Jump to content

User talk:The ed17: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→OMT: new section
Line 1,001: Line 1,001:


Hey Ed .. thanks for the OMT link. So far the only thing I've done in the Military History stuff is minor Bio things. Mostly I just do my own quiet thing in NASCAR old obscure history stuff .. but I do like working with others to. I'll definitely follow up on that .. thank you. — <small><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding:1px;"><b>[[User:Ched|Ched]]</b> : [[User_talk:Ched|<font style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#0000fa;">&nbsp;?&nbsp;</font>]]</span></small> 07:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Hey Ed .. thanks for the OMT link. So far the only thing I've done in the Military History stuff is minor Bio things. Mostly I just do my own quiet thing in NASCAR old obscure history stuff .. but I do like working with others to. I'll definitely follow up on that .. thank you. — <small><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding:1px;"><b>[[User:Ched|Ched]]</b> : [[User_talk:Ched|<font style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#0000fa;">&nbsp;?&nbsp;</font>]]</span></small> 07:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

== Belchfire and the WikiProject Conservatism posse ==

Thanks for keeping an eye out. Ever since I started assembling the RFC about the WikiProject's behavior, they're stepped things up a few notches by reverting pretty much any change I make. I've kept myself to 2RR, and more commonly to 1RR, in the spirit of BRD, while focusing on launching RfC's whenever they stonewall. As for vitriolic personal comments, if you could point out any examples, I would be glad to redact them and avoid anything similar. Given the provocation, I think my comments have been quite mild, but who knows. Also, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:StillStanding-247&oldid=508899759#Just_so_you_are_aware... this] might interest you, although none of it appears verifiable. [[User:StillStanding-247|I&#39;m StillStanding (24/7)]] ([[User talk:StillStanding-247|talk]]) 08:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 08:20, 25 August 2012



Great American Wiknic

In the area? You're invited to the Great American Wiknic.

Place: near Minnehaha Falls at Minnehaha Park, Minneapolis
Date: Saturday, July 7, 2012 (rain date July 8)
Time: 12–3 pm

  • Accessible from the Minnehaha Park light rail station, bus, walk, bike, or car
  • If driving, free parking available at 46th Ave. S, and pay parking in the park
  • Food and drink options nearby, or bring your own... maybe even to share!

See the meetup talk page for more. —innotata 00:10, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Highlights from May 2012

Highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation Report and the Wikimedia engineering report for May 2012, with a selection of other important events from the Wikimedia movement
About · Subscribe/unsubscribe · Distributed via Global message delivery, 02:56, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 June 2012

Arb report

Hey Ed. Sorry to be a pain, but I was wondering if you could take a look at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-06-18/Arbitration report. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 08:46, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've reworded the statement to allay any accusations of perceived "editorialising". My statement was made based on a casual observation, I have no opinion on the RM and I do not like to get involved in heated arguments such as that RM where it does not concern me. James (Talk • Contribs) • 9:21pm • 11:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See also my comment there. Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:35, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've commented. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For future reference

For whatever it's worth, happy reading : ) - jc37 18:05, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like (from what I've been seeing) that I should have placed some emphasis on making it easier to remove adminship... harumph. I didn't think it played that big of a role. Thanks for the note. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:44, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. And btw, nice article. I've glanced over it twice, and will likely be spending some research time on it : ) - jc37 20:57, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! The responses have been illuminating. Incidentally- I know you ran for bureaucrat a bit ago. I don't know if I !voted (I rarely go/vote there anymore), but I thought you would have made a fine 'crat. I'm sorry it ended the way it did. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lol no worries. It seems it was an RfB (which went full term) with the lowest turnout in ages, so you're in good company for having missed it : )
And thank you, that's kind of you to say. - jc37 21:30, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work with this article Ed - it's certainly had a significant impact! Nick-D (talk) 08:19, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, much more of an impact than I had been expecting! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:47, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ed, just wanted to appologize if my comment on the article talk page came off as attacking you. I didn't mean it that way and I understand in a short article you're not going to hit on everyones viewpoint. The removal of adminship issue is just one of those factors that I feel is key to RFA reform, but is often just dismissed by many of the people who participate in the "RFA is broken" threads on WT:RFA. Overall good job.--Cube lurker (talk) 12:05, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats and a story suggestion

Congrats on the new position as editor-and-chief, while its been a while since the title was bestowed on you I am now only learning about it. I have full faith and confidence in you that you will be able to bring us the news in the best possible way, and I hope that your tenure at the signpost works as well for Wikipedia as your tenur with the bugle has been.

On that note I have a story suggestion for you as it relates to the bugle: some days back Yahoo! ran a piece on the DD(X) destroyer class, which caused pages related to it see a massive influx of viewers from the net who arrived at Wikipedia to look at the destroyer's article here and learn more about it. Additionally, while we (milhist) are not credited with the article content that was up on Yahoo!, a lot of it did sound like it had come at least in part from Wikipedia. There could be a story in their somewhere, or perhaps an honorable mention for our project. TomStar81 (Talk) 22:01, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Tom. Thanks! Being EIC is certainly a big change from the previous, but it's gone well so far. If you'd like, you could propose that at WT:MHNEWS... the Bugle doesn't typically cover that sort of material, but that's because we mainly focus on in-house stuff, and discussion there could help. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their July 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on July 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on July 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to eliminate the articles tagged in April, May and June 2011 from the queue and to complete all requests placed before the end of June. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 6 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in April–June 2011", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa and Stfg.

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:17, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost - In the news section

Hi there. I noticed the role was empty an took on the task of writing this weeks 'In the news' section. However, I have never written for The Signpost before and I was wondering if you could give me some feedback on my article which can be found here.

Thanks

Oddbodz (talk) 21:15, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. We haven't run "In the news" for awhile because there hasn't been enough outside news to cover. You should try to follow the format of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-03-12/In the news, and we'll need more than one item to cover (if we don't have more, we'll put it under "in brief" in news and notes). "In brief" is meant for brief mentions of other news items not worthy of a full-length story. Also Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Resources#In the news may help you. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:30, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

'Bogus' GA 'reviews'

I'm not quite sure what to do about this "review" I got for my GAN... - The Bushranger One ping only 02:51, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(tps) I deleted the review; the user didn't modify anything else GA-wise, so it looks like a 'new user who doesn't know the process' deal. If he asks about it I'll explain it to him. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 03:07, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:26, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Wizard, I didn't know you have my talk page watchlisted! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:55, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal

Per our discussion above, I thought you might be interested in this. Enjoy : ) - jc37 17:36, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're going to want a short summary/intro at the top; I wasn't sure what you were asking for until I got to the bottom! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:39, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to make it clearer. Hope this helps : ) - jc37 17:44, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And one more thought, if your usergroup isn't intended to moderate behavior, why are you calling it "moderator"? ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:49, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Best thing I could think of. In my experience moderators typically deal with the "substance"/text/discussions. (Though nod, depending on the website/software, some deal with policing behaviour.) And it nicely abbreviates to "mod". (Compare to admin - the abbreviated form of administrator.) If you have another suggestion, I'm all ears : ) - jc37 17:58, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, and now that I think about it more, I can't come up with a better name either. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:12, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I know the feeling. And believe me, I tried. Nothing I found came close to being as clear or as universally understood. If something comes to you though, please drop me a note. - jc37 18:25, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uh oh

Was the current run of the Bugle supposed to be titled "GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive"? That is how it is being delivered. Cheers,
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 18:44, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...whoops. I really do need to use preview. It doesn't look like I can stop or change it, so I guess I'll just edit the project news section with an apology. Thanks Berean. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:48, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Don't break the Bugle again! Nick-D (talk) 23:06, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, he didn't break the bugle (dented it maybe...) - jc37 23:08, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have high standards ;) Nick-D (talk) 23:31, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, as long as it still plays... : ) - jc37 23:37, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah yeah Nick, just remember that I'll be waiting with a trout for the next time you screw something up. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:05, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Surreal Barnstar
For dispatching what may be the most creative edition of The Bugle ever put out from the Military history Project press I hereby award you The Surreal Barnstar. In the (possibly paraphrased) words of a cartoon square I recall reading some years ago, "To err is human, but to really @#$% things up requires a computer." Enjoy :) TomStar81 (Talk) 02:12, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Tom. xD Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:05, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXV, June 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed with project banner code

Eddie.. are you aware of anyone with the coding skills to help out with the ships banner? All I ever get are plugs for the meta banner. Brad (talk) 13:07, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Brad, I was going to say that User:MSGJ is the one, but then I read the linked page. I'd try User:TheDJ, who I know can do it but isn't very active, or User:WOSlinker, who may also advocate for WPBannerMeta.. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:01, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Who takes care of the milhist banner and why hasn't milhist been brainwashed into accepting the meta banner? Brad (talk) 00:15, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh duh, that'd be Kirill. Not sure why I didn't think of him... and I'd suspect it's for many of the same reasons you have. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:08, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Long time without update but Kirill made some changes and never came back to address the remainder. So, fed up without the help I needed, I converted Ships over to the meta banner. The MB has its quirks but is not totally unworkable for what Ships needed. The change over happened about two weeks ago. Since no one seemed to care I didn't bother asking about going with the MB. Three months later and here we are. Brad (talk) 07:25, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tb

Hello, The ed17. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:The Core Contest.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

(I love using this template, it's like getting a decal and sticking it on someone's user page.....) Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 June 2012

SignPost

I recently posted a suggested story for the Signpost and in poking around noticed we had a new Signpost editor. A long time ago (maybe six months or so) I was invited to write an op-ed on COI for the Signpost and I guess it must have faded away with the changing of the guard. If you're interested, the offer is still there.

FYI - I run a firm called EthicalWiki that helps educate and consult companies on how to improve articles they have a COI with, ethically and with quality content. You can see some of my works at [1][2][3][4] User:King4057 12:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'll look into this tonight when I have more time. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:36, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright then, I'm back. I'm going to be writing about your suggestion in our "In the news" section tomorrow (UTC) shortly before we publish for this week. The topic faded away because it faded away on-wiki, which is our principal readerbase, but I'd be happy to run an op-ed from you on the subject as they do not have to be timely. Would 30 July or 6 August work for you? (and when you have it done, listing it at the opinion desk would be appreciated!) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:16, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to help. I know the CIPR was asking in a video interview about the response of the Wikipedia community and this should be a good way to potentially get some feedback. I'll shoot for 7/30. User:King4057 19:06, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Newsletter

Anything to add? J Milburn (talk) 17:04, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:36, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
EdwardsBot has been unable to send it all of today, and I know that if I try to get my bot to do it, I'll make a hash up. I'll try again when I'm a little fresher tomorrow... J Milburn (talk) 23:27, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, gotcha. The bot has been having Toolserver-related issues lately, which I'm sure annoys MZM to no end. :/ Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:16, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2012 June newsletter

Apologies for the lateness of this letter; our usual bot wasn't working. We are now entering round 4, our semi-finals, and have our final 16. A score of 243 was required to reach this round; significantly more than 2011's 76 points, and only a little behind 2010's 250 points. By comparison, last year, 150 points in round 4 secured a place in the final; in 2010, 430 were needed. Commiserations to Pool A's Minas Gerais igordebraga (submissions), who scored 242 points, missing out on a place in the round by a whisker. However, congratulations to Pool B's Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions), whose television articles have brought him another round victory. Pool A's Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came second overall, with an impressive list of biological did you knows, good articles and featured articles. Third overall was Pool D's New York City Muboshgu (submissions), with a long list of contibutions, mostly relating to baseball. Of course, with the points resetting every round, the playing field has been levelled. The most successful Pool was Pool D, which saw seven into the final round. Pool B saw four, C saw three and Pool A saw only the two round leaders.

A quick note about other competitions taking place on Wikipedia which may be of interest. There are 13 days remaining in the June-July GAN backlog elimination drive, but it is not too late to take part. August will also see the return of The Core Contest- a one month long competition first run in 2007. While the WikiCup awards points for audited content on any subject, The Core Contest about is raw article improvement, focussing heavily on the most important articles on Wikipedia. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 11:12, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-07-02/Discussion report. Is the entry accurate? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.
I didn't edit it directly, as I don't know who is "allowed" to. (Don't want to step on anyone's toes. : )
There's a typo: [nd] > [and]
And to me, it makes it sound like a moderator receives block and protect. And WMF said that it needs to be the standard RFX process.
As a suggestion (to try to keep your existing phrasing), replacing the first sentence with:
  • "Moderators" would face the standard RFX process but would receive fewer tools. Moderators would not receive: "Any tools which directly deal with the assessing of editor behaviour. In particular: block or protect."
Otherwise, looks good to me. And thank you for the note : ) - jc37 13:27, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
From what I can tell press time is an hour away, so I went ahead and was "bold" - Obviously feel free to revert. - jc37 05:09, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I've been at work but was going to fix it when I got back. Plus, I'm the one who publishes it, so I wouldn't have let it go out without being corrected. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:36, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(facepalm) - Oh.
Incidentally, I've withdrawn the proposal (for various reasons).
For my next proposal on this (whenever that is), I may ask you to look it over first. You seem to have a good eye for clarity : ) - jc37 17:57, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't facepalm, it's fine! I saw the withdrawal, unfortunately. I'd be happy to look over a finetuned proposal before you submit it; feel free to drop me a note here or send an email. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:27, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 02 July 2012

tb

Hello, The ed17. You have new messages at Waldir's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re:Newsletter delivery

Thank you!--Midgrid(talk) 19:52, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

COI op-ed for the Signpost

I thought I would share my draft op-ed so far. I'm asking a few editors for feedback and making some tweaks from there. User:King4057 15:47, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm literally running out the door right now, but my first-glance thought is that I wouldn't make it much longer. Some detail is good, but people won't read the whole thing if it's too long. :-) I'll provide more detailed feedback later. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:22, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking that too. I just cut it back quite a bit, but it may still need some shortening. User:King4057 20:33, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That length is fine. Another thought is that the SP, or Wikipedia in general, does not use bolding like you do. Is there a different way of framing your principal points? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:46, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Flip. Flop.

Re this . . . by a "Romney-like stand", do you mean they 'd have to play the leading role in implementing PC in some sector of the project, pat themselves on the back for years for a job well done, and then make opposing wikiwide PC a central tenet of their Arbcom campaign, while waffling on exactly what PC is and is not? Rivertorch (talk) 06:29, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sort of. I didn't mean a literal interpretation. Mostly I meant that they'd have to waffle between the two to cater to both sides or they wouldn't get elected... but the overarching thought in the comment was that we probably don't want to bring that much politics onto WP. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:08, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: June 2012



Headlines
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 12:49, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikimania

Ed, as we mentioned a while ago at WT:MIL, there will probably be an informal Milhist session during the unconference. Please let me know if you want to meet for anything else. I'm going to be attending mostly tech sessions during the conference, and I'll have access to email and to Wikipedia several times a day throughout.

Dan

We'll figure it out as we go along. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DC

Ed, any chance I'll see you at Wikimania this week? -- Lord Roem (talk) 02:49, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully! I'm flying in late Wednesday and leaving in the evening on the 16th. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: CSS question

Try that :) It's a very common CSS problem, because, as you say, there's no float:center. - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 10:51, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's ... frustrating. :-) Thanks for the help! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:00, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 09 July 2012

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi t | c 17:34, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, The ed17. You have new messages at Drmies's talk page.
Message added 21:24, 12 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Drmies (talk) 21:24, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A cheeseburger for you!

Ed, you're a good man. I'd leave you a big fat penis for a barnstar, but I have been told that they are restricted, so a cheeseburger is the most masculine I can drop of you. Drmies (talk) 03:50, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Four million

Thank you. --Meno25 (talk) 14:30, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ed! You noted that "that kind of change would need more discussion", but the banner went up despite a clear lack of consensus (due to concerns that the compromise wording addressed). —David Levy 04:15, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David! My view is that if we're going to have a banner, like we've done in the past, it needs to be focused on the reason we're posting one. That reason is the 4,000,000th article, not a repeated call for contributors (we already have "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit."). The banner text currently in place has been previously used and agreed upon; your wording involved discussion with three editors over a matter of minutes. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:55, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My view is that if we're going to have a banner, like we've done in the past, it needs to be focused on the reason we're posting one. That reason is the 4,000,000th article, not a repeated call for contributors (we already have "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.").
The idea wasn't to fundamentally alter the banner's purpose; it was avoid implying that we care only about the quantity of articles.
Perhaps this attempt was less successful than intended, but the concern on which it was based remains (and is the reason why the current wording lacks consensus).
The banner text currently in place has been previously used and agreed upon;
But when the banner was discussed this time, it clearly failed to achieve consensus. For some reason, it went up anyway.
your wording involved discussion with three editors over a matter of minutes.
Yes, but it replaced wording that definitely lacks consensus (and specifically addressed the reason why). If it lacks consensus too, the banner should be removed for the time being. —David Levy 05:25, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And just how many outside people (non-editors) do you actually think read it that way? Obviously we care about the quality of the articles or we wouldn't have a "featured" article right beneath. Anyway, I'm not going to argue with you about it here; it won't achieve anything besides unneeded acrimony. Good luck on Talk:MP, though. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:52, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't intend to debate it here (which I agree serves no practical purpose). My point is that you undid the revision on the basis that "that kind of change would need more discussion", but the current version was discussed and shown to lack consensus.
Why, in your view, should it nonetheless be displayed? Why shouldn't the banner be removed until consensus is reached? —David Levy 06:17, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)Removing the banner celebrating a significant achievement would look really silly, as would changing it significantly now it's been posted. Nick-D (talk) 06:30, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So consensus (or the lack thereof) should be ignored?
To be clear, I don't aspire to eliminate the banner. I opposed its display (as did others), but I sincerely seek a compromise that addresses both sides' concerns. I thought that we'd found one (wording collaboratively devised by a strong proponent of the banner and me), and I'm prepared to continue brainstorming. —David Levy 06:44, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

John's got a stomach bug

If anyone is trying to find me, I'm going to hang with John until we see whether he needs to go to a doctor. I'll be back as soon as I can. - Dank (push to talk) 16:17, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We were worried, we flew back to NC, he saw the doctor, he's fine. Sucks to come back early, but I understand the videos of the conference are going to be up shortly on Commons, and I already got a chance to see most of the people I wanted to see, so ... meh. Great to meet you, Ed, you gave me a lot of ideas. - Dank (push to talk) 22:50, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's sad, but you do what you have to do! I'm disappointed I couldn't meet him, but I'm very glad to hear he's okay. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:11, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE July 2012 mid-drive newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors July 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter

Participation: Out of 37 people signed up for this drive so far, 25 have copy-edited at least one article. It's a smaller group than last drive, but we're making good progress. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Template:J

Progress report: We're almost on track to meet our targets for the drive. Great work, guys. We have reduced our target group of articles—May, June, and July 2011—by about 40%, and the overall backlog has been reduced by 264 articles so far, to around 2500 articles.

Copy Edit of the Month: Starting in August, your best copy-editing work of the month will be eligible for fabulous prizes! See here for details. – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 16:57, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice meeting you at Wikimania

You've come a long way since your "Disruption, trolling, vandalism, no useful edits" days :-P Keep up the good work. --Cyde Weys 01:40, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :P Nice seeing you too, and I hope we all get together again sometime! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:51, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Probably should go here too... nice meeting you in person! Hopefully it won't be the last time. Keep up the good work on the Signpost. Regards, Lord Roem (talk) 05:03, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Same to all that. Note that I won't be sad if you ever stop clerking and come back to the SP, even if it's not on the now-occupied Arb report. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Last week's Signpost still up?

If I knew something about your template, I would fix it myself. - Dank (push to talk) 10:33, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, that's manual for now while we test it. I'm updating it now. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:34, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to be fixed for me :) Nick-D (talk) 10:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not for me ... for instance, the Featured Content is last week's, and I think others as well. - Dank (push to talk) 10:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SIGNPOST is still off though. ;-) Am updating. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fantastic job on your write-up of the conference, btw. - Dank (push to talk) 15:33, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 July 2012

Duplicate Signpost postings

Hi. It looks like LivingBot updated m:Global message delivery/Spam twice, resulting in double postings. This led to EdwardsBot being blocked on de.wikipedia.org. I don't think there's much to be done now, but we should try to avoid this. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 15:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My internet died partway through Jarry's automated process. I made sure it wouldn't break anything on en.wp when I redid the step ... but I forgot to check the meta implications, as you are aware. Sorry! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agincourt FAC

I've updated the article in response to the last few comments from the ACR, so you can nom it whenever you get a chance.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Special report' in this week's Signpost

Hi Ed. I'm a long-term fan of the Signpost, but I'm really disappointed by the 'Special report' in this week's edition. It is conflating two entirely separate issues - the establishment of the WCA, and the arbcom case against Fæ - and appears to be manufacturing non-existent controversy around the WCA as a result. I would strongly urge you, as editor in chief, to separate the two issues into two articles - one covering the WCA, and another covering the arbcom case around Fæ. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 16:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know nothing about the WCA and very little about WMUK ... but I have to admit that I thought it was quite striking that the WCA would choose a leader who may be about to be banned from Wikipedia; it suggests there's a disconnect somewhere, and certainly struck me as newsworthy. But again ... I know nothing at all about the merits. - Dank (push to talk) 16:59, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I must disagree – they are very related. Fae is both the chair of Wikimedia UK and the elected chair of the WCA (the election took place during Wikimania). Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
While I think that this is an important issue to cover (and the obvious problems with the WCA selecting an editor in poor standing on this Wikipedia as its first chair clearly need to be covered as it does decrease the organisation's credibility considerably), the breathless tabloid style of the article really does it no favours. The first of the dot points about Fæ's alleged misconduct should have been omitted as it's obviously not actionable (if people want to upload photos of themselves with no clothes on to Commons for some reason, this seems to be fine - and probably rightly so, I guess). Nick-D (talk) 12:08, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:57, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Queering Wikipedia edit-a-thon

Hi! I'm helping to organized a Queering Wikipedia edit-a-thon in Los Angeles. I was wondering if we could publish a report in the Signpost after the event? It is Sunday, so there is not much time to write it up. Let me know if that is possible. Thanks! Wadewitz (talk) 20:56, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, you are looking to author a separate page for this week's Signpost? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:39, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A separate article would be nice, yes, but if that is not possible, a small notice would still be good! Wadewitz (talk) 22:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We don't typically have separate pages for anything but the biggest events, but I'll make sure it's in News and notes. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Thanks! Wadewitz (talk) 17:15, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia talk:Meetup/LA/7 - short summary of the event. Wadewitz (talk) 17:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding Brandon Harris tot he Signpost article

and nice to meet you, however, briefly, at Wikimania.SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:12, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime. I had meant to add him before publishing, but it slipped my mind -- thanks for the reminder. Nice to meet you too! See ya around the wiki, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:38, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shocking language!

I thought you wrote a bit nicer than this. Rcsprinter (talk) @ 20:30, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I got a little angry that day. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:57, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Signpost work

The Content Creativity Barnstar

Hello, ed17! I want to thank you for your hard work writing the Signpost every week. You don't just collect some links and quotes, you actually analyse and comment in depth a lot of stuff. That's why I'm giving you the Content Creativity Barnstar. Feathers are really old fashioned, but fortunately good writing isn't. Good luck! --NaBUru38 (talk) 01:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm not sure that I'm quite as good as you say I am, but I'm continuing to learn as I go! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:57, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox Shannara location

Template:Infobox Shannara location has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 July 2012

Signpost feedback

You know, if you are looking for constructive feedback, might I suggest a new feature? I've had in my head that the post may benefit from a "classifieds" page that lists the weekly articles up at the bounty board and the reward board, and in my mind's eye, would allow editors looking for help or interested in testing the waters to place an "ad" such as it were on the page to see if they could find other liked minded people for whatever project or goal they need help with (ie: "project x is being reactivated, any interested editors are asked to join", "seeking an editor adept at .svg conversions for photo project", etc). It could be worth a look into if the other post members think the idea has a chance.

On an unrelated note, read that you got flack this week for your controversy article. I wanted you to know that in my case at least this was the first I was hearing of any controversy, and while the article in the post was apparently controversial, I found it illuminating in that it did sum up an interesting issue for me. Nice to know that when push comes to shove some people still have the balls to tell it like it is for the rest of the world to know. TomStar81 (Talk) 14:05, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We already have that in the WikiProject Report, Tom! ;-)
Thanks for the feedback! We're doing our best. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 16:35, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Help requested...

Ed, can you take a look at the edit-war underway at Roger Federer (and the discussion heatedly underway at its talk page), brought to my attention here, and see if it needs full protection to ensure proper discussion? My Internet is being 100% derp today so I can't do much. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:38, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not The ed17, but... done. - jc37 01:19, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Bushranger, I wasn't online, but it looks like one of my talk page stalkers got it for you. ;-) Thanks Jc! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:24, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost op ed

Hi Ed, I'm hoping to do an opinion editorial on my dispute resolution work - is it too late to get something in for the upcoming issue? Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 01:42, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Steven, it's not too late, and we don't have anything scheduled for this week right now, so I'm fine with a preliminary green light. Let me know when you have a draft ready. :-) (not to censor it or anything, just copyediting) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:24, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do my best to get a draft ready in the next day - I've got a lot on but it'd be great to have an opinion piece on dispute resolution to coincide with the Wikiproject Dispute Resolution report. I'm not a good writer though so I'll do what I can. Steven Zhang Get involved in DR! 07:28, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you have a wiki friend interested in DR too, you could always have him/her coauthor it to help you out! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:39, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Highlights from June 2012

Highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation Report and the Wikimedia engineering report for June 2012, with a selection of other important events from the Wikimedia movement
About · Subscribe/unsubscribe · Distributed via Global message delivery, 21:30, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

GOCE July drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors July 2012 backlog elimination drive wrap-up

Participation: Out of 45 people who signed up this drive, 31 have copy-edited at least one article. Lfstevens continues to carry most of the weight, having edited 360 articles and over a quarter of a million words already. Thanks to all who have participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, will be available early in August here.

Progress report: We are once again very close to achieving in our primary goal—removing the oldest three months from the backlog. Only 35 such articles remain at press time. The total backlog currently sits at under 2400 articles, down from 8323 when we started out over two years ago. We are just two articles away from completing all requests made before July 2012 (both are in progress).

Copy Edit of the Month: Starting in August, you'll be able to submit your best copy-editing work for palaver, praise, and prizes. See here for details. – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:20, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Afd

There are two reasons why I did not restart a merge discussion:

  • Merging has already been discussed from Hell to Breakfast and back to Texas with no consensus, and restarting the age old merge debate is unlikely to get any fresh blood on the case, which is what we need here, and
  • Our hand has been forced on the matter on account of this: Wikipedia:Featured topic removal candidates/Iowa class battleships/archive1. I am not going to work alone or with others to bring up Kentucky and/or Illinois if our entire workload is gonna end up null and void by merging. This forces the issue, but in its resolution we will know which of the two options we are going to take to keep the Iowa's as an FT.

Its extreme, but it works, and right now with the FTRC open we really do not have time for diplomacy (IMO). TomStar81 (Talk) 06:13, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was under the impression that we had a consensus to merge—just no one had done it yet. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:55, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Which is ironic, because I was under the impression that all had ended without consensus. Which just proves a point that this afd will force the merge issue at the same time it serves as a motion of confidence for or against the retention of the individual articles. Incidentally, you should weigh in at the afd, the more people that do the clearer the consensus will be for or against retention and the more people who weigh in the sooner consensus can be reached and the afd closed. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:21, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, well, to each our own view! I'll go !vote to merge over there. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 08:17, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:53, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bugle problem

Hi Ed, for some reason all the links in the version delivered to my talk page are pointing to the May edition... I think that you may need to re-send ;) Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:19, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Y'know, I previewed all this and tried to make doublecheck that everything was right, yet I still screwed up because I didn't click the links. Sigh. I've redirected the May pages and will un-redirect them in two weeks or so. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:17, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good fix. Incidentally, you're now on a Hat-trick for breaking the Bugle, and I'm a bit scared of what you'll do next time ;) (please don't block me as part of it!). Nick-D (talk) 10:22, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Troll's on you, kind sir – I'm only on whatever you'd call a two-trick. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 12:38, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To be 'on a hat trick' means that you've done two of whatever, and are well positioned to follow up with the third action. If you were from a civilised country you'd know that. ;) Nick-D (talk) 10:03, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"A hat-trick or hat trick in sport is the achievement of a positive feat three times during a game, or other achievements based on threes." Tell me again how I need to live in a civilized country. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:38, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost issue

An hour ago, User:LivingBot updated Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Issue with the edit summary "(on behalf of User:The_ed17) bot publishing Signpost Volume 8, Issue 31 for 30 July 2012". That is usually the update which signals the last stage of publishing the Signpost, as the Issue subpage is intended for watchlisting, but the table of contents is still showing last week's. — Richardguk (talk) 11:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The contents page was fixed by User:Tony1 after 2 hours. You might want to check that the publishing procedure is being implemented in the correct sequence. Anyway, thanks for all the work that you and the team put in each week. — Richardguk (talk) 14:34, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The regular page at WP:SIGNPOST is still being manually updated; today was a weird day because I had to get up at 5am my time for work, so I had Tony keep an eye out for any problems. Thanks for noticing this, and we'll do better in the future. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 16:00, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 July 2012

Anything...

...to add? J Milburn (talk) 20:01, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and sent it a little earlier than usual, as I have an early start tomorrow and want to get to bed. Hope there are no objections! J Milburn (talk) 22:14, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I was at the end of the world with little access to wifi today anyway. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:15, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2012 July newsletter

We're approaching the beginning of 2012's final round. Pool A sees Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) as the leader, with 300 points being awarded for the featured article Bivalvia, and Pool B sees Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions) in the lead, with 10 good articles, and over 35 articles eligible for good topic points. Pool A sees New York City Muboshgu (submissions) in second place with a number of articles relating to baseball, while Pool B's Minnesota Ruby2010 (submissions) follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film Pride & Prejudice. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals.

Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 22:35, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-07-30/Recent research

Ed (or TSP'ers, whoever get this first), there seems to be a problem with the format in the references section on this page. Something about the pdf format needing to be a certain way. In any event, its causing big red letters to appear, and that can't be good. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:43, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like this has been addressed. Thanks Tom! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:38, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: July 2012



Headlines
  • USA report: World Digital Library Wikipedian in Residence
  • UK report: British Library update; UK representation at Wikimania 2012; brief news
  • Spain report: Wikipedian in Residence for a whole town; Backstage Pass at National Art Museum of Catalonia
  • Germany report: Wikipedian in Residence updates; WikiCon 2012; Hamburgmuseum workshop
  • Italy report: July's case studies shed new light on African GLAMs
  • Mexico report: Second editathon with Wikipedia Student Clubs; participation in Mexico City's Creative Commons Film Festival; private art gallery donates 650+ images
  • Africa report: A month in Africa's GLAMs
  • Wikimania report: Wikimania gets GLAMorous
  • Open Access report: Open Access at Wikimania; Year 2 of Wikimedian in Residence on Open Science; Open Access Media Importer tested; WikiProject Medicine goes publishing
  • Calendar: August's GLAM events
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 17:22, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Re:

Nice :D Icy // ♫ 21:36, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

80% (or 90?) of the credit belongs to Sturmvogel 66. I just wrote the background and did some copyediting. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:40, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

precision
Thank you for your constant flow of featured content on battleships (planning 2021), for editing the Signpost, and for your diligence in language questions without a battle, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (5 AND 6 April 2009 - what did you do then to be noticed by two?)! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can't take all that credit, I done very little article writing lately. I did, however, have a major scare when I finished publishing the Signpost to find that I had a new messages banner. Typically that means I screwed something up. This was a bit more pleasant, though. ;-) . I got two in a row from different people, I think? Thinking back, I'm really surprised I got those; I feel like I was much more immature then... which is to say, I'm certain I was much more immature then. I've learned a lot in the last three years.
Thanks very much, Gerda – this honestly means a lot! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:06, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you think you didn't deserve the credits then, you are welcome now! I also learned a lot in the last three years, - I started in August 2009 and remember well, - first article deleted, a little later on DYK, did you know? - Feel free to check my hook suggestions before they go on the Main page ;) - I got the idea of looking for some awesome Wikipedian every day from esteemed predecessors. (One of them was hit by the Bozeman Carnegie Library effect, but is back to write Temple Emanu-El.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:36, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I started in March 2006 and basically treated the site like Myspace. I came back a couple years later and was better - I wrote articles too! - before I settled into Milhist articles... although I really should note that the reason my Milhist articles did okay at FAC was from two failed FACs for The Sword of Shannara.
I really should write more, but it seems like it just gets harder and harder to find the time. Awesome Wikipedians is a great program in my book... it's definitely a good way to boost an editors' spirits. Maybe you should also try to keep an eye out for promising new users (at DYK, perhaps?) and award it to them too? Just me thinking out loud! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments and suggestion. I "inherited" the program, learned it from Rlevse who made my day 2 years ago. I gave some Precious to new users on their first or second DYK. - I gave one to Br'er Rabbit when he was Alarbus. The reformation mentioned there, he knew, for others I have a link on my user ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cool! I don't think anyone is disputing Jack's article work, just his interactions with certain users. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:45, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
or his treatment by certain users? (Look for my name to find a small example, "Polite is irrelevant".) ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:29, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It goes both ways, yes. :p Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:34, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, not everybody seems to see that ;) - thank you also for taking responsibility for TFA 21 August! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:03, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Donut
4 making a donut ;)
(&& 23rd;) at this point, I doubt anyone will try and page ban him for it. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 06:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Well, there's the related issue of frustrated people lashing out after snarky edit summaries too. Still, at least some of the abuse directed at Jack clearly isn't warranted. Also I'm not really taking responsibility... it's just to prevent another mishap like José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco, which ran after Lecen asked it not run, just because Raul is on break. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:13, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for however you call it, very helpful, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:17, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Meh ;)
Tip. You really should not make such cut-and-paste moves. If you had actually moved the page to the correct date you would have maintained the attribution of the blurb in the edit history. You did make reference to the source of the blurb in the edit summary, so I'll go light on ya. Besides, if you did it now, it would break some diffs I've added at ArbWorld. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 06:23, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Psh, it's not like the TFAR summaries aren't copy/pasted too. ;-) I was going to ask what I did to deserve mention at Arbcom, but I never saw your suggestion to move Olmec for Sturm's article, just your post on his page. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:30, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You mean Teh Raul hasn't been writing those blurbs, just copying the ledes out of articles? Horrors. Is that {{minnow}} worthy? I posted at Sturm's talk because I doubt that he would have seen the removal of my suggested move. Last I looked, he had not commented on it.
Anyway, you've backed-up precedent that, uh, it's wiki in Teh House of TFA, too. Have a Donut ;) Br'er Rabbit (talk) 06:54, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You forgot the chocolate frosting! I consider it an anomaly and will be happy when Raul returns... but we have slightly different views on the subject of a FA director. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:09, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 06 August 2012

Nomination for deletion of Template:Royal Netherlands Navy cruisers

Template:Royal Netherlands Navy cruisers has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DH85868993 (talk) 12:07, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Douglas World Cruiser merge proposal

This proposal has probably dragged on long enough. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Agreed, but since I !voted there, I'm WP:INVOLVED as it were...perhaps you could ping Ed? - The Bushranger One ping only 18:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pinged. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 19:15, 7 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
I'll look at this tonight, when I'm not running out the door to work. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've offered some thoughts there (because no one thought of the other possible merge target!) and will close in a day or two if no one thinks I am now impartial. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 16:59, 10 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Fall 2012 Online Ambassador Program

Hi, Ed!

I know you were busy last semester, but if you're planning to work with a class in the US and Canada Education Program this Fall, please add your name to this census. Once the new class list is available, I will notify you guys so you can sign up for a class (or two) that interests you. I hope you're still interested in supporting these students for the coming term and have the time. Thanks so much! JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 20:38, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm still rather busy in real life, and the majority of my on-wiki time is devoted to the Signpost, but if there's a class I take a liking to, I'd think about it. Will there be any history courses this semester? (that's what I'm majoring in, so I'd be more interested in the topic, plus I'd be able to help students faster so I could also accomplish my other tasks here!)
Hopefully that doesn't come across as sounding like a slob who wants special treatment. While I still support the idea of getting college students to edit – my academic writing improved by leaps and bounds because of this site – I honestly don't have a lot of excess time that I can devote to it. :-) Thanks and apologies, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I understand! We actually will likely have quite a few history classes, so I'll just keep you updated. JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 22:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! I'm glad that didn't come across badly, and I hope I'll be able to help in some way. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New Ed program wiki newsletter

Saludos! LiAnna suggested that I get in touch with you. We have been working on creating a community-based newsletter, much like This Month in GLAM. We have some articles, with LiAnna's coming but we are having technical issues. Im hoping you can help us out tweaking it. We want the first issue to go out on 15 August, mid-month as TMIG goes out at the end of the month. Could you go over to [5] and take a look? Thank you! Thelmadatter (talk) 01:25, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. For one, you need a header linking the individual articles together and giving your pages a common theme (or brand). Second, you need a uniform way of crediting the authors. Third, on your main page, your logo should be the biggest thing there, with the issue and headlines being secondary. Also having "Headlines" there is a bit redundant and therefore unnecessary, in my opinion. For formatting inspiration, you may be interested in the Bugle for a good example of the multi-page format (disclaimer: I'm a co-editor), or the Ichthus for the older but more compact single-page style. Last, "This Month In Education" is rather bland and generic. Why not pick something more unique or quirky, something that will grab the attention of people who wouldn't otherwise read it?
Just a few thoughts. Hope they prove helpful, and good luck! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:46, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Those are great suggestions but unfortunately I am useless at the technical stuff. Most of that has been done by Beat Estermann and what we really could use is another pair of hands to get this off the ground. Im doing mostly the contacting of writers and subcribers as I have more time than technical ability. Do you have any time to help out in this way? If not, can you recommend someone?Thelmadatter (talk) 13:59, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Technically speaking, I'm about as good as a water buffalo. I can roughly understand what it does when I'm looking at it, but I can't write any of it myself. So, I can copy over some code and get it organized similar to the Bugle, if you'd like, but (assuming you like my suggestion) you'll need to decide on a name. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:00, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost opinion piece

Hi Ed. This week I have prepared an opinion piece to sync up with the release of the Wikiproject report on Dispute resolution - on my progress as a fellow thus far and where I see us going in future with dispute resolution. It looks like someone has beat me to the punch however, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-08-13/Op-ed - I'm wondering if it's possible this opinion piece could be delayed a week and mine could be published to sync up with the DR wikiproject report - I think it would have a greater impact. Could you let me know ASAP? Thanks. Szhang (WMF) (talk) 23:16, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The op-ed you see will be a response to Brandon Harris' op-ed, and we'll have a second op-ed as well, so I can't give you a spot this week. The best I can offer is a possible next week or a certain August 27th. Apologies, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:41, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see. It's a real shame because I think it would have had a greater impact if the op ed synced up with the DR wikiproject report...I suppose I'll have to do it next week then. Szhang (WMF) (talk) 06:58, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Again, my apologies, but I can't push them back. Perhaps you could ask Mabeenot to push the DR WikiProject Report back a week, as he has his interviews planned and prepared well in advance? (that's his section; I don't make the decisions there. :-) ) If he can't, though, I'm afraid there's nothing I can do. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:31, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, its OK. I'll just do a WMF blog post and have Mabeenot add a big link to it or something. Szhang (WMF) (talk) 07:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's your choice. The WMF blog isn't as well-trafficked as the Signpost though. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:55, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't really have much choice - I didn't take the op ed page in time (I'd always planned for my op ed piece to sync up with the DR project report) :-) Szhang (WMF) (talk) 08:26, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said, ask Mabeenot if he will flip the WP:Korea interview with yours, and we can run your op-ed next week with the WikiProject report? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 08:36, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I'll poke them - it would be published on 20th August? Szhang (WMF) (talk) 08:39, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify: While I don't have a current comparison available, it seems that, based on older data, the average posting on blog.wikimedia.org actually gets significantly more pageviews than the average Signpost piece, especially when promoted in social media channels (which we're trying to do for Signpost pieces too when the opportunity arises, see e.g. [6][7]).
This is of course a reflection of the different scope of each publication - the blog also caters to general readers -, and I believe Ed may have been referring to an audience of active users on the English Wikipedia, or such. Regards, Tbayer (WMF) (talk) 23:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting, I was mistaken – I was under the impression that we had more readers, albeit I don't remember where that came from. Still, as you hinted at (thanks for giving me a way out of looking foolish, but I try to be honest :-) ), I believe we'd have more en.wp readers than the WMF blog, so an op-ed on the English Wikipedia's dispute resolution would have more impact when published on the English Wikipedia. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 08:24, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Steven, greater impact by having yours come a week after the Wpr rep. It's not just the longer timespan, but your ability to reflect on talk-page comments that appear this week. Tony (talk) 08:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey, sorry about the short notice - I think it might be best if I do this on a week where I have more than 9 hours to prepare something - since it may have a big impact - I want it to be good. So sorry about the short notice! Szhang (WMF) (talk) 19:00, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please move talk page

I was creating a talk page while you moved the associated page. Here is the result:

Can you move the talk page to be the talk for the "Response"? And not keep the redirect? If that's too much fiddling, my comment can just be copy/pasted (I have a local copy), and the old page deleted. Thanks. Johnuniq (talk) 10:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done with my apologies. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:21, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Eretria (Shannara)

The article Eretria (Shannara) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no assertion of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Widefox (talk) 17:01, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 August 2012

A request

Ed, José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco will be tomorrow's TFA. Would you mind raising its level of protection? I don't want to spend the day reverting vandal edits. I would be really grateful. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 21:59, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lecen, hope you're well! I'm not allowed to preemptively protect any article (see WP:SEMI, second section), but if there's a fair bit of vandalism, I'll be happy to protect it. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification regarding RSN closure

Hi Ed! I wanted a clarification about an RSN discussion closed by you. I observed that User:DBigXray is removing links to this site (pakdef.info) from the articles, many of which are on my watchlist. While doing so editor has removed many valid sources and external links from the articles, for example: 1, 2, 3. Can you please explain in the light of result you concluded from the relevant discussion at RSN and per Wikipedia policies, that are any type of links to this site forbidden forever? --SMS Talk 12:30, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am here as I am upset to see that SMS has wrongly done[8] a rollback of all my edits using WP:Rollback button which is itself blatant misuse of this right. Whats more disturbing is he has reverted back the references and links from self published source Pakdef info [9] saying this WP:SPS is a valid source, thereby clearly disregarding the current consensus. Also its to be pointed that while replacing with a different source he is using misleading edit summaries such as this I had waited almost a year but it seems like some editors have no intentions of removing the SPS but they are readding it after removal and also willing to edit war to keep these tainted sources into a wiki articles [10], rather than looking for better sources.
  • Even using pakdef.info as a mirror source of a RS is inappropriate, because it is proven that pakdef.info tweaks the actual data and content from other sources in order to support its stated objective of Glorifying pakistan (by hook or crook). I guess this also explains why this seems to be a favourite source of some editors here. Wikipedia is trusted among its users only due its policies on WP:RS which in my opinion should never be compromised, specially with history related articles.--DBigXray 13:42, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dead horses

If he was willing to back away from the dead horse, I wouldn't have filed the request. You're being presented with two editors who cannot work together productively and are both requesting an interaction ban. I would think that the best solution is to grant it to them. Unfortunately, closing the ANI report only perpetuates the problem. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 06:49, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you and Guy truly don't want to interact with each other... then don't interact with each other. Really, this should be frighteningly simple. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:09, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Still* already pointed out, he believes the other editor's self control is inferior to said user's goal to not interact. I tend to agree. (Please see [11] and [12].) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 07:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is a lot different in that both editors want it, not just one, as in your diffs. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:32, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In my diffs, the user confirmed understanding was corrected and agreed on new behavior. Then self-discipline broke down. (At least that is how I interpret it.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 08:46, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here, both editors want to be apart from each other. There, Guy isn't so inclined, for whatever his reasons. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:48, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, my request included a recent diff in which Guy said he was so inclined.[13] If you're not sure whether he's still inclined, you could just ask him. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 13:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think User:Ed is saying he believes the other user also supports an interaction ban. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 13:58, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, that's not how I read it, but I guess he could clarify. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 14:02, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ihardlythinkso is right. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:45, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so what am I missing here? I would imagine that if two users both agree to an interaction ban, it could just be granted. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 03:01, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What am I missing when two editors who supposedly want to ignore each other can't? Good lord, do you really need me to come in and say 'okay, will you two agree for me to block you should you contact the other?' Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:30, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In a word, yes! I don't have any intention of contacting him, so the threat of blocking doesn't perturb me. But he has intentions that differ from his ability to control himself, so it would actually help him stay on the wagon. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 03:40, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
User_talk:Guy_Macon#Interaction_ban?. Now can you please (1) take his page off your watchlist (2) leave drama areas for a few days and (3) write an article or two to prove you're not just here for the drama? Thanks, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:48, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Long gone.
  2. I'm avoiding ANI, etc., as these seem to be counterproductive.
  3. Editing articles right this moment.
Thanks. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 04:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
W/ regards to 2 and 3: no, thank you. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:05, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Remotely related: today I finally saw your response to Precious above, I replied there, and - in a way - here --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:47, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Replied above! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:45, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Snow

Hi Ed, You might be bemused by this photo of what constitutes heavy snow around these parts ;) Regards, Nick-D (talk) 23:59, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That made me chuckle. If you ever want to see real snow, my apartment's couch is unoccupied. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:45, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May I sent you an email?

Just wanted to ask before I shoot off something. ViriiK (talk) 04:09, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:18, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, The ed17. 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.

ViriiK (talk) 04:37, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Human baby

I know you were lying, but it was very nice nonetheless. I promise you that I will do my best, Ed. Fatherhood is really nice and I kind of wish I had started earlier--but things go as they go. Drmies (talk) 04:35, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh obviously. You may be sad you didn't start earlier, but maybe you wouldn't have been as prepared then as you are now. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:27, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, made my day ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:31, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, and everything would have been different. Still, that first night home on a reversed schedule (he doesn't like to sleep at night, apparently) is always rough. Think about that, Ed, next time you're sitting at the family table--thank the poor people who took care of you. You know, this makes me think of my father (our boy has his first name for a middle name--couldn't give him a Dutch name for a first name) and all the things I should have asked him and told him before he died. Drmies (talk) 14:20, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can't imagine, but I will do that. I'm sorry for you, Doc, but just remember that he's watching you from up above somewhere... and I'll bet he's laughing at you a bit too. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A notice.

Once the interaction ban is official, I'd like to post exactly the following notice on my user page:

User:Guy Macon and I have voluntarily entered into an interaction ban.

This way, I can refer to it in case someone brings up Macon. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 00:29, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:37, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I also saw the last thing you said to him, and I'm fine with not discussing each other's work. I consider the matter closed. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 01:51, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TFA change

Re: this -- I'm OK with that one, but in the future please don't do that again. Raul654 (talk) 21:55, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the note. As I said above, that was an anomaly – I'm certainly not planning on repeating it! Hope you had a good break, Mark. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, not as peaceful as I had hoped. Real life right now is crazy. I'm helping to bring Blue Waters's storage system online and that's a bit of stress that won't be helped by a wikibreak. Raul654 (talk) 22:21, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds like a ridiculous amount of work... good luck to you. Thankfully, it looks like Dabomb is back to help you on-wiki. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:39, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I appreciate that you took the time to lock that article. As it is a BLP, would you mind taking a look at it for bias or problems in your opinion, and make changes, if any, to ensure it is in compliance with our BLP policies? I realize this may put you in a position of having to make a content decision, but considering that the article is locked, only admins can make such changes at this time. Again, thanks. -- Avanu (talk) 05:49, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've copyedited a sentence away from a source, but I don't see any problems with BLP in that paragraph right now. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:58, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Much appreciated. -- Avanu (talk) 06:04, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I mentioned that you locked the article in this AN/I report ( Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Casprings and User:JamesAM reported by User:Avanu (Result: Protected) ), so I'm letting you know you were mentioned. -- Avanu (talk) 01:36, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) I assume this is the link you meant. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:41, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the note, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Signpost

Hi! Sorry, I didn't get your message about the signpost @ my en.wiktionary talk page until just now. I can try to provide some comments in the next 12 hours. How exactly would you like me to provide them? Do you have specific questions for me to answer, or would just a statement sent via email suffice? Thanks for the interest. Best, Tempodivalse [talk] 14:57, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail! Apologies for taking so long; I hope I'm in before the deadline. But it took some time to think out what I was going to say. Cheers, Tempodivalse [talk] 23:28, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, it's fine and it's in time. :-) Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 August 2012

GOCE news and September drive invitation

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in its events:

  • The August 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best August copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC).
  • September 2012 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on September 30 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit the articles tagged longest ago and to complete all requests placed before the end of August. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top six in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged longest ago", and "Longest article". This drive features a much easier signup process. We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.
>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:09, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Todd Akin

Please consider un-protecting semi-protect Todd Akin. There have been a lot of work done at Todd Akin rape and pregnancy controversy‎ so most of this controversy has been processed already. With 80,000 page views, we ought to give readers the material they are looking for. We the many eyeballs/watchlist on this article already it's unlikely that vandalism will be an issue. Cwobeel (talk) 16:59, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've provisionally unlocked the article. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question about voluntary interaction ban

One of StillStanding-247's disagreements with me was with the practice that I and several other DRN volunteers have of taking an informal poll to gauge consensus, explaining the concept of consensus to any "me against the world" editors, and (after a while for discussion) closing the DRN case if the consensus is overwhelming. He calls this "counting heads as opposed to trying to resolve the underlying content dispute."[14] and " "consensus" that controls the article by virtue of veto power".[15] (quotation marks around "consensus" in original).

Now he is. IMO, pushing the same POV[16][17]

Especially problematical is his comment that "just as an admin closing an RfC is obligated not to just count up editors and must instead exclude views that do not comply with policy and facts, a DRN volunteer should do the same." This clearly refers to my actions in closing the DRN case (after seeking a second opinion by another DRN volunteer).

I am of course not going to respond to this, but would it be out of line to place a neutrally-worded notice on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dispute Resolution and/or Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard with the wording "There is a discussion at (link) regarding WP:CLOSE and WP:DRN"? IMO, WP:CLOSE does indeed apply to WP:DRN, but StillStanding-247's understanding of it does not. --Guy Macon (talk) 01:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's really determined by how you use it. If it's 10 to 1, okay. If it's 7 to 3, no, that's not a good enough consensus to warrant a quick close. (just general thoughts there, I haven't done anything at DRN.) As long as you're following that, I doubt anyone else will have an issue with it... and no, I don't think you should place a notice there, not because of SS247, but because it's really unimportant in the grand scheme of things. :-) Do you see where I'm coming from? Otherwise perhaps you could ask a DRN volunteer to start a discussion about the role of WP:CLOSE in DRNs? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:22, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. Thanks! BTW, my normal practice is to only do a consensus close when one editor has a position, four or more oppose him, they have tried and failed to convince each other on the article talk page, discussion at DRN is going nowhere, and there are no overriding policies in play (IOW, I don't care how many people agree not to, we still follow WP:V, WP:RS, etc.). --Guy Macon (talk) 01:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two quick comments:

1) I wasn't specifically talking about Macon. The practice I described is fairly routine for WP:DRN, with deviations as the exception. I've done my best to avoid talking about him.

2) The ratio is a misleading measure. For example, 3 to 1 sounds like a big deal, and it would be if we're talking 30 vs. 10 in an RfC. However, when you literally have 3 and 1, all it takes is one person changing their mind and it's 2 to 2. Likewise, with just 3 on one side, it's easy for them to be effectively meatpuppets. In short, ratios are less important than the total difference between the counts. This isn't usually a problem for RfC's because those bring in many votes, but it's a serious problem for DRN's. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 07:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but if a dispute has gotten to the level of needing DRN, I think the participants' arguments will be set in stone. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:30, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to belabor this, but I must express disagreement. The whole point of dispute resolution is to resolve the dispute, not shut the minority up. Often, the reason it reaches DRN in the first place is that people ignore WP:CONSENSUS by voting their preferences instead of explaining their reasons. In such cases, DRN has the opportunity to break the deadlock by encouraging participants to explain themselves instead of just pushing for their view. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 07:38, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but there's a good counterargument that we shouldn't spend more time and drama on a topic than is necessary -- say, when the 'minority' view is really a fringe view and should be immediately discounted. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't disagree with that. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 07:45, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's in a situation like this where (I imagine) Guy and you could use a straw poll to doublecheck your gut feeling, then close the DRN if said feeling is confirmed. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:46, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, a straw poll can be a very useful technique, since it's where editors reveal whether they have reasons or preferences. The trick is not to just count up preferences and call it a day. :-) I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 07:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Which is true as well -- while numbers can assist in determining consensus, they shouldn't be the only barometer. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 08:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but we're just going to have to agree to agree, so there's nothing more to be said. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 08:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Ed, I think a good round of dispute resolution can sometimes help the entrenched participants see new ways of looking at the problem. I've participated in several now where people were simply stuck in their ways, and something as simple as changing "Jeff Bezos is a jerk" to "According to TechBlogToday, 'Jeff Bezos is a jerk'." Sometimes it is as simple as reminding people of Wikipedia's policies, because often a debate is happening because people don't know a policy, yet they inherently feel that something is not quite right. If we instead, as you say Ed, have DRN where the people are dismissed or the minority points are ignored, you probably just need a different set of DRN volunteers for that debate. It takes finesse and diplomacy to be able to bring people in arguments together. -- Avanu (talk) 15:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It has always been true that anyone who files a case at DRN can ask for a new set of dispute resolution volunteers, but this could be made more clear in the instructions. I will make that happen. (I wasn't going to respond to this thread, but I wanted to give Avanu credit for an excellent idea. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:40, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We're talking at different levels here. I'm talking about, say, a content dispute where multiple people have consensus for one thing, and a single person is fighting tooth and nail for a different thing. Otherwise yes, I fully agree with what you say there Avanu. Guy, that's fine, that's certainly within the spirit of the interaction restrictions! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:51, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OMT

Hey Ed .. thanks for the OMT link. So far the only thing I've done in the Military History stuff is minor Bio things. Mostly I just do my own quiet thing in NASCAR old obscure history stuff .. but I do like working with others to. I'll definitely follow up on that .. thank you. — Ched :  ?  07:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Belchfire and the WikiProject Conservatism posse

Thanks for keeping an eye out. Ever since I started assembling the RFC about the WikiProject's behavior, they're stepped things up a few notches by reverting pretty much any change I make. I've kept myself to 2RR, and more commonly to 1RR, in the spirit of BRD, while focusing on launching RfC's whenever they stonewall. As for vitriolic personal comments, if you could point out any examples, I would be glad to redact them and avoid anything similar. Given the provocation, I think my comments have been quite mild, but who knows. Also, this might interest you, although none of it appears verifiable. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 08:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:The_ed17&oldid=509055227"