. Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 19:10, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Very impressive

That was a very impressive withdrawal statement Sven.[1] Obviously I didn't vote, but I do know what a tough gig RfA can be. Malleus Fatuorum 19:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Seconded. Very classy, and I'm glad to see you'll be sticking around. 28bytes (talk) 19:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Ah, Sven, you withdrew before I could append this to my initial statement on the RFA after seeing other people's comments, so I'll give it to you here: "ETA: However, I agree with tommorris and Scottywong that you do good and useful work on this project, and if you can get the tendency to snappishness under control, I would expect to support you at a future RFA." I'm sorry things turned out like they did - I think blind opposes over the very concept of someone having cleanstart-ed are silly. Hopefully someone will figure out what the community wants in that regard, to prevent all future "I had a clean start" RFAs from auto-tanking. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 19:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

What they said. I look forward to supporting you at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Sven Manguard 2. Watch out for those Arrows to the knee. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 19:47, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

This is very strange, I saw your username yesterday and thought about you possibly running for admin. What an extraordinary coincidence that was. Ah well, I don't think we've ever interacted, but had I seen your Rfa in time I would have been in the support column, for sure. Sorry to see that things didn't go well, hope that you don't get discouraged. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:56, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

"Impressive" is exactly the adjective I came here to use. MF beat me to it. --Dweller (talk) 20:47, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I also thought about the RFA withdraw, and it was the best choice considering the potential bloodbath. I myself wasn't sure considering Fluffernutter and Fox opposes. Good close, and I'll look forward for your next RFA. Until then RFAs of any candidate that can be considered a bit "controversal" needs to be reformed badly. They seem to be huge bloodbaths recently, for reasons I'm still uncertain looking at the history of RFAs and any potensial controversy with adminstrators though AN/I, ArbCom, etc. Secret ^account 22:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

A good close Sven, and in every way as eloquent as your extremely professional work on Signpost. You and I have worked well together many times and I have every respect for the huge investment of your time in your high quality contributions. I have sometimes noted your slight, very slight, tendency to be abrasive, but it would only be of concern to those who are of an exceptionally sensitive nature, or indeed for those who look for possible hints of incivility in the written word - those who do, generally end up with a piece of wood at their feet. Your withdrawal was already done by the time I woke up this morning and although I have known for some time that your RfA was coming, I cannot say how I would have commented. Nevertheless, I know you will address the concerns you have yourself recognised, and you can be assured of my support next time round. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

• It was unfortunate to see how your RfA had turned out. Apologies for not noticing it earlier. I hope with time your true worth will shine and everyone will be able to look beyond the old past. - Mailer Diablo 11:46, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

• Ah! I've been taking some time off lately and I missed your RfA (which I've been watching for for months). When it comes to users who should be admins, you're one of the first to come to my mind, and I was sad to see how it turned out. It looks like you handled it perfectly, though. I'll have Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Sven Manguard 2 pre-watchlisted and I look forward to supporting you in the future. Swarm ^X 22:26, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks all for the kind words. I was avoiding responding to all of this because I thought it might be in poor form to do so. Then I realized not responding probably was worse form. I appreciate it. I plan, for the record, to run again in either four or six months (four months would be at the end of the term I'm in now, and therefore the next time I'd be comfortable starting a process that needs my close attention for a week straight). Sven Manguard Wha? 22:51, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

JSTOR Ban Dainagon

Hello, Sven Manguard. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Thank you. bamse (talk) 20:35, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anónimo Consejo

If you're not too busy killing guards (hard, I know), I'd appreciate it if you'd take another look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anónimo Consejo. I have completely rewritten the article and with multiple new sources I think it passes the GNG with plenty of headroom. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 00:47, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Responded with a withdraw. Sven Manguard Wha? 14:30, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I've closed it. Good work, both. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 14:48, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

My thanks to both of you. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 14:49, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

RfA

Sorry to see that it didn't go as planned :\ At any rate, I hope you found it to be a helpful learning experience. All the best, FASTILY ^(TALK) 08:39, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

• I thought you handled it with great dignity. I hadn't had time to decide yet, so I didn't !vote, but I certainly hope to be able to support you in a future run -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:32, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

PS: I think part of the cleanstart problem was that the unequivocal statement from xeno was a bit late, and people weren't at first sure who you had contacted and how. I suspect that getting such a statement from an ArbCom member right at the very start, appended to your nom statements before transclusion, might make things go more smoothly -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:35, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

If you need some random person to go through your old account in the future and verify there is nothing in your history worth opposing (assuming there isnt), I'm willing to volunteer. We've spoken once or twice about a couple of files but I don't think we've ever talked at all enough to consider me biased. I'd be willing to put my name behind a short 'statement of findings' if you want. Just let me know next time.--v/r - TP 03:29, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Re:Fbot task 4

Hello, Sven Manguard. You have new messages at Fastily's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:05, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I noticed, and have been trying to figure out the best way to respond. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

No response to my opinion essay submission via email at wikipediasignpost@gmail.com

Hi Sven--

I followed the writing guidlines carefully and submitted an opinion piece for Signpost 10 days ago asking for advice and help. After no response for 8 days, I sent another email and still no response. On the NEWSROOM page for Signpost, it states about this email address: "It is monitored by a handful of trusted Signpost editors."

I'm a newbie, so please forgive me if this lack of response is normal, but it seems to me that at least one of the "handful of trusted Signpost editors" could have responded with some advice/help or a "screw you, your piece stinks". Is this just a busy time for all signpost editors? Have I violated some rule or done something else wrong?

Thank you for your time,

Carmen Yarrusso (talk) 15:21, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I actually don't have access to that email address, I directed things there because it made more sense than having things sent to my personal email address. I will alert the executive editors, who do have access and should have seen it and either responded to you or told me about it. Apologies, Sven Manguard Wha? 15:26, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the help!

Hey Sven, I just wanted to thank you again for helping me improve the Brentwood Academy article. I appreciate giving your time to review it.

I hope your New Year is going well. Best regards, Lord Roem (talk) 17:39, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

New e-mail

Hello, Sven Manguard. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Yarrusso (talk) 14:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Question

Just asking that is it mandatory to have a date in a Commons transfer. But, even if it is isn't it wrong to say that the mover must be knowing the date? Discuss this with Ebe123 too.--Ankit Maity ^{Talk • contribs} 16:56, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

The date field really should be filled in. If it's an 'own work' image by a Wikipedia editor with no date, I just state "Uploaded <upload date>". If it's a current corporate logo, you can say "current as of the date of transfer". In all things, use common sense, and if you can't figure something out, skip it. There are 200,000 files to choose from, there's no need to force yourself to transfer a specific file that is missing information. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:06, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Email

Hello, Sven Manguard. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

-FASTILY ^(TALK) 22:56, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Responded with an email. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:22, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I suggested an alternate method. It's kind of crappy (because I can't be arsed to multithread my bots), but that's usually how I run my bots. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:19, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

We should...

Cover the debacle going on at WP:FAC. You up for a short Discussion report? ResMar 04:33, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I was unaware of any of that. There are two problems with me doing a discussion report on it. First, I have no time for the Singpost right now, and second, I doubt that I can cover anything related to TCO, who I have had numerous negative interactions with in the past, in a neutral manner. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:56, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Ok. ResMar 14:17, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Re:Bulwersator (talk)

Re:Bulwersator (talk)

"09:09, 2 January 2012 (UTC): File:Longhorn RSoD.png → File:Longhorn RSoD.pngRed X.svg Transfer unacceptable - I do not believe that this file is in fact within the public domain, and have placed it up for deletion both locally and at commons." - on commons deletion request was closed as kept Bulwersator (talk) 22:05, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:06, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sven Manguard. You have new messages at Alpha Quadrant's talk page.
Message added 01:16, 11 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 01:16, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

"Please use Commons"-notices

Hi! I noticed you wrote this to a user "Hello. Yesterday, I transferred a file which you uploaded to Commons. In the future, please upload unquestionably free use images to Commons, unless you specifically do not want them on Commons, in which case you should use a {{Keeplocal}} tag. Thank you." I find it very good that you ask uploaders to use Commons but adding keeplocal is not a quarantee that the file is not moved to Commons. So I suggest that you concider not to mention that option. --MGA73 (talk) 08:05, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

It's not a guarentee, but there's no other way for conscientious objectors to Commons to signal that they don't want to use Commons, and since I believe in moral rights in images, I am going to continue to give that option. Sven Manguard Wha? 14:21, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Questions re. Signpost opinion pieces

Hi Sven--

As a newbie who recently tried to submit an opinion piece, I'm still confused about the process:

What's the preferred way to submit a piece, e-mail to you, e-mail to one or both managing editors, e-mail to wikipediasignpost@gmail.com, or some combination of the above or some other way? Will you or the managing editors automatically keep me abreast of the status of a submitted piece? Is it appropriate to ask for the status after a few days? If yes, who should I ask about it? Should I use e-mail or Talk pages? Will you and/or the managing editors routinely monitor e-mail at wikipediasignpost@gmail.com in the future?

Regarding my recent submission: Have you or SMasters cracked the password to wikipediasignpost@gmail.com to get a clean copy of my submission (with italics, bold, and URL links)? What is the status of this piece?

Thank you for your time,

CarmenYarrusso (talk) 16:19, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Apologies, but I am no longer the opinion desk coordinator. As such, I am no longer involved in the process of getting pieces run.

To be completely honest and upfront, were it entirely up to me, I would decline to run the piece, as I do not believe that the Signpost is the proper place to advocate for the launching of new initiatives that are only tied in the loosest way possible to Wikipedia. You are not the first person, nor will you be the last person, to propose new projects on Wikipedia, however the proposals do not belong here, they belong (I believe) on Meta, and regardless of the merits of individual project ideas, they all get sent to the same place to be proposed and flushed out. That place is not the Signpost.

There are two executive editors, Skomorokh is the one that has always been more hands on with the Opinion desk, but she is ill, so I'd not expect a response from her. SMasters is the other executive editor, and I've never seen him in the area of the Opinion Desk, but right now he's the only person that has any input on what gets run in that section. I advise that you go speak to him if you still seek to use the Signpost as a platform to launch your idea. Sven Manguard Wha? 18:13, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

(sorry, I don't know how to indent my response)

Thank you for letting me know you’re no longer the opinion desk coordinator (I assume this is a very recent development since you didn’t mention it a few days ago when I sent you a copy of my opinion piece via e-mail).

If you read my piece even casually, you’ll see only a very small part of the essay refers to my specific proposal for a new WMF project. As the title indicates, the vast BULK of the essay is clearly a general argument advocating the WMF articulate its political POV by providing the world with a reliable source of free political knowledge (because, the piece argues, political knowledge is at least as important to humanity’s wellbeing as encyclopedic knowledge).

After spending 1300 words carefully explaining WHY the WMF should sponsor a new wiki to provide a reliable source of free political knowledge, I would be quite remiss if I didn’t refer the reader to an existing system that does just that, especially since the system is modeled on Wikipedia and would thus be relatively easy and inexpensive for WMF to implement.

Perhaps you don’t believe political knowledge is at least as important to humanity’s wellbeing as encyclopedic knowledge?

CarmenYarrusso (talk) 22:19, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Regarding "Perhaps you don’t believe political knowledge is at least as important to humanity’s wellbeing as encyclopedic knowledge?" that's not it at all. I am, after all, a political science major. Clearly you're attached to the piece, which is understandable, but launching an attacks against me isn't going to get you anywhere. As I said, Meta, not Wikipedia, is the place for this, at least in my opinion. Sven Manguard Wha? 14:28, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I’m very sorry you took my response above as “attacks” against you. I was simply trying to explain why my opinion piece meets the criteria for Signpost. My new project proposal is at Meta where you say it belongs, my opinion piece merely refers to it, while making a general argument.

From the Signpost opinion desk under “Submission guidelines”: “The criteria for publishing opinion pieces are quality of argument, originality, and relevance to the community.”

If the “quality of argument” is not up to your standards, I would think you’d point out the flaws and make constructive suggestions to improve it.

If you don’t think the piece shows “originality”, I would think you’d clearly state why it doesn’t.

That leaves only “relevance to the community”. If you don’t think arguing why the WMF should openly embrace a political POV, and arguing why it should provide free political knowledge to the world (because political knowledge is at least as important to humanity’s wellbeing as encyclopedic knowledge) is not relevant to the community, I would think you would clearly explain why it’s not.

What am I missing? CarmenYarrusso (talk) 16:00, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hey Carmen, given that Sven is no longer the Opinion Desk coordinator, wouldn't it be more productive to go debate this with whoever is? Nikkimaria (talk) 16:26, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Question

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Sven_Manguard&diff=469744322&oldid=469743173 – I'm interested in learning more about this "recent case". What case are you referring to? --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 18:58, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not going to name names, that's not my style, but an admin that I'm friendly with told me in private that another admin (which I know of but don't really know) was tied to his/her old account by someone else (i.e. was outed), and the old account had some apparently serious problems that would have factored into his/her RfA. I didn't investigate it, but apparently it made waves and enough people took notice of it that right now, there's not a surplus of trust for cleanstarts. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:12, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Would you be willing to tell me more about it privately through Special:EmailUser? --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 00:08, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

No. Other than the names, which I won't share, there's very little I know, and even less I know with enough confidence to share. Additionally, I've created and try my best to follow a philosophy that when I say bad things about users, by name, in public, they either have to be public figures (mainly full time WMF staff), or I would have to feel that they've wronged me to a degree to which I'm willing to deal with the fallout from saying bad things about users, by name, in public. I'm sure that if you ask someone who opposed me on account of the incident, they'd know more. Please ask them instead, or drop it entirely. If you didn't know about it, (and keeping in mind Wikipedia's love for gossip and drama), how big a deal could it really have been? Sven Manguard Wha? 15:13, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Are you talking about Fæ? I'm assuming that you're not since Fæ is a public figure and a WMUK Trustee. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 19:28, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Looks like you found it on your own. In case you didn't pick up on it, this isn't something that I either followed or care to discuss, so if you have specific questions about me, or how the incident affects me (other than raising suspicions right before my RfA), I'd suppose I'd be willing to chat about that. Otherwise, I have no interest in helping you get yourself uncomfortably involved in issues that really don't concern you. Thanks, Sven Manguard Wha? 22:55, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

File Database Reports

Hi Sven, as you know, I maintain a number of bot-updated database reports for the file namespace in my userspace. I'm thinking about graduating these reports (and also creating more) to a Wikipedia namespace page where they will be more accessible. What do you think? -FASTILY ^(TALK) 07:03, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

I have no real opinion either way. Run it by a BRFA person, informally would probably be good enough, and tell them that you're going to have the bot update a page in the Wikipedia namespace rather than your userspace. I doubt they'd have a problem. If they do object (or even if they don't), I'd love to have a "hub" page, which links to all of the reports that you (and maybe the other file namespace workers) generate, whatever page they dump to. This would allow people to find all of them, which isn't exactly easy now. I'm an organizer, what can I say . Sven Manguard Wha? 14:59, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Here we go - Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Fbot 16. Best, FASTILY ^(TALK) 20:36, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, the task was approved for trial. If you're willing, I could use your help in getting Wikipedia:File Database Reports together and coming up with ideas for reports to run. Regards, FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:27, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll take time to track them down, but I know betacommand has some reports, and there are a few others floating around by either MBisanz or MZMcBride, I forget which. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:15, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation Appeal

Articles for Creation urgently needs your help! Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are 1036 submissions waiting to be reviewed. Do you have what it takes? Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not? Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions? Are you autoconfirmed? Can you review submissions based on their individual merits? If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog.

Sent on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation using AWB on 20:23, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but I stopped doing that a long, long time ago, and I don't see myself doing it again. On the plus side, a 267 item backlog (which is where it was at the time of this comment) is pretty low for you guys. Congrats on getting it out of the 400s. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:25, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

That is the most cheeky response I've read in ages =S ResMar 03:01, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not kidding either. Part of the problem is that Chzz is inactive again. AfC's continued smooth functioning is heavily dependent on two users. Chzz does massive amounts (at times between 50% to 99%) of the work there, and Earwig maintains the bot that allows people to handle the massive queue. Evidence has shown that when either user goes dark, the process grinds to a halt. Similarly, if Armbrust were to take a leave of absence, FFU (the files subsidiary of AfC) would grind to a halt, even more so than AfC, since he pretty much does that whole project solo (the only way I'd get back to FFD were if Armbrust were to leave). Sven Manguard Wha? 07:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

As result of talk page stalking I joined FFU :) Bulwersator (talk) 19:51, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Maria/Colin

Hi Sven, I know that you are likely extremely busy, but I was wondering if it was too much to ask if you could get Hurricane Maria (2011) and Tropical Storm Colin (2010)'s GA reviews before the Wikipedia blackout? TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 22:18, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, no can do. I have less than no time right now (that's right, I've got negative time). My plan was to do the reviews during the blackout itself, then post them as soon as Wikipedia goes back up. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:59, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't think you could. Thanks anyways for responding. (: TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 01:21, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Switch function and images

Hi Sven, since you're the person I know who has the most experience with images, are you aware if there are any guidelines regarding the use of {{#switch: {{#expr:{{NUMBEROFEDITS:R}} mod 2}} so that two images, taking up the place of one, can switch? You see. Terminator 2: Judgment Day doesn't have any Commons equivalent since there are only two free files that I have asked from Flickr users available. I'm contemplating the use of the above magic words so that I can use two images without encountering text sandwich; what do you think? --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 06:56, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm a tad confused as to what you're asking, and I'm not that familiar with Parser Functions. That being said, if what you're asking is 'should I have two images that switch from one to the other, in an article', then I would say "no, that's a bad idea". How would that print? How would it export? Sven Manguard Wha? 15:14, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, if you think it's a bad idea, I'll lay the matter to rest. --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 02:19, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Movies_es5-20030823.png

Hi Sven! Thanks for all your hard work on Wikipedia. I see your edits and work all over the place. Also, thanks for the message on my talk page and apologies for not replying sooner. I was traveling and have not been able to log into Wikipedia for nearly a month.

In any case, there seems to have been a misunderstanding about File:Movies_es5-20030823.png in terms of the deletion discussion and rationale. The page was deleted before I was able to respond but I think it was in error. As per the deletion review guidelines, I wanted to bring this up with you and the deleting admin first.

I've tried to explain what I think is going on and what I think should be done at File talk:Movies_es5-20030823.png. —mako๛ 15:00, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Sophie Lyons in Professional Criminals of America.png

Why do you want to keep it local? Don't you like Commons? :-D --MGA73 (talk) 20:57, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

+ File:Pugsey Hurley in Professional Criminals of America.png and a few others :-) --MGA73 (talk) 21:00, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

1) At that time I had a deep distrust for Commons and open disdain for its community, which came from a number of personal experiences which I will not go into further detail about. (While there are still a number of problems with the project and several of its editors, enough so that I choose personally to minimize the time I spend there, I'm no longer as stridently opposed to storing files there.)

2) Many of the files I've uploaded have been transferred to Commons. Of them, half a dozen were botched by a broken bot (which I've since had blocked) and another few were botched by users. The number of incorrect transfers far, far outstripped the number of correct ones. The Keeplocal allows me to check over the files one last time, so that I can add the information that disappears during bad transfers. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:08, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Oki... It was the combination of you being here Wikipedia:WikiProject_Images_and_Media/Commons/Drives/Jan_2012 and using "Keep local" that made me wonder :-) And yes... Crappy transfers sucks... --MGA73 (talk) 19:06, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

GAs

I responded on Colin's talk page. You've not forgotten about Maria, have you? ;) You'll find that one in a lot better shape, I believe. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 22:46, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

No I did not forget, I'll be doing Maria and Capture of Savannah, the two GANs I'm listed as doing, this coming weekend. Let's hope you're right about Maria. I'm not going to lie, the sourcing thing worried me. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Bot request

Could you confirm at [2] that I have understood the request correctly? — Carl (CBM · talk) 17:28, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Confirmed it there. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:32, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh if there is a problem with this user perhaps you should know I moved 500-1000 (not really sure how many) images to Commons. But the good news is that (as far as I remember) they are all in Commons:Category:PD-Bain and have a link to LOC. --MGA73 (talk) 19:36, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi

Can you comment over at Commons:Commons:Bots/Requests/SreeBot, thanks. ZooFari (talk) 23:54, 21 January 2012 (UTC)