User talk:The ed17

User Talk OMT Articles E-mail

Featured content

I have an idea for a featured content April 1st, but it *could* go horribly wrong if we don't write it very carefully. The joke is that I'd write it as someone who works in featured pictures, and show ridiculous, over the top bias towards that, like I'd talk solely about the images in the articles, and so on. If done right, it'll be funny, if done wrong, it'll annoy people.

Of course, the week after, we might want to cover the same material again, properly. =) Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 03:09, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm not so sure that people would recognize the intended hilarity. :/ Could we just mess with the short descriptions, similar to the TFA? Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 04:58, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Could work. Although we might want to provide a second, more sober version, linked from the bottom. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 13:09, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't think so—if we're entirely accurate with the blurbs, we should be able to get away with it. ;-) Also, to pass the word along, Tony1 thinks that your "photographic talent shows in the selection and arrangement" of the photos in "Featured content" this week! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 04:53, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

That's very kind of him. Though I wonder what he'll say if you let me get away with the indulgent gigantic Korean map this week. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 18:11, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Heh. But seriously, once articles and lists are finished, I'll play with images. Might move the Korean map to the side, lose Auriga, put up Aquarius (I like Auriga more, but aspect ratios count) and then see what I can find in the articles and lists. I would like there to be at least one... Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 18:14, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Up to you, I don't mind whatever you choose! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:42, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2014

• News and notes: Wikimedians celebrate International Women's Day, Women's History Month

• Traffic report: War and awards

• Featured content: Ukraine burns

• WikiProject report: Russian WikiProject Entomology

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:46, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Belle knox

I didnt agree with your closing so I made a DRV. Beerest 2 Talk page 14:57, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:28, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Your close on this article was blatantly improper. To claim that the opinion of a small minority is "consensus" is such a distortion of language, policy, and logic that you should reverse the decision, and if not you have no business being an admin. Everyking (talk) 01:55, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't think that's fair. Even admins are considered people(!), so even if they did make a mistake, let's treat them civilly, even if we disagree with their decision. Sportfan5000 (talk) 02:45, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Everyking, there's absolutely no need to be hostile here. Wikipedia's culture is toxic enough without you making comments like that. Sportfan, we must respectfully disagree, but I appreciate your much calmer demeanor. Regards, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 08:18, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

I think the culture might also benefit if we could count on admins to properly and honestly assess an AfD discussion. What does it mean when an AfD clearly says one thing, but then an admin comes in and says the opposite? As it happens, I looked up her article because I read another news article about her—she's still making the news for various things, even though the "one event" happened several weeks ago—and I was flabbergasted to see it no longer existed. I remembered that the AfD seemed like a slam dunk in favor of keeping, so I could not imagine what could have happened... Everyking (talk) 20:56, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

So you didn't go back and look at the AfD before commenting here? I would go read the end of that, examine the emerging consensus at the DRV, and possibly reassess your opinion. Thanks, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:02, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Of course I did realize what had happened. Perhaps I should have said "if I didn't have so much depressing experience seeing admins overrule consensus, I could not have imagined what happened". This "emerging consensus" at the DRV is based on a fait accompli; that's always how it goes, people defer to the admin once the action is taken. But make no mistake, you put your own opinion ahead of the community's wishes. Everyking (talk) 00:32, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Not really—I've seen many DRVs get overturned. If this was as egregious as you claim, it would have been a unanimous condemnation. Either way, I don't have an opinion on Belle Knox. I read the debate and made what I felt was the correct call. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 08:47, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Everyking, you are mistaken and grossly out of line. Determining consensus is not a simple head count; if it was, we'd have bots instead of admins. When closing any discussion, admin or not, the closer needs to weigh the comments against established policy, since that represents broader community consensus. Granted, not everyone has the exact same interpretation of any given policy, but that does not give anyone the right to berate anyone else for their valid interpretation. If you can't disagree with Ed amicably, I'd ask you to disengage, because your behavior is clearly unproductive. Parsecboy (talk) 12:06, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

People worked on that article and the community voted to keep it, and Ed disregarded all that. That is the plain and simple truth, and somebody needed to tell him that. Having made the point, I will happily "disengage". Everyking (talk) 17:38, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

As I said, discussions are not resolved by a simple vote. You've been here far too long to still have that fundamental misunderstanding of how Wikipedia works. But I thank you for agreeing to walk away. Parsecboy (talk) 18:16, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	for a courageous close. Spartaz Humbug! 21:15, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Spartaz. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:28, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2014

• Forum: Wikimedia Commons mission: free media for the world or only Wikimedia projects?

• WikiProject report: We have history

• Interview: Nate Ott: the writer behind 71 articles in the largest-ever good topic

• Featured content: Spot the bulldozer

• News and notes: Foundation-supported Wikipedian in residence faces scrutiny

• Traffic report: Into thin air

• Technology report: Wikimedia engineering report

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

RE:FT

What exactly do you mean? Wikipedia:Good topics and Wikipedia:Featured topics are two different entities and as such they have their own count pages (here and here). Or are you talking about something involving bots? Because everything we do is done manually. Including the count pages. GamerPro64 03:36, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

GamerPro, I was referring to the featured topics page, which hasn't had a new entry since January ... but now I realize I should have been looking at the good topic page. Sorry! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 05:27, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Okay. Glad to hear that everything is taken care of then. I guess when you think about it, the Featured Topic project is a bit complicated. GamerPro64 15:06, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

It can be when you don't look at it often :-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:16, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

FC for the 26th

Should be fairly easy this week. I've already set it up, and there's a lot less to describe than normal. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 04:30, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Awesome, I like hearing that ;-) I'll get to the FAs and FLs tomorrow! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 05:27, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Though one question: Do we report good topics or only featured topics? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 06:07, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

See, that's what I ran into in the above section -- we only do featured topics, and they are two very different things. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 06:18, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Okay. In any case, I've roughed in my image selection, and did a couple of the descriptions. If we get space, I might add in another image (Probably Stockholm station). We don't have as much space as normal, so I've innovated a little bit. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 14:41, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I like the gallery! Good choices. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:16, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Pine found a good image in an FA, and we had enough space for the Stockholm Central Station image once I finished describing the FPs. It looks pretty good, and it scales gracefully, which is one of my big goals. At lower window widths than my 1400px, it even does a nice division into FA image next to FAs, FL image next to FLs, and FPs next to FPs. (I've been trying to do that every week, but FAs and FLs don't always have enough good images to make it work that well.) Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 04:48, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

By the way, as next week's more-or-less April Fools, should the lead image be a little bit cheeky? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 05:02, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

You may go with that Adam Cuerden. But I think that it should be made not lead image but center image of bottom. Good for 1st April. :-)Herald 13:51, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm fine with making it cheeky! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 19:45, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Featured content

Yeah, obviously I haven't been around much, but I'm interested in getting back into the swing of things. I've been a lot more busy and probably couldn't actually work on the featured content, but I could look over things and do tidying up. öBrambleberry of RiverClan 21:28, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

@Brambleberry of RiverClan: Hey, thanks for getting in touch. I hope RL isn't too stressful! We'd love to have you around even in that capacity. Every little bit helps! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:07, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVI, March 2014

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Hawkeye7 on military command and Nick-D on F-111s in combat

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 Nick-D (talk) 11:58, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Started the April Fools issue's Featured content

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2014-04-02/Featured content

POTY

You know, this might be controversial, but I'm tempted to do an opinion piece on it. It has a tendency to exclude large classes of content, and the finalists, many times, are only vaguely usable to illustrate an encyclopedia - take this year's, in which a smoking lightbulb was photoshopped to remove the lampholder, leaving a visually striking - yet probably encyclopedically worthless - image. The one year I was involved, images were divided up into categories, and the category winners competed in the finals, I don't know why they dropped it, but if this is the result, methinks it should come back. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 00:30, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Adam, I'm emailing you about this. Tony (talk) 05:20, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I found the high proportion of POTY candidates which were images which had been (legally) harvested from Flickr to be rather unsettling. Surly the contest should be limited to images which were donated to Commons by their creator, and not include images where the creator might well be unaware that the image is on Commons. Nick-D (talk) 09:46, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

@Nick-D: I thought it was open to all images which had attained FP status in the preceding calendar year (including also PD images etc.). Avoiding Flickr would require quite a bit of rule retooling, either at FPC or POTY. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:20, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, that's my understanding of the rules as well. I personally think that including the Flickr images in the contest is unhelpful given that few of these images were consciously made available to Commons by their creators: it seems better to reserve this honour for donated images in order to encourage further donations. But that's all IMO :) (from someone who's donated lots of self-created images to Commons, and also uploaded quite a few Flickr-sourced images there). Nick-D (talk) 10:32, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

But you know that if they do, they'll come up with some rule that means anyone who does restoration work will get excluded from POTY, instead of simply de facto excluded. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 11:04, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

• Which would suck. Royally. Mind you, none of my restorations have actually passed Commons FPC. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 March 2014

• Comment: A foolish request

• Traffic report: Down to a simmer

• Recent research: Wikipedians' "encyclopedic identity" dominates even in Kosovo debates

• News and notes: Commons Picture of the Year—winners announced

• Featured content: Winter hath a beauty that is all his own

• Op-ed: Why we're updating the default typography for Wikipedia

• Technology report: Why will Wikipedia look like the Signpost?

• WikiProject report: From the peak

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:19, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

User:Matty.007/sandbox/HMS Algerine (J213)

Hi, I know you are very active in ship articles, would you mind giving the article a once over before I mainspace it please? Also, is there anything I can say about it being the namesake (I think) of the Algerine-class minesweeper? Thanks, Matty.007 15:46, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Hey Matty, it's going to need a pretty severe copyedit, but I'd say it's a strong start—especially for such a small ship that doesn't have much information on it. Sturmvogel's covered all of the other bases on the ship. I'd say that the article can get to GA once you go through some of the literature on the topic to make sure that there isn't any other information out there. :-) Regards, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:06, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

OK, thank you for the help. Best, Matty.007 20:10, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 March newsletter

A quick update as we are half way through round two of this year's competition. WikiCup newcomer Godot13 (submissions) (Pool E) leads, having produced a massive set of featured pictures for Silver certificate (United States), an article also brought to featured list status. Former finalist Adam Cuerden (submissions) (Pool G) is in second, which he owes mostly to his work with historical images, including a number of images from Urania's Mirror, an article also brought to good status. 2010 champion (Pool C) is third overall, thanks to contributions relating to naval history, including the newly featured Japanese battleship Nagato. Cliftonian (submissions), who currently leads Pool A and is sixth overall, takes the title for the highest scoring individual article of the competition so far, with the top importance featured article Ian Smith.

With 26 people having already scored over 100 points, it is likely that well over 100 points will be needed to secure a place in round 3. Recent years have required 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) and 100 (2010). Remember that only 64 will progress to round 3 at the end of April. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page; if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally. 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. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! 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), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 22:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Signpost RSS

Hello! Looks like the migration broke it :( I'm working on fixing it now. Thanks for the notice! YuviPanda (talk) 14:36, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Publish script fix in https://github.com/Jarry1250/labs-signpost/pull/2. Tool fix in a few mins YuviPanda (talk) 18:13, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

@Yuvipanda: Thanks for your efforts here! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:35, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

@Yuvipanda: Just a quick poke to see where we are on this. :-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:29, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

GOCE March drive wrapup

Guild of Copy Editors March 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter The March 2014 drive wrap-up is now ready for review. Sign up for the April blitz! – Your project coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by

Guild of Copy Editors March 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up Participation: Thanks to all who participated in the drive and helped out behind the scenes. 42 people signed up for this drive and 28 of these completed at least one article. Final results are available here. Progress report: Articles tagged during the target months of December 2012 and January 2013 were reduced from 177 to 33, and the overall backlog was reduced by 13 articles. The total backlog was 2,902 articles at the end of March. On the Requests page during March, 26 copy edit requests were completed, all requests from January 2014 were completed, and the length of the queue was reduced by 11 articles. Blitz!: The April blitz will run from April 13–19, with a focus on the Requests list. Sign up now! – Your drive coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Featured content is done

Sorry I was a little late. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 23:13, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

That's quite alright, Adam, I'm grappling with double shifts in real life. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 18:21, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I would very much appreciate

A second opinion over at Wikipedia talk:Top 25 Report, if you're willing. Serendi^podous 19:32, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2014

• News and notes: Wikimedia conferences—soul-searching about costs, attendance, and future

• WikiProject report: Deutschland in English

• Special report: On the cusp of the Wikimedia Conference

• Featured content: April Fools

• Traffic report: Regressing to the mean

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

ITM

Hey Ed, I have not forgotten about ITM, and apologize for the inexplicable absence of it lately; between some real life busyness, the WikiCup, and a few other reasons, I just have not made the time to do it lately. It's one of those things that once you fall out of it, it's hard to jump back in - what am I covering, just this week, the last several weeks, whatever? This has led me to just ignore it a little, and for that, I sincerely apologize. With the aforementioned thought in mind, however, I think I could handle (and hopefully would have help from Jayen466, Andrewman327, Gamaliel, etc.) a monthly edition of ITM for the last Signpost of the month, to recap media coverage from the preceding month. I would hope to start this in April, but am wondering what the deadline would be. I need a deadline, as that is the other thing; lately, I have had some chunks of time during which I could write ITM, but didn't know which issue it would be for. Anyway, I have sort of made personally justifiable excuses for not doing ITM lately, and would like to rectify the situation by doing it on a monthly basis. Another benefit of the monthly issue would be that it would be more comprehensive, as there would have been more coverage. What thoughts do you have on this? Thanks! Go Phightins! 21:19, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey Phightins, thanks for the note! I'll take any version of ITM that you guys can muster up, so monthly would be fine. How does the first issue of each month sound? It'll give you a little extra time to summarize each month, and you won't be competing with the monthly research report. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 21:23, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Sounds great; so for May, what would the deadline be; I have lost track of on which day we publish lately :-) Go Phightins! 21:24, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up, Go Phightins!. I am likewise sorry for the lack of ITM lately. I dropped various articles in the Google doc, but was just too stretched to write them up. Let's get going again. The WR feed works again, by the way. Andreas JN466 21:35, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I also would like to get back on this after being busy (wedding planning in my case). Andrew³²⁷ 12:03, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey everyone. I haven't forgotten about ITM, I've just been crushed with work lately. I should be able to participate properly once the spring semester is over. Gamaliel (talk) 22:00, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikivoyage

Hey there again The_ed17,

Can you do another op-ed for the English Wikivoyage project? Wikivoyage had recently attempted to attract more Wikipedia contributors by creating this joke article for April Fools Day and I'd be interested in what other Wikipedians had to say about it, and you can perhaps just generalize the topic to a discussion about the Wikivoyage project as a whole. TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 07:46, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

However you respond is fine with me, either on my talkpage here, or my Wikivoyage talkpage or in my inbox. TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 10:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

@TeleComNasSprVen: I read your post and completely forgot about it amidst Adrianne's death. Give me a couple days to respond in full, but in the interim, what exactly would you be looking for? I didn't hear anything about the joke article here on en.wp, so I'm not sure it had much of an effect. :/ Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:54, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Simply speaking, I'd like to know what other Wikipedians might think about their recent attempts to gain more publicity, and then expanded to cover what they might think of the project as a whole. --TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 07:26, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

So you're looking for a editor on the English Wikipedia to comment on Wikivoyage's attempts to gain publicity? I'm not sure if that's a viable topic... or am I misunderstanding something? Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 04:16, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but this is looking less and less like news now, and more like old stuff. I understand if you decide to reject writing it as not being a "viable" topic of interest for Wikipedians to read, but could you explain why you would think it would not be? --TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 06:19, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

FWIW, here's the page view stats--it got over 500 page views over a 2-day period. And here's the discussion--it beat out Xiamen for the April 1 front page. I don't see any discussion at the traveler's pub about this. I see User:TeleComNasSprVen is relatively new to WV; I wonder if more Signpost publicity is something the rest of the WV editors are eager for, if so, what form they would like it to take. —Neotarf (talk) 07:13, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

TeleCom, it could be reframed as a regular story on what WV is doing to attract more editors, or an op-ed taking a critical eye at those efforts and offering suggestions for improvement, but I'm not sure that an op-ed is the place for your idea... Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:29, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks; if you think a regular story instead of an op-ed is more suitable for WV I think it would be fine too. @Neotarf: A few Wikivoyagers mentioned coverage in the Signpost as part of the April Fools stunt, but I forgot where. TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 17:16, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: March 2014

This Month in GLAM – Volume IV, Issue III, March 2014 Headlines Australia and New Zealand report: Summer is over Germany report: GLAM ship; Open GLAM hackathon; Science 2.0 conference; GLAM meetup Mexico report: New GLAM projects in Mexico and Reynosa's City Hall donation of historical photos Netherlands report: Education; Libraries; Museums; Maps, Earth Norway report: GLAM edit-a-thon at Preus museum Sweden report: Many ways to meet Wikipedia UK report: Art, Women, the Police and the build up to Wikimania USA report: Women's History Month Open Access report: Open Access at Wikimania; Open Access Button; Topic Pages Calendar: April'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.

Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 20:15, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

April 9th FC

Very busy this weekend; I might miss out finishing it this week, but I'll do what I can. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 00:20, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Adam! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:54, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

For helping to work on a remembrance of Adrienne's work. 145.253.152.190 (talk) 20:51, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome, but it's the least I can do. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:54, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2014

• News and notes: Round 2 of FDC funding open to public comments

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Law

• Special report: Community mourns passing of Adrianne Wadewitz

• Traffic report: Conquest of the Couch Potatoes

• Featured content: Snow heater and Ash sweep

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:07, 13 April 2014 (UTC)