User talk:Keri

Skip to the bottom

CSB

Regardless of the reliability of CCR, per your talk regarding the article on Rafael Moure-Eraso, the cited article is an unsigned opinion piece. As mentioned in my edit notes, the opinion was rendered prior to the hearing and well before the resulting letter. There are a number of factual errors in the CCR piece regarding the Safety Case and PSM which call into question the conclusions drawn and make it a highly questionable source for this topic. IceBear2310 (talk) 21:36, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Horseshit. Keri (talk) 23:22, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Stanbridge Earls edit

Hi Keri,

Just have a quick question with regards to the edits with regards to Stanbridge Earls school

1) How do I make the proper reference to links and articles like you did. When ref to link I do not seem to get the time stamp like yours.

2) I removed the part about the accusation with regard to the 12 years old as I could not find any reference to it in the news articles linked and neither did the Tribunal mention any other girls either.

3) I removed the section with regard to operation Flamborough as I thought this was now superseded with the conclusion by the CPS and the police investigation. I refer here to this article http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/11189307.No_charges_after_allegations_of_sex_abuse_at_school/ which states at the bottom that "Operation Flamborough is now complete"

Keen on your view about these edits

WeathergoWeathergo (talk) 16:56, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Weathergo:. There's a great page at Wikipedia:Citation templates which shows the different types of templates you can use for creating citations, be they books, newspapers, websites etc. Very handy. With regards to the article, it probably needs a thorough pruning and reorg now that the dust has settled. I'll take a look after dinner and get back to you with some thoughts. Keri (talk) 17:27, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Hangover (book) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hangover (book) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hangover (book) (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Courtesy nomination because the speedy deletion tag you placed has been removed. RichardOSmith (talk) 14:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

How to make progress after a receiving a stop sign for warlike activity.

Hi Keri, thank you for the stop sign. I had just logged in with the intention of 'removing' the edit in question, having started to feel 'contrite' about it. In a nutshell, it was a quick reaction for having been given a full block this morning after posting a similar addition last night. The editor that blocked me is from a country that seems to have people who react hostilely to the subject matter. An editor (maybe the same one) had previously removed my addition without giving any feedback, and I tried to improve it from experience I was having with a different edit. However, I am finding that after giving criticism from a few editors, I still get criticized/blocked after making suggested improvements. Most do not engage in dialog. Therefore, I would like to work on the BBC Panorama edit now and to ask you if you can see any way that I may post improve it, and include it again without the likelihood of people deleting it / blocking me again. I hope you have the time to read it (pasted below.) Gerrytlloyd (talk) 19:45, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

@Gerrytlloyd: With the additions to the Panorama article, you must restrict yourself to media coverage of the episode and critical responses to the episode. You mustn't use the article as a coatrack: an "article that ostensibly discusses its nominal subject, but has been edited to make a point about one or more tangential subjects." It's debatable if this is even a notable episode. South Africa's National Prosecuting Authority suggesting that "it could prove an obstacle to justice if Dewani was put on trial" is just about the only notable aspect of the episode. Keri (talk) 20:33, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

@Keri: I see what you mean. Can you recommend an article that would be appropriate? It is the closed-book quality of the legal system that worries me in the South African context: There is an unworkable mixture of apartheid-derived trial procedure with western plea bargain ideas that proved very damaging for Shrien Dewani. I tried to constrict my description maximally but it still 'bulges' in the Articles have tried to edit (Jury, Jury trial, Right to a fair trial.)

@Gerrytlloyd: You might try asking at The Teahouse. There are usually a number of knowledgable types lurking in there who may be able to point you in the right direction. I've mulled it over and have to admit I'm not quite sure how I would go about tackling this subject, either as a stand alone topic or as an addition to an existing page (eg Courts of South Africa). There is certainly plenty of source material (eg here in The Guardian, here on the BBC). Perhaps someone more creative than I at The Teahouse will be able to offer you more constructive advice. Keri (talk) 21:01, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello, following a review of your contributions, I have enabled rollback on your account. Please take note of the following:

• Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including Huggle and Igloo, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
• Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
• Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
• Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
• Please read Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
• You can test Rollback at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
• You can display the {{User wikipedia/rollback}} userbox or the {{Rollback}} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:29, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Newspapers.com check-in

Hello Keri,

You are receiving this message because you have a one-year subscription to Newspapers.com through the Wikipedia Library. This is a brief update, to remind you about that access:

• Please make sure that you can still log in to your Newspapers.com account. If you are having trouble let me know.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, to include citations with links on Wikipedia. Links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. Also, keep in mind that part of Newspapers.com is open access via the clipping function. Clippings allow you to identify particular articles, extract them from the original full sheet newspaper, and share them through unique URLs. Wikipedia users who click on a clipping link in your citation list will be able to access that particular article, and the full page of the paper if they come from the clipping, without needing to subscribe to Newspapers.com. For more information about how to use clippings, see http://www.newspapers.com/basics/#h-clips .
• Do you write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let me know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate it if you filled out this short survey. Your input will help us to facilitate this particular partnership, and to discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you,

Wikipedia Library Newspapers.com account coordinator HazelAB (talk) 19:09, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Edit War? Don Lane (Santa Cruz) Un-Negotiated??--Not True!

My main revision (+812) was negotiated on October 15 2014 under my previous IP Address: 67.180.161.221 with a representative of Don Lane.

Please revert to the most recent revision done by me.

Who are you to play Edit Police especially when you haven't done your homework?

Don Lane, himself, refers to this episode in a recent local piece: http://www.gtweekly.com/index.php/santa-cruz-news/santa-cruz-local-news/6203-on-his-terms.html

So, this is direct evidence that he wishes the information to stay current while trying to manage it to his liking. The Man of Heart (talk) 13:42, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

@The Man of Heart: Edits to Wikipedia are not "negotiated" with representatives of anybody - they either follow Wikipedia's policies or they don't fly. Take the dispute to the proper venue - Talk:Don Lane (Santa Cruz). Keri (talk) 13:47, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

This is a false allegation

Sorry. Since you have read and monitored all my correspondence, you know that I have denied that I am one of the recipients of the Obscene Valentine's Card as seen here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Donner60#Thanks_for_your_help_with_Don_Lane_.28Santa_Cruz.29 It is the "Rep" of Don Lane (Santa Cruz) who is assuming this. It is patently untrue.The Man of Heart (talk) 20:36, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism at Vermont

I note that IP user 67.184.44.6 blanked a section title after your initial warning. User:HopsonRoad 19:19, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Nilsen article

Kudos and thanks for your efforts in improving the references etc. on the Dennis Nilsen article. Much appreciated. Regards, KS.--Kieronoldham (talk) 00:18, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, no worries. Keri (talk) 00:25, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Adam Kotsko

I had another look at that sentence, and now I'm not 100% sure about it either. However, looking at the sentence again it also strikes me as not particularly informative, because it doesn't specify what "ways" its referring to. A quick skim of the linked article suggests that it is about how Kotsko's thinking about the devil in his own work has been influenced by Agamben. How about replacing the sentence with: "He has previously presented a paper before the American Academy of Religion on the influence of Agamben's writing on his thinking about the devil." That is more informative and (I hope) avoids the grammatical problem. VoluntarySlave (talk) 11:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@VoluntarySlave: Agree, much better. Keri (talk) 12:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

QUOTE He has previously presented a paper before the American Academy of Religion on the ways that thinking of the Devil are informed by Agamben's writing. END QUOTE

He has presented a paper on the ways are informed???

That doesn't seem like a sentence.

He has presented a paper on the ways that thinking is informed.

That, on the other hand is comprehensible.

He has previously presented a paper before the American Academy of Religion on the ways in which thinking of the Devil is informed by Agamben's writing.

"in which" seems to make it flow better in this more complex sentence than the shorter examples above. It also makes it clearer that what is "informed" is _thinking_. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:58, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Precious

British court and crime
Thank you for quality articles on British crime and court, beginning with Corby toxic waste case and Murder of Teresa De Simone, for insisting on constructive editing by warning users and cautioning admins, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:43, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! You're too kind :) And you reminded me that I really need to revisit those 2009 articles and carry out some improvements! Keri (talk) 00:16, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello and re Eric's talk

Hello Keri, I don't believe we have met. Just a quick thanks for your comment on Eric's page, but I have been wondering since: you made reference to "racist scum" without using a full stop within the sentence where I was mentioned. Would you be referring to this?, or was this something completely different? I see, whatever it was, has now been revdeled (I can't remember what it was). In that case, if that was what you meant, then I think I'd be justified in calling someone "racist" for using the word "nigger" wouldn't I? Racist people are scum, IMO, and using the two words together would be a perfect descriptor for such a person, no? I'd be interested to know as I could learn this for the future if you are offended. I don't know about you but I'm English and we Brits see nothing wrong with that kind of terminology, as long as it is justified. Any thoughts? Good work on the sock puppet investigations btw. Cassianto^Talk 19:02, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey, no no no, it wasn't anything that you wrote :) I was referring to this comment by another editor. I am just amazed that admins can turn a blind eye to an editor calling a BLP subject "racist scum" but won't hesitate to call down a shit storm on those who have "had their cards marked" who might say "fuck off" to a vandal or troll, or dare to criticise the right-on thought police. Keri (talk) 00:24, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I couldn't agree with you more Keri and thanks for clearing that one up. On the whole, the admins who I've come across are largely fair, impartial and always willing to help. The lovely Bishonen immediately sticks out in my mind; she has supported me when I'm right and bollocked me when I'm wrong (which isn't often, I know 😋). I'm thankfull to her for that. I would say that there is only a handful of "admins", like the ones who I've had problems with recently, that I would consider to be a joke. As for policy, WP:CIVIL is a piece of arse paper, most of which is largely made by Jimbo's little sycophants. One particular admin has it in for me and will no doubt block for me saying "arse" here. Then, if I try to reason with him, he may even remove my talk page access if I'm lucky! "Bent" and "prejudicial" are just two words that spring to mind! Cassianto^Talk 15:23, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Introducing the new WikiProject Hampshire!

Greetings!

I am happy to introduce you to the new WikiProject Hampshire! The newly designed WikiProject features automatically updated work lists, article quality class predictions, and a feed that tracks discussions on the 2,690 talk pages tagged by the WikiProject. Our hope is that these new tools will help you as a Wikipedia editor interested in Hampshire.

• Browse the new WikiProject page
• Become a member today! – members have access to an opt-in notification system

Hope to see you join! Harej (talk) 20:42, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

IPA's ANI notice

What is the subject heading? I couldn't find one. Cheers Ping me with {{u|Jim1138}} and sign "~~~~" or message me on my talk page. 15:58, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

"July 2015" Keri (talk) 16:06, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

My mistake; "Sockpuppet investigation" Keri (talk) 16:07, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Best Ping me with {{u|Jim1138}} and sign "~~~~" or message me on my talk page. 17:57, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Gardner

Gottit, mailed you, please see your email. cheers DBaK (talk) 11:43, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Many, many thanks! Keri (talk) 11:45, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

V welcome. I think you will need to mail me back next, so I have a real email to respond to with the PDF. DBaK (talk) 11:52, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Yup, np's. Keri (talk) 11:58, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Subway

"Interesting, but WP:UNDUE as far as an article about the business is concerned." Please be more specific. Especially concerning which specific part of WP:UNDUE you think I'm contravening. Thanks.XenoRasta (talk) 05:22, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

@XenoRasta: It is about "former Subway spokesperson Jared Fogle", not about Subway. Fogle has his own article, where this information would be appropriate and is, in fact, already included. Information about a former employee is quite clearly undue: "discussion of isolated events, criticisms, or news reports about a subject may be verifiable and impartial, but still disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic." Keri (talk) 10:57, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Subway admits to dropping Jared because of this pedophilia incident. Jared is Subway, regardless if he was fired or retired or whatever. When people hear the name Jared, a significant portion will associate it with Subway. Subway removed Jared from their company to protect their image. That does not change the fact that the icon of Subway was raided by the FBI. The Advertising section in Subway says see Jared Fogle. Why are you trying to separate the two?XenoRasta (talk) 00:31, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

The correct venue for any further discussion is Talk:Subway (restaurant). Keri (talk) 00:33, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Murder of Lynette White

I requested copy editing at WP:GOCE/REQ. Are you fine with it? --George Ho (talk) 22:12, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

@George Ho: Not really. The article is a work in progress. You start complaining that the lead is too long. Then you complain that it is too short. Personally, as you've contributed a sum total of Fuck All to the article to date, I think you should go away and find some other corner of Wikipedia to fuck about with and leave content production to content producers. Keri (talk) 23:28, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh, and for some reason, since the first time I read one of your less than helpful comments I've developed a very strong dislike for you so after you've read these messages, kindly never post on my talk page again. Cheers. Keri (talk) 23:40, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Taylor & Francis

You should have received an email a couple of weeks ago regarding Taylor & Francis - could you please either fill out the linked form or let me know if you didn't get the email? We'd like to get these processed soon. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:53, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

@Nikkimaria: No email received yet, unfortunately. Keri (talk) 20:22, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Re-sent - if it still doesn't come through send me an email and I'll forward. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:31, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Death of Christopher Alder

Hi. Please note that in Britain a decoration is a medal that allows you to put initials after your name (e.g. VC, DCM, MM, GC, GM, QGM). Alder clearly did not have such a medal as they are all gazetted in the London Gazette and easily findable (and the media would have made a much bigger thing if someone with the Military Medal, say, had died in these circumstances). He may well have received a local commander's commendation, which would not be recorded in the LG, but that is not a decoration. He would also have received the General Service Medal, but that isn't a decoration either - it's a service medal. Newspapers are generally not an accurate source for such things, as their journalists are not usually at all knowledgeable about technical issues like this and just make assumptions or even make things up if they don't understand. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:44, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

SockPuppets

Please stop being such a busybody. If you have unlimited time and energy to revert edits and accuse others of malfeasance, then get ready because I am going to keep you busy.  :) 104.156.240.164 (talk) 22:15, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) And you stop leaving bullshite messages under the guise of an anonymous IP. Have the balls to identify yourself and then people may take you your comments more seriously. Cassianto^Talk 23:03, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Why would I do that? I keep my login for real edits, not this petty shit. Besides, she started stalking me. Turnabout is fair play. 104.156.228.110 (talk) 10:35, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

I couldn't give a flying monkey's fuck. Logging on to WP for 5 minutes, reverting your nonsense and clicking a few Twinkle buttons is hardly what I would call "being kept busy". And you should look up "malfeasance" in a dictionary; it doesn't mean what you think it does. Keri (talk) 00:45, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps you should keep your ethnocentric definitions to yourself. There are other definitions besides what you Americans deem

to be true.104.156.228.110 (talk) 10:35, 13 August 2015 (UTC)