Jump to content

User talk:Noleander: 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
Line 570: Line 570:
:Done. --[[User:Noleander|Noleander]] ([[User talk:Noleander#top|talk]]) 17:02, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
:Done. --[[User:Noleander|Noleander]] ([[User talk:Noleander#top|talk]]) 17:02, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
{{you've got mail}}
{{you've got mail}}

== Dealing with troublesome issues ==

As you might have noticed already, Cambalachero usually deals with contrary opinions by turning the discussion into a mess. His replies are usually huge blocks of text that almost no one reads. And he is usually followed by his two friends: ‎MarshalN20 and Wee Curry Monster (I'm quite surprised that the latter one has showed up so far). In the end the issue isn't resolved because the other party give up and third parties have no motivation to try understanding the mess. That's what they did in every article related to the [[Falklands Islands]] as well as in [[War of the Pacific]]. They are three Spanish American nationalists (do not confuse with "patriots").

For the last few years they have been whitewashing their countries' history here at Wikipedia. Since almost no one in here has any true knowledge of Latin America's history, their behavior passes unnoticed. That's how Cambalachero has removed any mention that [[Juan Perón]] was a dictator (as usual, he says that "critics called person X a dictator") and also from Juan Manuel de Rosas (do you doubt? See [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Juan_Manuel_de_Rosas&diff=528073593&oldid=527834583 here]). Cambalachero has been blocking even my slightest attempts to improve the article[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history/Archive_115#Juan_Manuel_de_Rosas] such as removing a great picture of Rosas I added[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Juan_Manuel_de_Rosas&diff=527410353&oldid=527400451] and asking it to be deleted from Commons merely because it was I the one who uploaded it.[http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Rosas] Since you are an experient editor in matters relating to disputes between editors here I ask: what is the appropriate measure I should take? --[[User:Lecen|Lecen]] ([[User talk:Lecen|talk]]) 12:21, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:21, 8 January 2013

Welcome to my talk page!

If you leave a question for me here, I will usually respond here, to keep the conversation co-located.

Start a new talk topic

Please comment on Talk:Michael C. Seto

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Michael C. Seto. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 October 2012

Imagine (song)

If you have the time, I would appreciate another excellent review. If you're too busy I'll understand. Cheers! ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 06:25, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 16:15, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Portal talk:Miley Cyrus

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Portal talk:Miley Cyrus. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 16:08, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 October 2012

Please comment on Talk:Pinky ring

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pinky ring. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 16:05, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom of speech = New WikiProject

Hi there, I'm notifying you as I noticed your excellent work on the Featured Quality article, Birth control movement in the United States. I've recently gone ahead and created WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do:

  1. List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Freedom_of_speech#Participants.
  2. Add userbox {{User Freedom of speech}} to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject.
  3. Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using {{WikiProject Freedom of speech}}.
  4. Join in discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech.
  5. Notify others you think might be interested in Freedom of speech to join the WikiProject.

Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt (talk) 17:40, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invitation. It looks like a great project ... unfortunately, I'll be busy in real life for the near future, so I probably wont be able to contribute much. However, I do note that two of my featured articles involve major free speech principles:
So I guess that proves that I'm interested! --Noleander (talk) 18:12, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:2012 main page redesign proposal/Straw Poll October 2012

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:2012 main page redesign proposal/Straw Poll October 2012. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:16, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 21:51, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 October 2012

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Russia Today DNR

Hi, can you kindly comment on the Ben Smith issue and criticism and controversies section issue on the RT section in the DRP? Festermunk (talk) 18:13, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2012 October newsletter

The 2012 WikiCup has come to a close; congratulations to Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions), our 2012 champion! Cwmhiraeth joins our exclusive club of previous winners: Dreamafter (2007), jj137 (2008), Durova (2009), Sturmvogel 66 (2010) and Hurricanehink (2011). Our final standings were as follows:

  1. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions)
  2. Canada Sasata (submissions)
  3. Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions)
  4. Scotland Casliber (submissions)
  5. New York City Muboshgu (submissions)
  6. Wisconsin Miyagawa (submissions)
  7. Minnesota Ruby2010 (submissions)
  8. Michigan Dana Boomer (submissions)

Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.

Awards will be handed out in the coming days; please bear with us! This year's competition also saw fantastic contributions in all rounds, from newer Wikipedians contributing their first good or featured articles, right up to highly experienced Wikipedians chasing high scores and contributing to topics outside of their usual comfort zones. It would be impossible to name all of the participants who have achieved things to be proud of, but well done to all of you, and thanks! Wikipedia has certainly benefited from the work of this year's WikiCup participants.

Next year's WikiCup will begin in January. Currently, discussions and polls are open, and all contributions are welcome. You can also sign up for next year's competition. There will be no further newsletters this year, although brief notes may be sent out in December to remind everyone about the upcoming competition. It's been a pleasure to work with you all, and we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:37, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kabulbuddha blocked

Kabulbuddha has been indefinitely blocked because he is one of about a dozen sockpuppets used by banned editor Zrdragon12, who specializes in editing warring to sacrifice one of many accounts to the cause of "baiting" other editors.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 16:50, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay. I've put a note on the DRN case page, suggesting that the case be closed. Thanks. --Noleander (talk) 17:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:16, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 05 November 2012

A barnstar for you!

The Writer's Barnstar
Great job with your quality improvement efforts on the article Pi, a significant contribution to Wikipedia within the field of Mathematics. :) — Cirt (talk) 06:58, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, thank you. It was a lot of fun, and I learned some interesting things along the way (mostly that my math skills are pretty inadequate :-) --Noleander (talk) 20:08, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Michael Crichton

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Michael Crichton. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:16, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 03:06, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk on Russia Today

Just letting you know I've made some important changes to both the reception section on the RT Talk page and the proposed material talk page, and that your input would be appreciated. Festermunk (talk) 16:31, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 03:23, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:2011–2012 Egyptian revolution

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2011–2012 Egyptian revolution. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 17:48, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 November 2012

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:16, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 01:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much

Thank you for joining WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech, much appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 01:50, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if you ever need any specific task done (GA review, etc) - I don't have a lot of time available for WP (pretty busy in real life) but if you give me a specific job, I can usually make the time. --Noleander (talk) 01:52, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh thank you so much for offering to help out! Okay well the best place to monitor that type of stuff for now is to watch WT:WikiProject Freedom of speech. — Cirt (talk) 03:08, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Education of the deaf

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Education of the deaf. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 17:33, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please review non-admin closure

Hello. There was an RfC a couple of months ago at Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/Archive_57#RfC:_Album_covers_in_artist_articles. I thought the consensus was clear, but one editor did object. I posted a request for a formal closing about a week ago, at Wikipedia:AN/RFC#Wikipedia_namespace. User Eraserhead closed it yesterday as "no consensus". I'm not sure that is correct. Could you please review the closure. Thanks. --Noleander (talk) 18:46, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Happy to help.
In looking over the discussion, it seems to me that it was a rather productive discussion in that many things were discussed and clarified.
That said, I don't believe that there was an overall consensus.
So at this point, I would suggest taking all that you all learned in the previous discussion, and laying out one or more new RfCs on each specific thing you're looking to update/change in the policy and/or footnotes.
I hope this helps. - jc37 19:03, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thanks for taking the time to look. --Noleander (talk) 19:13, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail

I'm not sure that the internal e-mail really allows attachments. If you drop me an e-mail, with your address, I can forward the material I found on LLDM to you. John Carter (talk) 23:42, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 01:49, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it looks like you've got JSTOR now, but I e-mailed you the articles that seemed most relevant off it anyway. Sorry for the delay. I wish the LLDM were better covered in that databank, but honestly didn't see much. I'll check to see if ProQuest and others might have additional content JSTOR doesn't have tomorrow, and mail you anything that seems to have material that would be significant and directly relevant to a main article on the LLDM. John Carter (talk) 02:45, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR

Hi there. You're one of the first 100 people to sign up for a free JSTOR account via the requests page. We're ready to start handing out accounts, if you'd still like one.

JSTOR will provide you access via an email invitation, so to get your account, please email me (swalling@wikimedia.org) with...

  • the subject line "JSTOR"
  • your English Wikipedia username
  • your preferred email address for a JSTOR account

The above information will be given to JSTOR to provide you with your account, but will otherwise remain private. Please do so by November 30th or drop me a message to say you don't want/need an account any longer. If you don't meet that deadline, we will assume you have lost interest, and will provide an account to the next person in the rather long waitlist.

Thank you! Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 20:54, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 21:54, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 November 2012

Please comment on Talk:State of Louisiana v. Frisard

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:State of Louisiana v. Frisard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:16, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:44, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dvorak technique GAN

I've submitted the first round of changes and responses to your GA review. Let me know when you're able to go over the changes or submit new suggestions. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:19, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The new round of comments has been addressed in one form or another. I don't believe we need more Saffir-Simpson related information because the SSHS is meant for the public, while Dvorak is meant for meteorologists. If you can come up with a way where it is more relevant, please share. Let me know if either or the "new graphics" were an improvement over the main graphic, per your first round of suggestions. Thegreatdr (talk) 18:34, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done at GAN page. --Noleander (talk) 15:25, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Optical Express

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Optical Express. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 06:00, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:15, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 15:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 November 2012

Dispute resolution volunteer survey

Dispute Resolution – Volunteer Survey Invite

Hello Noleander. To follow up on the first survey in April, I am conducting a second survey to learn more about dispute resolution volunteers - their motivations for resolving disputes, the experiences they've had, and their ideas for the future. I would appreciate your thoughts. I hope that with the results of this survey, we will learn how to increase the amount of active, engaged volunteers, and further improve dispute resolution processes. The survey takes around five to ten minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have either listed yourself as a volunteer at a dispute resolution forum, or are a member of a dispute resolution committee. For more information, please see the page that describes my fellowship work which can be found here. Szhang (WMF) (talk) 02:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 05:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help?

Dear Noleander - I'd like to thank you for overseeing the AfD discussion about Innovation Journalism.

It seems some people have targeted this article. The argumentation for deletion failed the time you oversaw the discussion There was no support for OpenFuture's charges of 'neologism' and 'conflict of interest'. Having lost the case, OpenFuture then edited the article, removing all the references to the Stanford initiative, as well as to the seminal paper - in short, everything with my name attached to it. This seems like a peculiar way of rewriting the article, its more like a personal vendetta. The 'neologism' banner was not taken away, even though the argumentation for neologism had failed.

Before long, another AfD appeared, using exactly the same charges as the first time. This time the decision was a clear 'keep'. I stayed away from the discussion, I'd had enough the first time. So 'Neologism' was thrown out once again. And still, the "neologism" banner remains, and OpenFuture continues to behave aggressively, pushing the same old accusations in the same ungraceful manner. I hope this is not considered an OK Wikipedia culture.

So now I am asking you for advice:

What is required in order to remove the 'neologism' banner? Who can do it?

I feel quite intimidated by OpenFuture. He is from Sweden - I am Swedish and it;s a small country - He uses a pseydonum and he clearly dislikes me. I accept that there may be critique in the matter, but I would like the discussion to be gracious. It can't be right that people hiding behind pseudonyms can go on harassing people who dare appear under their real names. I am beginning to wonder if I have been stupid to use my real name.

thanks for your attention, i'll appreciate your thoughts on this.

--dnordfors (talk) 05:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on article talk page. --Noleander (talk) 05:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicion

Looking at the Margret Sanger article, I noticed a SPA named "DonnaCzahchy". She is good for one edit, but it is a highly suspicious one. Within 5 minutes after registering, she made this edit that you reverted a few hours later. I don't have any real proof that is is another sockpuppet or meatpuppet, other then this flimsy one. What do you think? Leave it or take it to SPI? The Banner talk 19:30, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And what to think of Alyssaisalive? The Banner talk 19:36, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for detecting those suspect edit histories. I'd say there is a 50-50 chance they are sock/meat puppets; and 50-50 they are just random 1-shot editors that have a strong POV against Sanger. As for an SPI: personally, I wouldn't bother unless the disruption becomes more frequent or more pronounced. But it is your call. --Noleander (talk) 19:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The point is that Bob Enyart is trying to get his block lifted, claiming he is innocent. The Banner talk 19:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
On second thought, evidence is really to thin. I leave it for now. The Banner talk 20:15, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I didn't know there was a block on that editor. Yeah, I'd just wait to see if the disruption continues. --Noleander (talk) 20:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

Hi. Since you gave comments on articles that are currently listed at WP:PR, I was wondering if you could give some helpful comments to Wikipedia:Peer review/Cher/archive1? Thanks, Lordelliott (talk) 05:08, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'd be happy to help. I'll start the review on that page. --Noleander (talk) 16:23, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for pushing-back on your recommendations. I want you to continue, and I'll try my best to do basically everything you say. Thanks, Lordelliott (talk) 20:24, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I'll be busy the next couple of days, but I'll work on it as time permits. --Noleander (talk) 20:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your advices Noleander! I already contacted User:GabeMc and he's doing a new PR. Your help was very valuable!! Lordelliott (talk) 17:53, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Following your advices, I tested the "cite bundling" two times on the article but I don't know if it's right. Could you check it to me? The refs are 105 and 180. Lordelliott (talk) 23:36, 11 December 2012 (UTC) Also, there are some refs which are repeated through the body of the article, so I can't put them in one ref. What should I do? Lordelliott (talk) 23:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Littlest Pet Shop (video game)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Littlest Pet Shop (video game). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:16, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 20:26, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Tokyo Girl

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Tokyo Girl. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 03 December 2012

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College Basketball

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College Basketball. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:16, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for PR

Thank you for carrying out the PR on Wikipedia:Peer review/Fecal incontinence/archive1. I will take some time updating the article based on this, and then get back to you. lesion (talk) 00:09, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All points have been addressed. Wikipedia:Peer review/Fecal incontinence/archive1 Thanks for comments, it was educational for my future editing. What is the way forwards now? Good article assessment? lesion (talk) 19:34, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the next step, if you want to progress towards WP:Featured article status, would be to nominate the article for WP:Good article status. Just place a nomination at the WP:GAN page. --Noleander (talk) 19:42, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
thank you. lesion (talk) 19:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Reviewer Barnstar
With thanks, lesion (talk) 10:19, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia:Peer review/Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy

Hi, thanks for your offer to review the Muhammad cartoons controversy article. I've left a comment for you at the review page. Peregrine981 (talk) 09:12, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll start the PR now. --Noleander (talk) 19:43, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Outside input requested at Talk:La Luz del Mundo

Hi, first of all I would like to thank you for your help in La Luz del Mundo page. I think it would be best if you could look into this discussion [1]. I am concerned that this could lead to issues further down the line. Thank you for your time. Fordx12 (talk) 22:09, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Conversion therapy

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Conversion therapy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 02:17, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Organically inane

TransporterMan ®: Stating the bleeding obvious at excruciating length since 2007 , TransporterMan (TALK) 16:49, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm growing accustomed to your verbose essays .... they always make me smile :-) --Noleander (talk) 17:56, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 December 2012

Please comment on Talk:Hezekiah's Tunnel

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hezekiah's Tunnel. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. --Noleander (talk) 02:36, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Religion

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Religion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:16, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Helped by adding sample images to RfC discussion. --Noleander (talk) 02:35, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review of Stamford Canal

Greetings! I note the discussion on the GA review of Stamford Canal. As you have not yet closed the review, I will be very happy to address any issues raised, as I was one of the main contributors to the original article. Bob1960evens (talk) 13:40, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 02:15, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Star Wars and Indiana Jones connection

Hello, I overhauled Star Wars and Indiana Jones connection by removing much of the trivia (for which I could not find reliable sources) and adding a "Shared themes" section. I think the article is in much better shape. While it is more sparse, I think there is a stronger case for having a stand-alone article as long as the standard is maintained. Please let me know at the AfD discussion what you think. Erik (talk | contribs) 21:24, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I looked again, but I think my prior comment is still apropos. --Noleander (talk) 02:16, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Austrian School

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Austrian School. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 00:16, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 02:33, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 December 2012

Merry Christmas!!

For all you do!! Have a wonderful HOLIDAY!!


Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas 2012!

Happy New Year and all the best in 2013!

Thanks for all you do here,

and best wishes for the year to come.
Ruhrfisch ><>°° 16:58, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Derwick Associates

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Derwick Associates. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 01:16, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 December 2012

Juan Manuel de Rosas

Neolander, Cambalachero has replied at Juan Manuel de Rosas's talk page. Once you have free time, could you take a look? --Lecen (talk) 00:16, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 20:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Caudillo and Dictator do not have the same meaning. "Caudillo" is the name given in Hispanic (or Spanish) America for powerful landlords who were local political chiefs. They would tamper elections to place either themselves or their allies in political offices. They used their laborers (called "peons") as private forces, and that's why Caudillos were either military officers or members of militia or of the national guard. Some of the them became dictators of countries or even of provinces, such as Justo José de Urquiza who ruled the Argentine province of Entre Ríos. However, not every caudillo was a dictator nor every dictator was a caudillo. Rosas was a caudillo and is regarded as such by historians. But Caudillo and Dictator can not be used in place of the other. Lastly, MarshalN20 is far from being a neutral observer. He and Cambalachero have both often teamed together in controversial articles, such as Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute. They were also together against me in articles such as Platine War and Paraguayan War. His sudden appearance in Rosas' article (which he has never edited nor took part in any dicussion in its talk page) is not a coincidence. --Lecen (talk) 11:09, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you seek to impose something that is cleary disputed?
Regarding your ugly claims about me, have you not noticed that we are among the few active South American editors in the en.Wikipedia? We have common interests, and every so often we find each other as a result of it.
I have nothing against you and, in fact, appreciate the work you do for the encyclopedia. If you could please leave aside the battleground mentality, surely we could all get along and hold discussions like gentlemen.
Regards.--MarshalN20 | Talk 04:49, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a good reason to explain why I am avoiding sources written in Spanish (or to be more precise, coming from Argentine authors). Leslie Bethell, one of the most respected Latin Americanist historians, said: "The enormous bibliography on Rosas is a hindrance rather than a help to understanding." He also list Julio Irazusta (whose "Vida política de Juan Manuel de Rosas, a través de su correspondencia" Cambalachero used as source) as "rosista" (that is, Revisionist). The other authors cited by Cambalachero are not even mentioned by Bethel.[2] Does every Rosista work should be avoided? Of course not. Bethel even mention a few. They should, however, be seen with careful. But what is the Rosista (or Revisionist) school? I'd recomend taking a look at pages 114 (beginning with the last paragraph: "While Sarmiento's ideas prevailed as Argentina's...") to all of 115 of this book. I'd like to also suggest reading Leslie Bethell's "Argentina Since Independence" begining with page 26 and until the end of page 27. It is amazing how Bethell's work says the exact same thing about Rosas as John Lynch's Argentine Caudillo: Juan Manuel de Rosas. Let's compare:

Bethell: "Rosas also controlled the bureucracy. One of his first and most uncompromising measures was to purge the old administration; this was the simplest way of removing political enemies and rewarding followers". (See the link given above)
Lynch: "Rosas also controlled the bureaucracy. One of his first and most uncompromising measures was to purge the old administration; this action was the simplest way of removing political enemies and rewarding followers". (Lynch, 2001, p.82)
Bethell: "While he controlled the legislature, Rosas also dominated the judicial power. He not only made law; he interpreted it, changed it, and applied it. The machinery of justice no doubt continued to function: the justices of peace, judges for civil and criminal cases, the appeal judge, and the supreme court all gave institutional legitimacy to the regime. But the law did not rule. Arbitrary intervention by the execute undermined the independence of the judiciary. Rosas took many cases on himself, read the evidence..., examined the police reports, and, as he sat alone at his desk, gave judgment, writing on files 'shoot him', 'fine him', imprison him,' 'to the army'." (pages 26 and 27)
Lynch: "Rosas not only controlled the legislature but also dominated the judicial power. He not only made law; he interpreted it, changed it, and applied it. The machinery of justice no doubt continued to function: the justices of peace, judges for civil and criminal cases, the appeal judge, and the supreme court all gave institutional legitimacy to the regime. But the law did not rule. Arbitrary intervention by the execute undermined the independence of the judiciary. Rosas took many cases on himself, read the evidence..., examined the police reports, and, as he sat alone at his desk, gave judgment, writing on files 'shoot him', 'fine him', imprison him,' 'to the army'." (Lynch, 2001, p.81)

Bethell is clear about Rosas being a dictator: "Propaganda was an essential ingredient of Rosismo: a few simple and violent slogans took place of ideology and these permeated the administration and were thrust relentlessly at the public. People were obliged to wear a kind of uniform and to use the federal [Rosas belonged to the Federalist Party] colour, red... Federal uniformity was a measure of quasi-totalitarian pressure... Portraits of Rosas were carried in triumph through the streets and placed upon the altars of the principal churches. Sermons glorified the dictator and extolled the federal cause... This was the system of total government which sustained Rosas in power for over two decades. The majority of people obeyed, some with enthusiasm, others from inertia, many out of fear [Emphasis added]." I hardly believe that every single English speaking historian is biased toward Rosas. --Lecen (talk) 09:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is good information. It is probably correct to say that non-Argentinian historians are less prone to bias about Rosas' character. So, I see no problem with relying primarily on English-language sources. On the other hand, if there are two or three highly respected Argentinian sources, the article should definitely include them in its References section, and should possibly include those author's assessment of the "was he a dictator" issue (but should probably identify those sources by name, per WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV). --Noleander (talk) 16:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to risk seeing Cambalachero saying "that Argentine historian you mentioned is anti-Rosas". We would waste time with him claiming that an author is that and I that he isn't. But I can give you one example. Argentine historian Fernando J. Devoto (who has doctorate and is a graduate of the University of Buenos Aires [3]) published a book along with Brazilian historian Boris Fausto (whose works have been published by the University of Cambridge [4]) that compares Brazil and Argentina from 1850 until 2002. The parts pertaining Argentina were written by Devoto and the ones about Brazil by Fausto. It says "...although a part of those elites had shared the exile in Chile and Uruguay, during the dictatorship of Rosas." Source: page 59 of Fausto, Boris; Devoto, Fernando J. (2005) (in Portuguese). Brasil e Argentina: Um ensaio de história comparada (1850–2002) (2nd ed.). São Paulo: Editoria 34. ISBN 978-85-7326-308-4 (there is a Spanish edition published by Sudamericana in 2008). --Lecen (talk) 17:37, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Noleander, disregarding Argentine sources under the concept that they are "less prone to bias about Rosas' character" is an ad hominem fallacy. Sources should be judged by their quality, not the nationality of the individuals.--MarshalN20 | Talk 17:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to let you know that Cambalachero has replied in that article talk page. --Lecen (talk) 16:22, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to thank you for your effort, and patience, trying to deal with this delicate matter. I'm well aware that it's not easy to get yourself into a troublesome dispute and find the correct path. You suggested that I should create a RfC about the matter. I wonder if it wouldn't be better to open a thread at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard? I'm saying that because, perhaps you might haven't notice, but Cambalachero largely ignored your points and tried to misrepresent facts. Both he and his friend Marshaln20 ignored your remark that "If the majority of mainstream, secondary sources hold a particular view, then that view can be stated in the encyclopedia's voice and need not be attributed. For example: evolution vs. creationism - those are two POVs, but the majority of scientists support evolution, therefore WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV does not apply and "evolution is true" can be (and is) stated in the encyclopedia's voice. WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV only applies when the sources are biased or the POV is held by sources that are in the minority". He also claimed that John Lynch changed his mind about Rosas being a dictator merely because the first edition was called "Argentine dictator" and the second one "Argentine Caudillo", even though the latter treats Rosas as dictator (and a brutal one since it includes an entire article about Rosas' atrocities) from the beginning to the end. Thus, perhaps the Dispute resolution noticeboard may be the appropriate place to end this troubled issue. --Lecen (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the WP:DRN process is a good path to take. You could do a DRN case, or an RfC. I recommended RfC because (with luck) there may be several editors that reply; and if there is a strong consensus one way, the RfC can be officially closed, and the result is semi-binding. The DRN is a great process also; but it tends to have a single mediator/volunteer that participates, so it is similar to Third Opinion. You could do a DRN case first (they typically last 5 to 10 days); then do an RfC afterwards if the DRN case is not fully resolved. --Noleander (talk) 19:16, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's done: Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Juan Manuel de Rosas If you don't mind, could you take a look at it? If I misrepresented something (mainly your opinions) please correct them. And if you're willing to comment or at least share a summary of your views, please do so. --Lecen (talk) 20:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Swiss Guard

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Swiss Guard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 02:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your thoughtful and evenhanded comments on the split proposal for this article Noleander. The consensus now seems to be firmly for two separate articles and this should be a straight forward exercise. The issue was hardly a heated one but having a fresh viewpoint and analysis to move things along was very helpful. Buistr (talk) 18:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Glad I could help. --Noleander (talk) 06:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2013 starting soon

Hi there; you're receiving this message because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup. This is just to remind you that the 2013 WikiCup will be starting on 1 January, and that signups will remain open throughout January. Old and new Wikipedians and WikiCup participants are warmly invited to take part in this year's competition. (Though, as a note to the more experienced participants, there have been a few small rules changes in the last few months.) If you have already signed up, let this be a reminder; you will receive a message with your submissions' page soon. Please direct any questions to the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! J Milburn 19:23, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]


please help agains vandalism

Hello dear Noleander,

as a user i have a problem, and i hope you can help me. I have uploaded a map, which is made by Professor M. Izady, Columbia University, USA. This map is describing the linguistic composition of middle east. And I have added that to wikipedia (Article: kurd ) or ( kurdish language ), in all languages in wikipedia. But a turkish fascist user, who hates kurds, delated my map. I did “undo” but now my commons picture ( the map ) is removed “becoz of licenzing”. I think, it is done by the same fascist user ( takabeg ):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Takabeg

And now I don’t know what I can do against this vandalism. Here you see my scientifical source and the link to Professor Dr. Izady’s work in Columbia University.

http://gulf2000.columbia.edu/maps.shtml

http://gulf2000.columbia.edu/images/maps/Mid_East_Linguistic_lg.jpg

example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurdish_language

I thank you for your help and info. Best regards, Sagapane (talk) 20:04, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on users' talk page. --Noleander (talk) 06:17, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Category talk:Hungarian communities in Vojvodina

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Category talk:Hungarian communities in Vojvodina. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 03:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 06:25, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 December 2012

Please comment on Talk:Hanakotoba

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hanakotoba. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 04:57, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 06:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution

Hello Noleander, I have responded to your comment/question at the dispute resolution page for Peter Proctor. Regards, Chantoke (talk) 01:07, 5 January 2013 (UTC) (Ramwithaxe, changed signature back to sign-on name to avoid confusion)[reply]

Replied at DRN case. --Noleander (talk) 16:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Nayirah (testimony)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Nayirah (testimony). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 06:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Noleander (talk) 17:02, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Noleander. 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.

Dealing with troublesome issues

As you might have noticed already, Cambalachero usually deals with contrary opinions by turning the discussion into a mess. His replies are usually huge blocks of text that almost no one reads. And he is usually followed by his two friends: ‎MarshalN20 and Wee Curry Monster (I'm quite surprised that the latter one has showed up so far). In the end the issue isn't resolved because the other party give up and third parties have no motivation to try understanding the mess. That's what they did in every article related to the Falklands Islands as well as in War of the Pacific. They are three Spanish American nationalists (do not confuse with "patriots").

For the last few years they have been whitewashing their countries' history here at Wikipedia. Since almost no one in here has any true knowledge of Latin America's history, their behavior passes unnoticed. That's how Cambalachero has removed any mention that Juan Perón was a dictator (as usual, he says that "critics called person X a dictator") and also from Juan Manuel de Rosas (do you doubt? See here). Cambalachero has been blocking even my slightest attempts to improve the article[5] such as removing a great picture of Rosas I added[6] and asking it to be deleted from Commons merely because it was I the one who uploaded it.[7] Since you are an experient editor in matters relating to disputes between editors here I ask: what is the appropriate measure I should take? --Lecen (talk) 12:21, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Noleander&oldid=531943462"