User talk:Steven Crossin: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is a member of the Wikimedia Volunteer Response Team.
This user is an Online Ambassador on the English Wikipedia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎SPI: reply
Line 735: Line 735:
Hello, I have answered to [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ceedjee]]. [[Special:Contributions/81.247.97.117|81.247.97.117]] ([[User talk:81.247.97.117|talk]]) 13:33, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I have answered to [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ceedjee]]. [[Special:Contributions/81.247.97.117|81.247.97.117]] ([[User talk:81.247.97.117|talk]]) 13:33, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
:Yep, thanks for that. I'll wait for the filer to make comment before proceeding further. Regards, <font face="Verdana">[[User:Steven Zhang|<font color="#078330">Steven</font>]] [[User talk:Steven Zhang|<font color="#2875b0">Zhang</font>]] <sup>[[WP:DRP|<font color="#d67f0f">Get involved in DR!</font>]]</sup></font> 13:39, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
:Yep, thanks for that. I'll wait for the filer to make comment before proceeding further. Regards, <font face="Verdana">[[User:Steven Zhang|<font color="#078330">Steven</font>]] [[User talk:Steven Zhang|<font color="#2875b0">Zhang</font>]] <sup>[[WP:DRP|<font color="#d67f0f">Get involved in DR!</font>]]</sup></font> 13:39, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
::Hello,
::Thank you. FYI : just want to edit far away from all troubles.
::[[Special:Contributions/81.247.97.117|81.247.97.117]] ([[User talk:81.247.97.117|talk]]) 14:17, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:17, 10 June 2012

Template:Useronline

User Page User Talk Contribs E-mail Subpages Adoption Awards Mediation

Steve's Status:
Offline (verify)
8:36 am, 4 June 2024 AEST
 Talk Archives
 Stuff to do

Hello, Steven Crossin. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Chuckle

Couldn't help but laugh at this discussion section heading. For a moment, I thought to myself -Now what?. GoodDay (talk) 19:54, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I thought exactly the same thing :-) Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 19:56, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question on Teahouse you might want to take a gander at

Oh king of DR :) Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Rules_in_banning_users_because_of_biased_edits_or_vandalising, fellow host Nolelover requested some extra eyes! Thought you might be a good person to take a look, if interested! SarahStierch (talk) 02:08, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I'll take a look :-) Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 02:10, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oops

I accidently edited Henry VIII of England & Henry Frederick, Prince of Wales, today. But, then I reverted my corrections, due to the broadly construed part of the topic ban. GoodDay (talk) 09:35, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Take more care in future, but you self reverted so no damage is done. Don't make a habit of it though. How's editing elsewhere going? Done any article work yet (I'm taking a semi-wikibreak at present, just keeping an eye on discussions and participating in email/OTRS work but not much else). Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 09:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still changing hyphens to longer & shorter lengths, where required. GoodDay (talk) 09:53, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You should probably try combine that with other edits, such as formatting references, fixing wikilinks or copyediting. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 10:20, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not very good at the heavy stuff. GoodDay (talk) 10:40, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Give it a go, you learn with practice. You don't think I became a veteran at dispute resolution in a day, do you? I'm more than happy to help you learn, that's what I'm here for. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 10:57, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do a few more hyphens & then will consider it. GoodDay (talk) 19:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

Talkback

Hello, Steven Crossin. You have new messages at Mr. Stradivarius's talk page.
Message added 21:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]
  • Hi, can you do this before it expires please? The discussion is not on any list and 1-2 neutral editors have commented. --lTopGunl (talk) 09:47, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. Will do in the morning. Regards, Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 10:07, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --lTopGunl (talk) 18:23, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

24 page/template

Hey Steven, I just wanted to speak with you for a minute about the episode pages. If you could, you might want to go by the WikiProject Television talk page and look over the initiatives over there to create pages for critically acclaimed episodes of historic television over the past twenty or so years. I only created the 24 episode page after one of the editors there suggested/recommended it. I hope you choose to at least relink it in the Season 5 page as to not would be poor etiquette to 24 and Emmy fans looking for information. As for the template, I don't really care much about it, but I still think it's a bit silly to include characters like "Jim Prescott" or "Hal Gardner" or "Arlo Glass" who weren't very notable characters when there is already a link to their specific minor character page. If you look further up the talk page, I believe there was some complaint about the clutter. Anyway, I hope you're having a nice evening and thanks for the discussion. Penny Lane's America (talk) 07:42, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I had a look at the WP24 talk page, I could see that there were TV seasons that didn't have an article, but it didn't seem to mention TV episodes. I'm fully behind improving the 24 season articles (though am overloaded with other stuff at present) but don't think smaller episode articles will work in the long run. We'd need one for all, otherwise there'd be big gaps. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 08:52, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Tea Leaf - Issue One - Recent news from the Teahouse

Hi! Welcome to the first edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

Spring has sprung! Stop by the Teahouse for a cup of tea under the cherry blossoms.
  • Metrics are out from week one. Week one showed that the need for Teahouse hosts to invite new editors to the Teahouse is urgent for this pilot period. It also showed that emailing new users invitations is a powerful tool, with new editors responding more to emails than to talk page templates. We also learned that the customized database reports created for the Teahouse have the highest return rate of participation by invitees. Check out the metrics here and see how you can help with inviting in our Invitation Guide.
  • A refreshed "Your hosts" page encourages experienced Wikipedians to learn about the Teahouse and participate. With community input, the Teahouse has updated the Your hosts page which details the host roles within the Teahouse pilot and the importance that hosts play in providing a friendly, special experience not always found on other welcome/help spaces on Wikipedia. It also explains how Teahouse hosts are important regarding metrics reporting during this pilot. Are you an experienced editor who wants to help out? Take a look at the new page today and start learning about the hosts tasks and how you can participate!
  • Introduce yourself and meet new guests at the Teahouse. Take the time to welcome and get to know the latest guests at the Teahouse. New & experienced editors to Wikipedia can add a brief infobox about themselves and get to know one another with direct links to userpages. Drop off some wikilove to these editors today, they'll surely be happy to feel the wikilove!

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah (talk) 16:09, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption

Hi Steven Zhang, I was wondering if you would be willing to Adopt me. Worm That Turned recommended me to you. I have been on Wikipedia for almost a year now but still have a long way to go, so I could really benefit from some lessons. Please let me know if you are able to take on another adoptee, or if there is anyone else I should go to for Adoption. Thank you! Alexroller (talk) 03:06, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I can. I like to start off with an introduction. Your preferred name, your interests, what you hope to achieve on Wikipedia and what you hope to learn. I'm Steve, I mainly focus on fictional articles and dispute resolution, and I hope to improve these dispute resolution processes by the end of the year. Tell me about yourself? Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 08:24, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm Alex, I like to focus on articles about big cities, universities, and political institutions. I hope to make Wikipedia a more widely resepected site, starting with cleaning up style and grammar in articles and improving article content. Beyond this, my goals on Wikipedia are not very clear, but I know that I want to be much more involved than I am now. Alexroller (talk) 21:27, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds really good. The policies lesson is normally a good starting point. Read it over, and sum up what you learned here, in your own words. It's that easy. Sorry about the delay. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 09:07, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Policies summary: Basically, be respectful to other editors and be visible and communicative about edits you make. Providing edit summaries helps other editors see what you have done, and prevents recent page patrollers from automatically reverting your edits. Always sign posts on Talk pages, but not on article edits. Do not keep reverting another editor's edits without having a discussion on the article's Talk page. Make sure you do not promote yourself on Wikipedia, but instead promote things that are notable (that have been mentioned in reliable secondary sources). P.S. Should I keep posting assignment summaries on the thread in this section or should I create a new section for every new assignment? Alexroller (talk) 19:59, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. For the policies assignment (which you've done) it goes here, but for stuff like the permissions and vandalism 1.1 lesson, it will go on your subpage that's located at User:Steven Zhang/Adoption/Alexroller. Many start out with either Permissions or with Vandalism 1.1. Let me know if you have any questions. Sorry, been busy (still busy) organising a lot of stuff :-) Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 14:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Hello, Steven Crossin. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 12:50, 13 March 2012 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

The subject is "Wikipedia: Guidance". Whenaxis talk · contribs | DR goes to Wikimania! 12:50, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS

Hey, I jumped the gun and called that guy. Sorry to cut ahead, but I'm a big martial arts fan and I had the time. It was just a common notability situation, and I think they understand what they have to do.

Also, "join the DR army" might not be the best metaphor for a group that seeks to avoid a battleground mentality. But it's cute anyway.

Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 20:48, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problems. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 09:05, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

Comediating?

You want to comediate this: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/16 March 2012/Occupy Wall Street? Alredy added your name. Whenaxis talk · contribs | DR goes to Wikimania! 01:11, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, love to. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 09:05, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Helping Hand Barnstar
I would like to thank you for your contributions to the Wikipedia Teahouse. Your efforts, along with other hosts, have made editing Wikipedia less intimidating and more fun. Thanks for your work! -- Luke (Talk) 16:14, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

There is a question at the Teahouse you might have interest in...

Teahouse logo
 Dear Steven Crossin, I just asked a question at the Teahouse that you might have interest in! I hope you'll stop by and participate! Sarah (talk) 01:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFC/AAT after the evidence phase

Steven,

I think there is a need to clarify what happens next at WP:RFC/AAT. Is there going to be a discussion and then a vote, or an RfC-style !vote? This came up because we were discussing the nature of any voting that should take place. Please provide clarity at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Abortion article titles#Formal proposal to use instant-runoff voting.

Yaris678 (talk) 11:41, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to poke ArbCom on this one. Personally, something like instant run-off may come into play, but if it were to turn into a true vote, well, I'm not so sure how good that would be, but it's not my call after all. I'll let y'all know when I find out. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 19:39, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
AGK's popped a note on the talk page (had a chat to him). I think instant run-off voting may be the way to go. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 09:44, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think a 'Help-me'...

on this user's talk page is meant for you or The Interior and is in reference to Kmpriddy's sandbox which appears to be an assignment for Wikipedia:United States Education Program/Courses/Introduction to Digital Literacies (Webster Newbold). In my opinion the draft is very good and almost (but not quite) ready for Main. The following sections need additional sourcing: History, Educational Uses and FCC Rules and Regulations. Also, the FCC Section seems to be an extensive quote of a document, a Wikiquote could possibly work better there. (In case this group is in The Interior's section, I am placing a duplicate post on his talkpage.) --Shearonink (talk) 03:31, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Might leave it to The Interior. Bit overloaded at the moment. But thanks for letting me know. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 07:20, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bot is sick

Hi. This was a rubbish edit, which I've reverted immediately. Your bot needs fixing, fast. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 02:52, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shit...must be some error in the code. {{Done)), all edits reverted. There was a line of code that was commenting out the number 7, now corrected. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 03:09, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, not all reverted. See e.g. this. --GenericBob (talk) 03:42, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that. It looks like the rollback all script didn't catch all of the edits (or my computer died trying to revert 300 edits at once) but all are now corrected. Feel free to trout me, that was a rather stupid mistake. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 04:01, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but I've still got a few bugs in my own code that need fixing :-) --GenericBob (talk) 04:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

Script list replacement project

You're receiving this message because somehow I determined that you have some interest in Wikipedia's user scripts :)

Wikipedia's current list of user scripts is in bad shape, in that it is disorganized and contains many non-working or obsolete entries. It is therefore set to be deprecated, and a new draft list has been created to replace it. Perhaps you regularly use certain scripts, or have authored some yourself, that you know to be currently working and relevant. If so, you are invited to add them to the draft. Thanks! Equazcion (talk) 03:18, 27 Mar 2012 (UTC)

RfA nomination

Hi Steven. Back in February, we discussed you co-nominating me for adminship with Pedro on his talk page. Just to let you know, we're now thinking of running the nomination soon - the discussion is here - would you still consider co-nominating me? ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:14, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 21:17, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removed your name from active hosts list for now

Yo Steven!

Just writing to let you know that I've removed your name from the list of active Teahouse hosts, because it looks like you haven't participated much since the Teahouse opened. This wasn't supposed to be some passive-aggressive swipe at you; we're really just trying to make sure the list of hosts (and the host profiles that new users see) reflects people who are actively working the Q&A board, inviting new users, etc. This is so new users who are browsing through the host list feel confident that the people the see there are available and engaged. Anyway, we'd still love to have you around and value your contribution, so feel free to come by and add yourself back in when/if you want to take part. Any questions, you know where to find me! Cheers, - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 21:06, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Jonathan. Been really busy as of late (as you would know) and haven't been on wiki much lately. Hopefully I will be freer soon, and can help out again. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 00:33, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You missed some pretty "great" wikidrama. :P Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 00:39, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 02 April 2012

RfA

Hi Steven. As you asked me to let you know, I have just transcluded my RfA. Thanks for your nomination. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 15:25, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph about copyright

Hi Steve, I've written a paragraph about the copyright lesson, let me know if this is sufficient. I've also uploaded some work for the wikimarkup assignment a while back, could you look at that too? Thanks!, Mythio (talk) 16:02, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"When it comes to wikipedia, copyright is a major issue. Because of the many different licenses and the public nature of a wiki, it is important to adhere to copyrights (most notably of images). Most of the text and images on wikipedia are used under a license that allows its free distribution. However, this is not the case for all material. An especially tricky part is making sure that uploaded images that are not owned by the uploader, meet the fair use criteria. This fair use rationale allows the use of images outside of their normal copyright based on a fair use claim. In short, the policies wikipedia has concerning copyright, essentially deal with the use of non-free content on the free wikipedia. Violating these policies repeatedly can get you blocked. On a personal note, I have learned to stay away from things involving copyright for the time being. Seems to be a very complex issue ;-) "

Odd, I was typing up a reply to this last night - I must never have saved it. Your paragraph here is good. When in doubt with things like copyright - especially when you're new, ask others for assistance. It doesn't hurt to be sure. Your WikiMarkup sandbox looks good. Maybe it's time to move on to some content lessons. Maybe check out the Article repair lesson? Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 20:17, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a good plan! Sorry my work on the lessons (and wiki) has been a bit sluggish last few weeks. I'm reading up on wiki discussions mostly and am trying to learn some more about the different areas around here. On top of that my RL exams for this semester are next week, so time is being sucked away from me :-) Mythio (talk) 20:54, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

The compulsory question on highest level of education goes from undergraduate to masters, but does not have a space for anything in between. I have a Postgraduate Certificate in Education which is midway between the two. I can either under or over qualify myself, or I can chose to "prefer not to say", but I can neither skip the question, nor write in a manual answer in an "other" box. SilkTork ✔Tea time 13:22, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I used the same "buckets" that was used in the new page patrol survey and the editor survey, but have added an other option. Thanks for pointing it out. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 13:31, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

If you use the back button on your survey, it won't let you proceed anymore, it says that there are required fields missing. Gigs (talk) 13:46, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure, couldn't create that error. Check that all the fields with red asterisks are filled in. If that doesnt work you could do it from scratch. It's done through Google Forns but I haven't seen any errors like that. Give it another go maybe. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 13:59, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Response on my talk. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:31, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there. Cheers. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 22:26, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I also encountered the problem that I couldn't leave fields blank. But when I saw the lists of checkoff items, I realized that the terminology of dispute resolution is mixed up.
WP:RFAR announces that arbitration is "the last step of dispute resolution". If so, what are the lesser steps? Suppose that WP:WQA is considered a step of dispute resolution, and you believe that your issue has not been adequately handled. Where do you go from there? Is there a route of escalation for dispute resolution forums? Any hierarchy that leaves out WP:ANI will be puzzling to people who actually deal with disputes every day. We should not be shocked that people who are in a dispute will randomly pick a lot of different forums when we don't give specific guidance on what to do. (Of course, any guidance may not be followed, but that is a different problem). EdJohnston (talk) 22:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd have thought RFC/U would between WQA and RFAR. It might be too late to add ANI as an option (but it would be encompassed in the Other noticeboards option). I'll tweak it a bit to add that info in. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 23:36, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Decided to add AN/ANI as an option, because it's sometimes used for DR. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 23:49, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of filling in the survey

I feel that what I have to say doesn't really fit into the forms, so I am putting it here instead. Feel free to ignore it if it's not usable for you in this form. I was going to keep the following thoughts back for about a year to give them time to ripen, but here is a preliminary version.

In my 4 years as a volunteer for Wikipedia I spent a lot of energy on resolving disputes simply because I felt I was quite effective in that role and it's very satisfactory when a hot conflict turns into a consensus and the opposing factions are forged into a team. However, in my most recent experience with dispute resolution, Arbcom scratched my back with a dagger: "reminded to engage in discussions about disputed article content with an appropriate degree of civility". At that point I decided that I am wasting my time here, as the project's highest body is evidently not interested in supporting dedicated and highly qualified volunteers who are not 100% perfect 100% of the time (keep in mind that everything is recorded here), perfection being assessed mostly by people living in an alien (to me) culture which is prone to excesses such as forbidden words on TV, arresting children for practically no reason, unreasonably wide interpretations of free speech etc. Hans Adler 16:32, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hans. This sort of in-depth info is useful, and was something I was hoping to get from users after the survey has run its course. I'll email this to myself so I keep it for future reference. Thanks heaps. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 22:28, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not going to be completing the survey, because I can't do so without practically identifying myself. Please rethink the question about what permissions ("rights") people hold, or limit it (none/autoconfirmed/administrator). There is not a statistically significant number of bureaucrats, oversighters, checkusers or stewards who regularly participate in Wikipedia to justify their results being analysed directly by permission level; each group has fewer than 50 members, the groups overlap significantly, and I cannot think of a situation on this project where those permissions were relevant to dispute resolution processes. Thanks. Risker (talk) 00:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    That's a fair point. I'll scratch those from the survey. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 00:59, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 01:02, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Steven. I remember going around with Okeyes about this for his survey, which was in turn based on a WMF survey where I also couldn't get a reasonable explanation from the researcher either. You're the first one to fix the survey. Risker (talk) 01:06, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, demographics info in my survey is important, but having honest opinions about dispute resolution is more important. The more responses, the more accurate the results are. Thanks again. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 01:34, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Tea Leaf - Issue Two

Hi! Welcome to the second edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

  • Teahouse celebrates one month of being open! This first month has drawn a lot of community interest to the Teahouse. Hosts & community members have been working with the project team to improve the project in many ways including creating scripts to make inviting easier, exploring mediation processes for troubling guests, and best practices regarding mentoring for new editors who visit the Teahouse.
Springtime means fresh tea leaves...
  • First month metrics report an average of 30 new editors visiting the Teahouse each week. Approximately 30 new editors participate in the Teahouse each week, by way of asking questions and making guest profiles. An average of six new questions and four new profiles are made each day. We'd love to hear your ideas about how we can spread the word about the Teahouse to more new editors.
  • Teahouse has many regulars. Like any great teahouse, our Teahouse has a 61% return rate of guests, who come back to ask additional questions and to also help answer others' questions. Return guests cite the speedy response rate of hosts and the friendly, easy to understand responses by the hosts and other participants as the main reasons for coming back for another cup o' tea!
  • Early metrics on retention. It's still too early to draw conclusions about the Teahouse's impact on new editor retention, but, early data shows that 38% of new editors who participate at the Teahouse are still actively editing Wikipedia 2-4 weeks later, this is compared with 7% from a control group of uninvited new editors who showed similar first day editing activity. Additional metrics can be found on the Teahouse metrics page.
  • Nine new hosts welcomed to the Teahouse. Nine new hosts have been welcomed to the Teahouse during month one: Chicocvenancio, Cullen328, Hallows AG, Jeffwang, Mono, Tony1, Worm That Turned, Writ Keeper, and Nathan2055. Welcome to the Teahouse gang, folks!
  • Say hello to the new guests at the Teahouse. Take the time to welcome and get to know the latest guests at the Teahouse. Drop off some wikilove to these editors today, as being welcomed by experienced editors is a really nice way to make new editors feel welcome.

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. -- Sarah (talk) 21:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Hi, the DR survey requires demographic information. If/when it does not require it I can try, but not now. My apologies. History2007 (talk) 02:27, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's alright. The demographic information is pretty important, as it shows the distribution of editors who participate in dispute resolution versus all editors (I will compare the results to the Wikimedia Editor Survey) and these questions were gathered somewhat from that survey. You don't have to do the survey, it's entirely up to you. Cheers, Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 02:34, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I really, really should not start this... but I can not resist it. Anyway, I do not think WMF (or any one else) knows the actual demographics of Wikiusers and any norms established via the other survey will likely have serious stratification problems. I would not rely on it for business decisions that involve money, but WMF is free to do what they wish. I see so many statistical errors in published literature this will be just one more. History2007 (talk) 16:07, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple invites?

Hey Steven, it looks like you may be issuing multiple invites in some cases; you issued one to Rich Farmbrough at 12:11, 5 April 2012 (UTC) and then again at 01:43, 6 April 2012 (UTC). Also, Rich gave you some feedback in response to your first invitation. On an unrelated note, don't worry; I haven't forgotten your idea of automatically spotting disputes heating up before they boil over. I've just been insanely busy at work lately and had to put quite a few projects on the back burner. Seeing whether it's feasible is still on my To Do list (as you can see on my user page). Cheers! — madman 03:35, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I'm not sure how that happened, I worked off a 1100 editor long list and there shouldn't have been any duplicates. I am not seeing any comments that others are adding on their talk pages, I had my robot deliver the message and signed with my signature, so I'm probably missing a little bit. After this survey has been done it'd be great if we could make some progress on this robot. Early survey responses are giving me the info I was after, so I am very pleased. Cheers. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 04:23, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sven, you are still leaving this message on the talk pages of indeffed users despite saying you would sort this out. In some cases these messages to blocked users are highly inappropriate. Please point to the bot approval for this task. - Kingpin13 (talk) 10:00, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I thought it fell under Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SteveBot (which was approved long ago) but I realise the scope of the task in fact isn't that wide. I'll revert the additions to the indef blocked users talk pages, as I detailed on my bots talk page before, the researcher who gave me the list of users to query said there were no indeffed users there, but this is easily remedied. I've used my bot in the past to leave notices on peoples talk pages (such as Melbourne Meetup invites) and haven't run into problems before, so I assumed that my bot was indeed approved to do such tasks (but I see that is not the case). What should I do here? Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 10:23, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Questionnaire

Hello Steven. I have just spent about half an hour completing the questionnaire about Dispute Resolution processes. I responded to every question, and made some extensive comments in areas that permitted comments. When I got to the end I attempted to submit my work. I received a message saying "It looks like you have forgotten to answer a question or two." It presented me with the entire questionnaire but didn't show which questions I had failed to answer. I spent another quarter of an hour going through my work, looking for a question that I hadn't answered. I didn't find one. I kept trying to submit but I kept getting the same message - "you have failed to answer a question or two". Finally my patience was exhausted so I abandoned the exercise and came here to alert you to the situation. You have missed out on my responses - it would be good to fix the questionnaire so you don't miss out on too many others. Dolphin (t) 06:56, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, hang on. You answered every question and it gave you an error message. You're 100% sure all the mandatory questions were answered? I might have to test it out. Gimme a sec. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 07:32, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I just did the survey and only answered the mandatory questions, none of the optional ones. It submitted fine. Did you choose any "other" options? The only thing I can see that could have gone wrong here is if you wrote something in the "other" box but didn't click the radio button. Is that possible? If you could let me know that'd be great. Cheers, Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 07:40, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your prompt response. I answered virtually all the questions, including most (all?) of the optional ones. My main point is that I have done many questionnaires like this before, and when I have forgotten to fill one of the mandatory fields it promptly shows me which field I have left empty. With your questionnaire it didn't give the slightest hint as to where the problem was - it just kept presenting me with the entire questionnaire. My second point would be this - the questionnaire is being completed by volunteers so what is the problem if they leave a field blank? It's not as though these volunteers are expecting you to reserve airline seats for them, or send them tickets to a Broadway show. If the problem occurred with me it is bound to occur with some others. I made a valiant attempt to supply you with a lot of relevant information but the system failed to accept it, and now it has gone. It will occur with others unless there are some quick changes to the system. Regards. Dolphin (t) 08:07, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
With the survey, it's all done through Google Forms - so the way the system works isn't something I can do a lot about, unfortunately. I have made as many questions as possible optional, and provided some more instructions to help with any quibbles. If you are so inclined, you could always email me your thoughts. They would be most appreciated. (One last thing, I actually just now tried seeing what would happen if I didn't answer a question that was marked as required, and a red box came up surrounding the question. I can only attribute what happened to a possible glitch. Regards, Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 08:54, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I initially had the same problem. In my case the reason was a single choice question with many options including one of the "other" type with a text input field. I had put some text there but had not activated the radio button. In the end I decided that due to my having stopped contributing some time ago the questionnaire wasn't all that meaningful in my case anyway, and did not continue filling in after I had solved that problem. Hans Adler 11:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that was the problem in the end. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 11:51, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. One hour. And the “It looks like you have forgotten…” alert. That is uncannily similar to what I independently commented on. Follow the below talkback template. Greg L (talk) 22:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Questionnaire and Greg L

Hello, Steven Crossin. You have new messages at Greg L's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Collecting age in survey

Hi, collecting of ages and other information in a survey is unethical. I note there is a 'Prefer not to say' for gender so why not for other information? I strongly suggest you are distorting the results as well as taking a liberty of wikipedia editors. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I note the two threads above also have a similar issue of questions not being optional. In addition the data is being stored on google. Way to go with the data mining. :( Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:22, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I also have concerns about relating demographic info with users? Are they? Alanscottwalker (talk) 12:08, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@SunCreator, I disagree that asking survey respondents questions like their age, gender and rough location takes away any of their liberties. I also disagree that I am distorting the results of the survey. Many demographic questions I have asked are either identical or very similar to those that were asked in the Wikimedia Editor survey from last year. This was deliberate - it allows for easier comparing editors who have participated in dispute resolution versus all editors. Google Forms has been used for surveys in the past, and was cleared by the research committee for use, and with their stringent requirements on privacy, I doubt they'd approve the use of a sub-par survey tool. If you still have any concerns that I have not resolved, please forward your concerns to Dario Taraborelli - he will have email enabled, and is my contact at the WMF for this survey.
@Alan, Demographic information such as age, gender and location will be kept separate from the list of users. This survey has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Research Committee. You can find further information about the measures I am taking to keep the data secure at the Meta Research page. So, if I understand your question correctly, demographic information will be released through aggregate only, eg: X% of respondents are 40 and over. I hope that resolves your queries, but if not, please let me know, however I am retiring for the evening so will reply in the morning. Regards, Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 12:30, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CVU Academy

Hello there! Your input is request at Wikipedia talk:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Academy. You had commented on the re-formatting discussion at WP:CVU but have yet to comment on the progress done to implement a major change discussed during the reformatting discussion, namely the training for new anti-vandals. Any input would be appreciated, thank you. Cheers! Achowat (talk) 19:28, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 09 April 2012

My RFA nom page

[1] Ha - man I so didn't see that you edited it. I went to the page to add It's Zippy, and was thinking - wow - the support/oppose/neutral was the same as the last person I nominated - how weird ..... Oh... wait... Doh. I don't win the observation award :). Need to move yourself into the top of that list at some point. Pedro :  Chat  21:52, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you totally suck. I wonder if there's a "Fail at Life" barnstar? I would like to be in that top section one day, but I've been so busy doing behind-the-scenes work (preparing for survey, etc) that I haven't done much of merit on-wiki. Kinda given up on RFA, tbh. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 22:04, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fail at reading barnstar maybe? :) Your RFA will come when you're ready, I'm sure. Pedro :  Chat  22:05, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, let's go with that. Maybe next year. I want to focus on dispute resolution for now, and that's not really enough to please the RFA crowd, I think. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 22:09, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Which is regrettable, as DR is incredibly important and should be recognised as such. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 22:13, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but I have done stuff all lately. Been so busy with the survey and such. Maybe when this has all quietened down in the survey I'll be able to do some content work, comment in AFDs and such. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 22:16, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Prem Rawat ANI issue

Pro or Con, I would be interested to hear what you have to say, if anything, over on the ANI page regarding this incident, since you do have some familiarty with the issues/editors. -- Maelefique(talk) 17:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I saw this and meant to reply, but something else came up at the time and then I forgot. Glad to see it looks resolved for now, though. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 06:34, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your HighBeam account is ready!

Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:

  • Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
    • Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
    • If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
  • The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
  • To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
  • If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
  • A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
  • HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
  • Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
  • When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t |c 21:03, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The voting at Requests for comment/Abortion article titles

Steven,

Reading through the voting at the RfC, I cannot help but thank God that I am not an admin or whoever it is that has to make the decision. I am pleased with the strong support for Option 12 (which I supported before you ever became involved), but support is also strong for other options. I cannot imagine how anyone can make a decision that will withstand criticism. Is this not the most hopeless conflict with which you have ever been involved? (Oh, I'm asking with the understanding that you are not going to participate in the decision. If you are part of the decision making process, please delete my post here without responding--I don't want to get you in trouble.) HuskyHuskie (talk) 00:36, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Back in 2008, I mediated a case that lasted for 2-3 months. It was an Israel-Palestine dispute, over a single word - "uprising". It was closed as unsuccessful, because no compromise could be reached. That was the most hopeless conflict I've ever dealt with. This pales in comparison. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 02:51, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 April 2012

Can you help

Hi,

I have seen you Project Idea on Meta, about dispute resolutions. I am having a problem, which I try to describe in RFC on Meta. Can you help?--Juandev (talk) 19:37, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Happy

...belated, or belated birthday. I vaguely remember being 22; it was a long time ago, and I was probably drunk :) Pedro :  Chat  20:27, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, not belated. It's my birthday today :-) Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 20:36, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, happy birthday Steven. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:29, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 20:36, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Have a good one, Steve! AGK [•] 10:04, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Anthony :-) Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 10:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually three hours. I haven't changed my clock on my talk page. I should do that now :-) Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 11:16, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Happy Birthday man! Hope you had a nice birthday! Mythio (talk) 14:05, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday!

Hope I'm not too late. Whenaxis (contribs) DR goes to Wikimania! 20:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Dispute resolution survey

Dear User:Steven Zhang, I received your message but upon clicking on the link, I was unable to access the survey. I hope you had a Happy Easter! With regards, AnupamTalk 01:24, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hi there! I don't know for sure. But it seems the survey is over. Regards, Whenaxis talk (contribs) DR goes to Wikimania! 01:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the survey is closed, as the daily responses had dwindled down to one a day, or had stopped, and I needed to collate the results. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 20:34, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 April 2012

Abortion vote tally

I took the liberty of tallying the abortion article naming votes at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Abortion_article_titles#Tally. If you have any questions about my methodology, feel free to contact me by email, because I think I'm checking out of wikipedia for a while. Homunq (talk) 20:25, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I'll let the closing admins know. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 20:39, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Whenaxis Award

For your stellar work in dispute resolution on Wikipedia and behind-the-scenes. I know from first-hand knowledge and collaboration with you, that you are easy to approach, you are accomodating and welcoming. A well-rounded editor with contributions in vandalism-fighting, content creation and dispute resolution. Efforts in dispute resolution often go unappreciated and at this time I hereby award you, Steven Zhang, with "The Whenaxis Award (of Dispute Resolution)" for your formidable additions to dispute resolution such as, the dispute resolution noticeboard, the dispute resolution survey and reforming dispute resoltuion through the creation of WikiProject Dispute Resolution. Whenaxis talk (contribs) DR goes to Wikimania! 21:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks :-) This is going on my awards page :P 21:02, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Mediation?

Mind taking a look at [2] please? Thanks, Tiptoety talk 18:30, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll take a look. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 20:04, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution

Steven Zhang. The article over there is just another Balkans article that has a disruptive local user personally "attached" to it. Its not a real dispute. And part of what I do is I go about "detaching" such unfortunate articles from their WP:OWNERS. PANONIAN does not really have a sound argument of any sort, nor is he at all willing to openly accept that as a fact (you can see him right now, talking about some OR propaganda posters and coins). He will change his claims and his position continuously depending on whether it will specifically help his agenda on that article, namely the creation of a non-existent country. He is willing to "compromise", but I am not. Because we do not "compromise" between personal opinions and POV-pushing on the one side, and sources on the other. That is part of why I'm skeptical with regard to mediation. Mediators just want to succeed in their mediation, and as such, they are usually tempted to just assume the middle ground. But the middle ground here is nonsense. PANONIAN is just POV-pushing, and is wrong, whereas Peacemaker and I are just plain right. Where Peacemaker and I may differ, for example, is where there might be a "real" subject for disussion - PANONIAN's "disputes" would be laughed-off the talkpage on any more prominent article. This is about a user, not a real factual dispute.

These sort of disputes make plain a terrible flaw in Wikipedia's mediation process. Mediators tend to try and have users agree, where their priority should be researching the sources and basing their recommendations solely on them, regardless of whether they favor a party in the dispute or not. If I were ever to mediate, I would ignore the users and research the disputed issue, and then present my opinion completely without regard to what position the disputed parties have. Sadly, that has not been my experience. And frankly I cannot imagine that it ever will be. What mediator could possibly spend a month or two researching some obscure part of some obscure country's history?
What is necessary here is that the problem user be made to abide by Wikipedia policy, or leave the dispute. That's it. -- Director (talk) 12:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to have to read and reply to this tomorrow. Rather busy today, but just briefly, I believe in contentious disputes, an actively involved mediator that analyses the sources and gives input, is required. Not all mediators have the same modus operandi. Steven Zhang Talk 07:04, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

British/Irish stuff

Howdy Steven. Does my topic ban 'prevent' me from discussiong British & Irish articles & such on other Users's talkpages? GoodDay (talk) 19:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Steven, I'd like to draw this post to you attention. Thanks, --Domer48'fenian' 19:30, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To me, edits like this aren't on. The topic ban covers all pages relating to UK and Ireland, so while discussing it isn't technically a violation, you have poked the bear, so to speak. It's a violation of the spirit of the topic ban, because essentially you've gone from making snide comments about others on article talk to edits on a user talk. I am not sure if you understand the severity of your actions. While it happened two days ago, I thought that a block is necessary here to prevent this from happening again. It gives you time to reflect on your actions, and realise that making comments about others in the nature you did isn't on. It's also a reminder not to feed the trolls, and not take their bait. Learn a lesson from this. Steven Zhang Talk 06:54, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just as an FYI Steve - while this exchange between VanSpeijk and GD is borderline[3] in terms of GD's topic ban (and not as blatant as the above) he needs not to go there. GD needs to show he's not "line stepping" - these comments are--Cailil talk 13:16, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll avoid giving 'you know who' future opportunities to target me, without a doubt. GoodDay (talk) 14:38, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 April 2012

Breach of promise

Since Djsasso has breached his promise & is moving articles to diacritics style. I'm gonna starte hiding/deleting diacritics on articles. GoodDay (talk) 19:54, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're not. Two wrongs don't make a right. Steven Zhang Talk 19:56, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then will you tell him to reverse his page moves? GoodDay (talk) 19:58, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It really depends on in what capacity he's done the page move. If he's done the page move to enact the consensus of a requested move, then no. Let me think it over for a few hours, but I would strongly dissuade you from removing diacritics from articles. Steven Zhang Talk 20:03, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm removing them from NHL-based articles. Djsasso promised (as did I) to stay away from diacritics, but he's since returned to participating at diacritics RMs (which is why I did) & is now page moving. GoodDay (talk) 20:07, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Doing one thing for the sole reason that another editor is doing the opposite is the textbook definition of disruptive editing, and will get you blocked. Don't do it. Steven Zhang Talk 20:14, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've already begun hiding them on North American based articles, which was/is the agreement at WP:HOCKEY. I haven't & don't intend to contact Djsasso. Remember, not fiddling with diacritics, was an informal agreement between myself & Djsasso. He breached the contract (so to speak) & now it's void. PS: Don't worry, I'm not going on a rampage. GoodDay (talk) 20:18, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Replied at [4]. Steven Zhang Talk 21:15, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

Please be aware of Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#GoodDay_block_extension. MBisanz talk 20:01, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Recall procedure

Hi there. I have chosen you as one of the editors who may request my resignation as part of my my recall procedure. Could you have a look, and confirm whether you're happy being on the list? Thanks. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 17:08, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'd be glad to. Steven Zhang Talk 19:54, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 07 May 2012

Your bot has a new task

Not sure if you noticed this edit, but it gave me a bit of a chuckle. Anyway, if possible, it might be best to take Shogun (talk · contribs) off whatever list he's on that means he keeps getting meetup invites. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 06:36, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Greetings. You seem to be in the role of mentor to User Good Day, is there anything I should know before replying to his entrance onto my talk page? In ictu oculi (talk) 17:31, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Scratch that, he seems to have come and gone. Odd. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:33, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. It's back, it was up the page where I couldn't see it, have moved it down to end of my page and his. Drop me a line if you have any reservations with the way I'm handling GoodDay's concerns. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:33, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but do need to ask your advice now. I'm getting "following" and very odd editing from GoodDay. I understand he feels very strongly about foreign names but his editing practices, and communication, goes some way beyond that of others. Are you in a position to give advice? In ictu oculi (talk) 00:13, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep an eye on it. If it continues, let me know. Steven Zhang Talk 11:47, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You asked me to let you know, it has been less disruptive, until just now: I'd truly like to believe this was coincidence. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:30, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy Steven. Just making a note: I see that In ictu oculi, has gone back to making unilateral page moves to diacritics, bypassing the RM stage. GoodDay (talk) 20:50, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

Congrats and welcome!

Just saw the announcement that you're a new Fellow. Congrats! Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation Engineering Community Manager 12:23, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'll be working really hard on this - I have a lot to achieve in a short amount of time, so you'll be seeing a lot from me :-) Steven Zhang Talk 12:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations, Steve, and good luck! AGK [•] 21:48, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Best of luck SZ --Guerillero | My Talk 02:54, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations Steve! Mythio (talk) 12:26, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats, Steven. I too, just read about the fellowship and wanted to add my thanks. Your work here at the project has been tremendous, but making DRN a reality was a miracle and only happened because of the HUGE amount of hours you put in on it. And I think it's been very sucessful.
I have a related question. Are you seeking input from others for your fellowship work? I have a few ideas/comments about dispute resolution on the project if you're looking for input, but I don't want to mess anything up if you've already got an outline and schedule your following. Best regards. 64.40.57.45 (talk) 02:03, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. You give me too much credit for DRN. With my fellowship, I am seeking input from others. Because most of my activities as a volunteer surround improving dispute resolution, and this is partially also what my fellowship revolves around, the lines are slightly blurred, but I do have a lot I want to achieve in dispute resolution over the coming months. Whether that's done in my capacity as a fellow or as a volunteer, I don't mind, as long as it gets done. But yes, please feel free to send any thoughts/feedback/suggestions, either via talk or email. Regards, Steven Zhang Talk 05:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, Steven, that looks really impressive. And yet, somehow, we're supposed to believe that you can't be trusted with the mop? I'll tell you what, when you finish this fellowship thing, what's say we nominate you to be the first-ever crat who wasn't a sysop first, eh? (By the way, I know your nature is such that you disapprove of my comments here, if only for their bitter tone. But someone has to speak up for the truth!) HuskyHuskie (talk) 14:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As always, I appreciate your passion. However, being selected for a Wikimedia fellowship based on my experience and skills is separate to earning the trust of the community with regards to adminship. I'd never stand for crat, even if one day I did become an admin. I have plenty keeping me busy at present, but again appreciate your comments. Regards, Steven Zhang Talk 21:46, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"please feel free to send any thoughts/feedback/suggestions" Thanks. Do you mind if I create User talk:Steven Zhang/Fellowship for commenting? And since HuskyHuskie brought it up, I was certain your RFA was going to succeed. It was sad when a few commenters focused on an event from many, many years ago. You've been a model Wikipedian and a fine example to others, and I beieve your help with admin chores would have been a welcome addition to the community. I was sorry to see you withdraw, but I certainly understand it. IPs can't vote, but if they could, you certainly would have had my support. Anyhoo, thanks for all your efforts. There are many people that appreciate all the work you've done over the years. All the best. 64.40.57.41 (talk) 18:59, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, go ahead. I too was disappointed that my RFA didn't succeed - especially since practically everyone told me I'd pass. But sometimes these things happen for a reason. If I had passed, I likely wouldn't have had time to focus on dispute resolution so much and thus would not have become a fellow. Maybe I'll try again someday, but I'm quite content doing what I am doing for the time being :-). Regards, Steven Zhang Talk 22:17, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I think your fellowship is far more important to the project than adminship would have been. I've created the talk page and added a comment. Thanks. 64.40.57.54 (talk) 02:18, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just read about what you are doing in the Signpost at Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2012-05-21/News_and_notes. Congratulations on your fellowship and good luck on the tough job of describing the dispute resolution process. You have been involved in a lot of drama so I appreciate how appropriate you are for this kind of job, and I hope that you find success for Wikipedia. We talked a couple of months ago and you were kind to call me, but I never returned your call or email. I still want to talk to you someday but now is not quite the time. Will you be at Wikimania in DC this July? If so, I would like to meet you there. Good luck in your endeavors. I like everything you are doing and I expect you to set a precedent for how editors in controversy can use that experience for inspiration to make things better for everyone. Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:40, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi there. Thanks for your comments :-). It's pretty hard work what I've been doing lately, but well worth it. Yes, I will be at Wikimania DC, and look forward to meeting you there. As always, I'm available via email if you want to chat. Regards, Steven Zhang Talk 23:52, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

/old suffix in AfD, e.g. Talk:Statesman/old

Hi. Can you please have a look at User talk:King of Hearts#old suffix in AfD, e.g. Talk:Statesman/old, in connection with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Statesman? Cheers. -- Trevj (talk) 12:52, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please fill out our brief Teahouse survey

Teahouse logo
Teahouse logo

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback!

We have created a brief survey intended to help us understand the experiences and impressions of veteran editors who have participated on the Teahouse. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages some time during the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 15 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host

This message was sent via Global message delivery on 01:18, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

Thanks for your help

I appreciate the assistance with resolving the dispute at Corrections Corporation of America webpage. Thank you for walking me through this. I hope I've done this correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Activist (talk • contribs)

You're welcome :-) Steven Zhang Talk 23:52, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:GoodDay

I see you are already familiar with the diacritics issue re: your "mentee". Today he made this edit to the Zoë Baird article, and more worryingly he has been deleting messages posted to his talk page.

Some background: during discussions at various Requested Move surveys I brought up Chloë Grace Moretz and Chloë Sevigny as non-"foreign" English names that have diacritics, and if I recall correctly he claimed the use of diacritics here represented mere "stage names" of actors. I then brought up Zoë Baird, who is a (presumably native-born) American lawyer, and therefore the claimed "stage name" issue is not applicable. Now he has actually made this seemingly absurd edit which really adds nothing to the article, as though it was necessary to supply an English transliteration of an English name, but the main issue is his very thin-skinned reaction. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 05:43, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on his talk page regarding the issue. Regards, Steven Zhang Talk 06:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I really am beginning to hate this place (i.e. Multiple language Wikipedia). One editor is allowed to unilaterally move pages to diacritics titles, while another editor is attacked for adding English version of a name to the articles intro. Apparently the Europeans have taken over former-English Wikipedia. What's next to be changed to diacritics? article content itself? GoodDay (talk) 13:22, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Steven, a few hours ago I left a complaint on the user's talk page (not knowing anything about his/her issues) and it was quickly deleted with the edit summary Removing provocation. I have had no previous interaction with this user. Xanthoxyl < 14:00, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've read your post & I'm allowed to delete it. Right now, I'm peeved with the increased activity to promote diacritics across English Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 14:14, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Joke RFA

User:Yasht101/Yasht101 Is An ALIEN RfA on April Fool's Day. Pine✉ 10:05, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Globalization of Religion

Hello Steven, my name is Chris Vondrell and I am a student at the University of Cincinnati. In my Sociology of Religion class we must create a Wikipedia stub for a certain topic. I have chosen the Globalization of Religion. If you could review my article and tell me anything htat needs to be added or taken away that would be very helpful. Thanks for your time! -Chris (Chrisvrulez (talk) 18:55, 27 May 2012 (UTC)) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_of_religion[reply]

Congratulations on new role

I just noticed the article in the Signpost about your new role. Congratulations! WP needs some coordination on content dispute resolution, and it is good to see someone who can act as a focal point. If you need volunteers for anything, let me know. I have lots of experience with content-based RfCs. As far as the overall process for content dispute resolution, in my opinion the three biggest areas of improvement are:

  1. A well-defined, step-by-step process that is simple and clear (it looks like you may be making progress there with the DRN. The next step would be making the escalation to RfC and/or mediation clearer)
  2. For major content disputes: a process that creates a semi-binding resolution (perhaps an ArbCom for content disputes?). It could be as simple as 3 uninvolved "judges" for major RfCs that come up with a semi-binding decision. This has happened with several major RfCs in the past (closing admins: sometimes singly; sometimes a group of 3) but it is not a well defined process.
  3. Mediation: make it mandatory. It makes absolutely no sense for a party to be able to sabatoge the entire mediation process (formal or informal) by refusing to participate. Mediation - once that stage of the dispute resolution process is reached - should be something that is mandatory - in the sense that it moves forward. Of course, nothing can compel editors to participate; but that silence would be taken into account by the mediator.

Anyway, good luck to you! --Noleander (talk) 01:32, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! If you're looking to help, we need volunteers for DRN - lots more :-) (see my signature). There's a few things I'm working on at the moment, both are referred to at Wikipedia_talk:DRP#Help_needed and Wikipedia_talk:DRP#Fresh_ideas. To your comments:
a) Part of what we are discussing is a way to simplify dispute resolution, possibly by consolidating many boards in to one, thus channeling all our manpower into one location, hopefully encouraging participation.
Sounds good. Maybe go incrementally: Just consolidate the content-oriented Noticeboards into DRN. Start with RS, OR, NPOV, etc. Trying to include the behavior-oriented noticeboards may cause too much opposition (wikipedians love to oppose suggestions :-) Consider a piecemeal approach: merge-in one content noticeboard into DRN board every six months. --Noleander (talk) 14:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
b) We need some process to help break the back of intractable content disputes. I did propose WP:BCD some time back, but it never got much traction. I do think that any binding content proposal should be centred around the community, and not the creation of a content committee. Unpopular idea.
Okay, if an analog of ArbCom is not going to fly now, consider a community based approach: Designate some important RfCs as "important" or something like that. Three uninvolved closers must close Important RfCs. If all 3 are unanimous, the result is enforced for some fixed period (say, one year) and after that, the issue can be re-opened. Process for non-important RfCs would be unchanged. --Noleander (talk) 14:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
c) Mandatory mediation...hmm...dunno. There have been changes that some of us have been discussing to make mediation more resistant to stonewalling, but I can't really let the cat out of the bag just yet :-)
I would support any process improvement that makes mediation more resistant to a single editor holding the process hostage. I like the rule: "if there are 3 or more partys, and 2 or more participants agree to mediation, then it goes forward and the results are semi-binding on the parties that refused to participate". I know that the theory of real-world mediation is that all must assent, but the experience in WP shows that we should not follow that real world model: we cannot let obstinate editors hold the process hostage. --Noleander (talk) 14:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 12:43, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/81.247.52.36

I have no intention of fishing, I merely thought that the evidence provided was sufficient to justify a CU. Would you look again at this issue if I supply diff's? Please note that IP geolocation is not perfectly accurate but does place at least two of the IP's in the same immediate area. Ankh.Morpork 13:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem here is that you're requesting an IP to be linked to a username - something a CU will generally decline to do in most situations. In this situation, the user is neither blocked nor banned, so I am inclined to decline a CU anyway. A CU wouldn't have any effect either, as Noisetier hasn't edited in nearly six months. My advice would be to present as much evidence as possible, and we can make a determination based on evidence. Regards, Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 13:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The username was added as an afterthought to this SPI [5]; as you state, the Noisetier account is inactive so can you proceed just against the IP's then.Ankh.Morpork 13:30, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No real need. We can get the info needed from geolocation, and base the rest on behaviour. Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 13:40, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I shall provide diffs linking them.Ankh.Morpork 13:45, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done so. Please take a look when you have time. If you wish further clarification, please state so and I shall happily seek to provide it.Ankh.Morpork 14:39, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

?Ankh.Morpork 12:50, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I recognise that Noisetier is not a banned user and has been inactive for a while. Is it possible to take action just against the IP's as there is definite sockpuppetry taking place.Ankh.Morpork 13:39, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, no. The first two IPs are in the same range, so in that situation it's very likely they just got assigned another dynamic IP address. With the last IP, it's some distance away. Might be travelling? Absent any serious abuse, I'm not sure if any action is required in this situation. Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 13:45, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration case opened

An arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GoodDay. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GoodDay/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 12, 2012, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GoodDay/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 21:59, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy Steven. I probably wouldn't have gotten steamed up (a few days ago), if those mass page-moves to diacritics had been stopped. There should be a freeze on such moves until English Wikipedia comes up with a 'clear' directive on diacritics usage. Concerning article titles - I'd recommend dios for bio articles & no-dios for non-bios articles. GoodDay (talk) 22:57, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The only people that can authorise such a freeze is the Arbitration Committee, and I am not sure if they would do so in this situation. The precedent to do this, however, would exist at the [Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Episodes_and_characters_2#Temporary_injunction|Episodes and characters 2]] arbitration case, but as the scope of the arbitration case is regarding your conduct, I'm not sure if they'd consider it. Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 23:06, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I too, am not sure Arbcom would consider it, but such a freeze would be helpful. I remember recommending such a freeze at one of the many diacritics discussions (can't remember where or when), but certain editors wouldn't budge. GoodDay (talk) 23:41, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Anyways, I've been able to avoid making direct contact with Djsasso :) GoodDay (talk) 23:45, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jeepers, one can't even add 'well sourced' material to an article anymore, see Zoe Baird article. GoodDay (talk) 13:30, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 May 2012

Talkback

Hello, Steven Crossin. You have new messages at Mabeenot's talk page.
Message added 00:05, 31 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Mabeenot (talk) 00:05, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats

let me congratulate you belatedly on your fellowship. 'Bout time you ran at RfA again... ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:32, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah...I'd fail faster than you can say...well, I dunno. I'd fail though. :-) Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 02:04, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Getting a fellowship is much harder than adminship - they don't give them to people my age! I'd probably also fail if I ran for RfA again, especially since a mockery was made of my attempts to improve it ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:20, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I still reckon I'd fail. Maybe I'll try one day. I dunno. Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 02:30, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Host feedback needed at the Teahouse!

Hi! We're seeking your feedback as a current or formal host at the Teahouse about the project. Please stop by and lend your voice at your convenience, here. Thanks :) Sarah (talk) 20:12, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AT & WP:Naming conventions (use English)

I've made recommendations concerning diacritics usage, at those 2 places. TBH, I've been quite bewildered with English Wikipedia, these last few years. I believe I'll be quite content, if the Arbitrators limit me to gnoming. GoodDay (talk) 03:06, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for !voting

at my successful RFA
Thank you, Steven Crossin, for !voting at my successful RFA; I am humbled that you put your trust in me. I grant you this flower, which, if tended to properly, will grow to be the fruit of Wikipedia's labours. Glad to work with you at the Signpost! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:33, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

British & Irish politicial articles

Thank goodness I'm banned from those articles. A known Welsh nationalist promotor, has just returned to Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 02:15, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure what this message is supposed to accomplish, GoodDay. Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 02:41, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just looking for a shoulder to cry on. I'm already prepared to face the Arbitrators ruling. GoodDay (talk) 02:46, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Arbitration is not fun. I wouldn't have pursued it as an option if I saw an alternative - but I don't think you can voluntarily control yourself with regards to diacritics. I am at present writing up my evidence, and will also write some proposals in the workshop, but my recommendation to the committee will be a topic ban from diacritics, broadly construed. Then you can focus on doing some good around here :-) Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 03:36, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I shouldn't be barred from the hockey articles concerning diacritics, however. I've had the least disputes there. GoodDay (talk) 06:32, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Though it's likely irrelevant to the case, you do realize that If I'm barred from the hockey articles too, that'll be a green light for editors like Djsasso to do as they please. A situation which could re-ignite another diacritics war on hockey articles; even though I'd be absent. GoodDay (talk) 20:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably either being topic banned from diacritics, or being site banned - I can't talk for the committee but they are the two likely outcomes. I assume you'd prefer the former rather than the latter, which is why I've suggested it at the workshop. Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 20:51, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I realize that a site-ban is possible. I just hope my bannishment/restriction/block etc; doesn't have un-foreseen problems, concerning ice hockey articles. GoodDay (talk) 20:56, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unless anything drastic happens from your end I can see no site-ban forthcoming . @Steven: can you have another look at your proposal. I know "broadly construed" is a popular ArbCom parlance but something more specific and detailed might be more useful here. Agathoclea (talk) 21:22, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See my comments at the workshop for my reasoning. I'm not sure if a limited scope remedy would be workable or effective, but it's not up to me in the end. Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 23:05, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When (for example) I see blatantly pro-French language editors like In ictu oculi & P. T. Aufrette, being allowed to push French accents on English Wikipedia? I don't mind the possibility of being banned from diacritics. As I mentioned to Jimbo, it's all so disheartning & unbearble, to see that nobody seems to care. GoodDay (talk) 23:46, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You know its pretty silly that you would state something like "green light for editors like Djsasso to do as they please" since I have only made something like 35 edits out of the 100,000+ that I have made on my time on the wiki where I have changed a diacritic in an article title and I believe almost all of them were reverts of other people. (This was calculated when the dolovis issue was happening). As for in actual article text I can't recall ever changing one either other than to revert someone else to our consensus (ie remove them). So to claim I will run roughshod over diacritics is a bit ridiculous. My position on has always been that people should leave them as they found them. People on both sides of the issue. Hence I have barely ever touched them. The ice hockey compromise was created to stop you from warring with IP editors if you go back and look at the old conversations. So I highly doubt you would see any wars at all if you were not present. Heck if you had never crusaded against diacritics there probably wouldn't have had to be a diacritics compromise at the hockey project because no one else was obsessed about them like you seem to be. -DJSasso (talk) 12:09, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I only hope aforementioned editors proove me wrong. GoodDay (talk) 18:38, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 June 2012

You've got mail!

{{you've got mail}} Rcsprinter (tell me stuff) 11:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replied, thanks. Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 23:54, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DR bot

Just to give you an update, I've done some research and found a good neural network library to use. I'm having to write a whole new language binding for it though because the current one is years old and doesn't work with any newer version of the library. I'm nowhere near done, but I'm just going to implement the minimal set of functionality I'll need and tests look good so far. The next step will be finding flamewars to feed to the network. At the moment, I'm thinking about parsing AN3 archives, finding talk page sections given the "Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page" links, and normalize the text for input. This is going to be pretty darn complex, though, and as always there's no guarantee it'll work. If you can think of any other potential sources for flamewars, let me know. . Even if it turns out that disputes are too variable for a bot to identify, this has been an interesting learning experience for me and when the language binding is done, it's going to help a lot of people. Cheers! — madman 18:33, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, you could always consider using Wikipedia:Requests for mediation and it's subpages...there's a section labelled "Other steps of dispute resolution that have been attempted" which has links to previous DR attempts. That would possibly give you some results. Hopefully that is helpful...I know with ClueBot Cobi somehow "taught" it to recognise vandalism, but I realise a detecting a dispute is completely different from detecting a page replaced with "NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER", so take your time (though it would be nice to have something by the end of the month) :-). Regards, Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 08:00, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:HOCKEY

Just curious. Do you see anything wrong with my statement here? GoodDay (talk) 19:12, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, it seems OK to me. Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 19:18, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okie Dokie :) GoodDay (talk) 19:28, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SPI

Hello, I have answered to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ceedjee. 81.247.97.117 (talk) 13:33, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, thanks for that. I'll wait for the filer to make comment before proceeding further. Regards, Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 13:39, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
Thank you. FYI : just want to edit far away from all troubles.
81.247.97.117 (talk) 14:17, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steven_Crossin&oldid=496904634"