User talk:Worm That Turned

User	Talk	Articles	To Do	Toolbox	Subpages	DYK	Awards

Welcome to my talk page. Leave me a message!

This user replies where s/he likes, and is inconsistent in that respect.

Request At My Page

Hello, Worm That Turned. You have new messages at CHAK 001's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WikiCup 2011 May newsletter

We're half way through round 3 of the 2011 WikiCup. There are currently 32 remaining in the competition, but only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Casliber (submissions), of pool D, is our overall leader with nearly 200 points, while pools A, B and C are led by Racepacket (submissions), Hurricanehink (submissions) and Canada Hky (submissions) respectively. The score required to reach the next round is 35, though this will no doubt go up significantly as the round progresses. We have a good number of high scorers, but also a considerable number who are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. Also, an important note concerning nominations at featured article candidates: if you are nominating content for which you intend to claim WikiCup points, please make this clear in the nomination statement so that the FAC director and his delegates are aware of the fact.

A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:40, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Nicola Horlick

Dear Dave,

Thanks for your offer of assistance. It has been pointed out to me that Wikipedia has been carrying a piece about Madoff on my page for the last three years which is inaccurate and defamatory. It is a long and complicated story, but I used to be one of two managers for an investment company called Bramdean Alternatives, which was publicly listed. The two managers were Bramdean Asset Management LLP (my company) and RMF (part of Man Group). Bramdean Asset Management was responsible for selecting private equity and other specialist funds for the company and RMF was responsible for hedge funds. RMF invested in Madoff funds and, indeed, had $360 million invested for a range of clients. When Madoff blew up, the press could not understand the difference between Bramdean Alternatives (a publicly quoted company owned by a whole range of shareholders including pension funds) and Bramdean Asset Management LLP (a company owned by me and others). They also could not understand that my company had nothing to do with the Madoff investments. There were numerous articles written which stated that I personally had lost money in Madoff, which was untrue, and other articles written that said that I had personally invested 9% of the company's money in Madoff, which was also untrue. Although RMF invested in Madoff, they also invested in John Paulson's hedge fund, which was the best performing hedge fund in the world in 2008. If you put £100 each into two funds and one goes to zero and the other is worth £300 at the end of a year, then you are still 50% up overall and that is what happened. Bramdean Alternatives actually saw a rise of 0.4% for its Sterling investors in 2008 when equity markets fell by 40% and it was the second best performing investment trust in the UK, despite the write-off of 9% of the asset value due to Madoff. The way that this is all reported on my page is incorrect, misleading and extremely damaging to my reputation. The interview that I did on the Today Programme in 2008 is referred to on the page. In that interview, I made all of these points. As far as the suggestion that the SEC was at fault, a report was published during 2009 by the SEC, which admitted that they were at fault. I would greatly appreciate your help with this. In my view, having inaccurate information on Wikipedia undermines its credibility and it should be prepared to put the record straight. In my view, the whole Madoff section should be deleted from my page as it was nothing to do with me.

Kind regards,

Nicola — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.185.213.178 (talk) 09:24, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Nicola. I can see how this sort of thing can happen, I've seen the press get very different companies with similar names mixed up in the past. I'm afraid you might have to be a little patient with me (and Wikipedia), the information is sourced to what we would generally consider "reliable" sources. As such, it's generally a bad idea to remove the information on the back of a single editor's say so.

I do agree that Wikipedia needs to have accurate information, and will do my best to confirm the information you've given me. Do you happen to know of any sources which confirm what you've said, confirming the SEC were at fault, or a retraction from any newspapers regarding their mixups? I'll have a listen to the Today program, and do a little further research. Worm^TT · (talk) 09:35, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) One recommendation is to contact Wikipedia at info-en-q@wikipedia.org per WP:LIBEL. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:40, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Kudpung, I couldn't find the right email address but had been looking. I'll be trying to get the article as accurate as possible too. Nicola, if you have any concerns with the article, now or after I'm done, that email address is a good one to write to. Worm^TT · (talk) 07:05, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

117.224.232.234 (talk) hifriend thanks for it .

Test(s)

Hi Worm!

I'm sorry that I haven't yet made a start to User:Worm That Turned/Adopt/MelbourneStar1...even though you made it ages ago. I do infact plan to make a start on it soon, but unfortunately not in the coming weeks, as I have school exams (I'm year 9...and I do 7 exams per semester...fun :| ). Other than exams, I have that stupid annoying phase that has currently taken over me, Procrastination... :| I will make a start on it, even if It takes me till 2012 to complete it. Thank You Worm, for making it, and for your patience ;) -- MelbourneStar☆ ^{(talk to me)} 10:23, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the update! Don't worry, there's no rush, and you're welcome to run through whenever you want. I've got it archived at the moment though, so do let me know when you are ready to start so I don't miss it! Worm^TT · (talk) 10:34, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Awesome, Thank You :) -- MelbourneStar☆ ^{(talk to me)} 10:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries and good luck with the exams. Worm^TT · (talk) 10:43, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Re requesting adoption

Dear Worm, I became inactive because I think my edits and contributions should be at par witk the standards of wikipedia. I feel that I need a mentor rather a coach who can make me improve my edits. I requested some editors after keenly observing their work. I was delighted to view your reply, though It was rejection. I would like to place a fresh adoption request. Arshan.abbas (talk) 15:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Dear Worm, I would like to thank you for prompt reply. I just need you to randomly audit edits/contributions made by me so that I can start my work again. I would like you to view any new page that I develop in my sandbox before publishing on Wikipedia.Arshan.abbas (talk) 15:32, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I also want to offer my help mentoring if needed --NickDupree (talk) 19:10, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Final test

I've finished the practical part of the final test. Do you mark it now, or all at the end? Rcsprinter (talk) 20:56, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll do it all at the end. But the written shouldn't take you long, so maybe tomorrow ;) Worm^TT · (talk) 21:09, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Right, then. How does your marking scheme work? Rcsprinter (talk) 21:12, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

10 points per task on the practical, 5pts per question on the theory. Totals 100. All at my own discretion. Worm^TT · (talk) 22:32, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Adoption Page

I've left you a message, thanks Jenova20 11:48, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Adoption Offer

Dear Worm That Turned. Thank you for your adoption offer on my user talkpage. Yes it is still active, I added it a couple of months ago and you are the first person to respond. Firstly, let me introduce myself. I am from the United Kingdom originally, although I left in 2003 and have been living in various countries since then, (mainly Japan), throughout Asia. Although I joined Wikipedia as a registered user in 2007, I didn't really become active until 2009. Since then I have around 2,500 edits, mainly to Gastropod and Ship articles, although I have interests in many areas, especially scientific. Although I am clearly not a complete beginner to Wikipedia, most of my contributions have been on the content side, and hence there are many areas of Wikipedia that are completely unfamiliar to me, and I know nothing about. This is part of my reasoning for seeking adoption from a more experienced user who has familiarity with these areas. For example, as you can see, I only have 16 edits to the Wikipedia Main namespace. I am interested in becoming more familiar with WP policy, and getting involved behind the scenes so to speak, more involved with the underpinnings that keep WP going among other areas. I have looked at your history, your adoption school, and the interaction that you have had between your current and past adoptees, and I can see that you take adoption seriously and that you are regularly active on WP. I also see that with your structured lessons and tests, you provide an opportunity for your adoptees to learn in a wide range of WP areas. This is just what I am looking for. I tend to edit mainly in the evenings in my time-zone, which is in the daytime in the UK, so we may be online at similar times which is an added benefit. If you are still happy to accept me for adoption, I would be very grateful indeed. I should add that until the second week in July, I will be less active than usual due to work commitments, but that after that time I will be back to usual. You can get an idea of my typical activity level at my month count indicator. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely yours, Antarctic-adventurer (talk) 13:51, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism

Done Jenova20 09:04, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Cleanup Duty

You showed me the script of new article changes to patrol for vandalism. Is there one where i can see any information in an article that has been marked as needing a reference? I'd like to give that a go, clean freak and all lol. Thanks Jenova20 12:05, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Not exactly... but yes. Yes there is. There have two major "Special" pages that I use, Special:NewPages which gives an up to date list of recently created pages. And Special:RecentChanges which gives an up to date list of recent changes to the pedia. Now, both of these update on the fly, and are very useful for their purpose.

What you're looking for is the backlogs. WP:CLEANUP is a massive project which sorts out all the backlogs of tags added, for all sorts of different things. You could focus on Category:Articles lacking sources, there's a few (253,833) in there... BUT if you want my personal opinion, your work would be best focused on the much more important project Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. BLPs are one of the most sensitive areas of Wikipedia, actual people out there could be harmed by the information on wikipedia. There's now 4,600 odd left, and they really want to clear it. What's more, if you find out a lot about a person, and can double the length of the article (min 1500 chars overall), you can submit it to WP:DYK. Let me know if you're thinking about a submission, I'll lend you a hand. Worm^TT · (talk) 08:42, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll consider that but i'm looking for something i can do quickly without a lot of research for this month before holiday.

And being a neatfreak i'm actually looking forward to this =]

Is it the same area i posted on my own talk page yesterday?

Thanks Jenova20 08:55, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

You're a volunteer Jenova, and you are welcome to do what you want. VN is a new one on me, but it says "Use this inline template tag to label ostensibly sourced text which appears doubtful or false and to request source verification" So you'll need to go into the source and check what's said, and if the source is reliable. I expect that many will be offline sources, and so require library work, but have fun. Category:Articles lacking sources is about articles that are missing sources - why don't you have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Fact and Reference Check, see if anything jumps out? Worm^TT · (talk) 09:15, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

The amount of beurocracy here is incredible, it's mad that there's so many different categories but necessary.

The source you got is the better one, i'll use that.

Thanks Jenova20 10:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Adoption

Hi Worm, I'm gonna sum this up as best I can. You do adopt users, and from what I have seen you teach them the basics of codes, writing articles and loads of other stuff that I'm rubbbish at. I am pretty good at monitoring vandalism, dodgy new pages and horrid usernames. Seeing as what you do, and what I do, are very different, I was wondering if you wanted to try doing a shared adoption course for one of your current or future adoptees. It would lighten the load a bit for you, and help me get into adoption. Obviously, I want to try it out (adoption) but if it's too much for me to handle, I also want to be able to drop out with disappointing my adoptee. I hope this is OK. If you could message me back on my userpage, that would be great!! Cheers, RDN1F (don't) (talk) (to) (me) (before) (my) (coffee) (talk) 20:04, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Adoption

Yes please. Was it User:adam mugliston. Thanks. Wilbysuffolk Talk to me 15:40, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Final test

Done now! Rcsprinter (talk) 15:52, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Re.

Hi Worm. I was thinking about some of your ideas and I'll probably start by just covering some basics, maybe with a future adoptee of yours (if this is OK with you, of course). If you get an adoptee, I'd like to just have a go (even if just for one lesson) and if I fail, then I will probably give up on adoption, but if I enjoy it, the adoptee enjoys it and your OK with it, I may go out into the big Wiki World and become an official adopter for that topic (or just team up with someone and do a completely joined adoption course). I hope this is ok. If it is, next time you get an adoptee, could you just pop a message onto my userpage but if this sounds like a terrible idea you want nothing to do with, leave a note on my userpage saying that (no need to be suttle!). As I said, I don't mind at all and I won't take it personally. Thanks for your help RDN1F (don't) (talk) (to) (me) (before) (my) (coffee) (talk) 16:55, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Back!

I'm back now! :) The computer rocks! (talk) 20:32, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

email

Thanks for the quick response. Sorry, but it seems I'm exceptionally thick tonight - I can't isolate the special page for email. Can you put me out of my misery please? Ta, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:34, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

You're a hero! Thanks!! Pdfpdf (talk) 12:42, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Any timeWorm^TT · (talk) 12:44, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello. Thank you for dropping by to offer help. I usually only do things I already understand and am good at, which are editing for grammar, sense, elegance, and reducing long, unmanageable sections of an article to a more concise and readable form. I rarely attempt anything much more complicated (don't have the time, for one thing), but occasionally I do run into situations where others are passionately objecting to something or taking a stand that I don't understand (which is what happened here) and then I do seek guidance from more experienced editors; I will turn to you in the future if I have a question. I'm not sure I'm really cut out for WP, as I get frustrated about working hard on things that can be entirely re-written the next day. I am a writer and have a great deal of editing experience, but I'm used to what I'm doing staying done! Anyway, thank you for your quiet sanity and clarity regarding the issue I needed resolved. How the notability guideline applied to these episodes wasn't clear to me until after you specifically explained that "significant coverage" could consist of books about Buffy the Vampire Slayer; I thought it meant things unassociated with the subject (like an article in a magazine not associated with the Buffyverse). I appreciate your patience, help and your good wishes. Take care. --TEHodson 12:21, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Just a Heads Up

I'm going to fail your last adoption exam, there's too much there for a week (for me anyway) I'll still attempt it but i'm going to have to learn more stuff and i'm not that optimistic. And if i do manage to complete the exam i may delete this so you never knopw i gave up. Will speak when you get back and enjoy the holiday Jenova20 14:21, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm not quite gone yet. Do what you can, I'll take the other factors into account. You've got a week... and a bit, I'm willing to waive the week, try 10 days on for size :) Just do your best, that's all I can ask for. Worm^TT · (talk) 14:24, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Well i wasn't asking for special treatment, just pointing out that i've skipped through so far and couldn't find an appealing start point.

I'd consider it fair if i failled for going over a week just because everyone had the same rules, i'm only complaining because i've seen about 3 adoptees zoom past me and finish ages ago while i was still stuck on copyright.

Thanks Jenova20 14:31, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Two things Jenova. 1) This is flexible. I'm trying to prove to YOU that you can do it (I've already let one adoptee go over a week and another pass under the pass mark). 2) I believe you can do it. Some adoptees may have zoomed past you, but in general I've felt you've asked more appropriate questions and shown a better understanding than many. Worm^TT · (talk) 14:36, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Flattery will get you many things and many places Worm but i'm a realist not an optimist.

Nether-the-less you've got me thinking it may just be possible to do this in a week now.

Your challenge is accepted.

Jenova20 14:53, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Check your email, SVP

Hello, Worm That Turned. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Barnstar

		The Adopt-a-user Barnstar
		Sorry this is a bit late, but here you are, for helping me to become a better user through your adoption program. Maybe in a while I would be ready to become an adopter myself. Rcsprinter (talk) 17:15, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I do need your help

Wow! Look at that! A message to me and a picture! Very cool. And aren't you lucky, being in Cornwall. I'm on the coast of Oregon, right on the ocean, which is pretty great, too.

Well, I think I should stay away from editing Buffy pages. My god. When you get a chance, can you look in on the Hush page, in the Plot Summary section? I made a few changes to make it accurate, gave a detailed explanation of why and how the changes relate to points later fleshed out in the article, and then all hell broke loose. This guy Moni3 (talk) reverted me three or four times immediately, and finally addressed me on the Talk page only after I re-reverted and asked him to please explain. Since then I have explained and explained and everything I've said is backed up by the episode and the sources, but he has refused to accept these relatively minor changes and has stated outright that it's because he wrote the article and feels it is his. He has become enraged, in fact, and says he continually gets into these situations with people who simply won't accept that their work compromises the integrity of his articles (well you can read it all for yourself). I think we need help, and believe me, I'm never going near a Buffy ep again, but I do think this is important. This is the only ep to win an Emmy for writing, and it seems an accurate plot summary is sensible, to say the least. I didn't make it longer, either; shorter, in fact. But this is clearly not about that--it's about him being unwilling to collaborate, and he's pretty frank about that. On another subject, I don't seem to be able to figure out how to archive my Talk page. Am I asking too much of you? If so you can tell me frankly that one favor is enough (or too much). I thank you in advance. Hope you're enjoying yourself.--TEHodson 01:49, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

And now it's going on on The Body. I re-worked two sentences to accurately reflect the nature of the scene and to clean up some sloppy grammar, and they can't let it stand. They've reverted twice (by "them" I mean Moni and one of the other co-writers of the pages; they've been working together, and revert everyone else for the past year). They can't, or won't, play with others.--TEHodson 05:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I feel terrible, like a tattle-tale child, but I've never seen the kind of stubborn, oppositonal obstruction I've met on the Buffy pages. I explained the grammar problem on the Talk page for The Body; we'll see if they get it. I should stick to editing less controversial pages, like, say, political ones!--TEHodson 05:18, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm not taking it personally now that I've read her (!) responses to others. She "hates WP" and those of us who annoy her so she "has to get drunk" to face the horror of it. I'm not sure what that bodes for a solution! Is it always like this here?--TEHodson 08:19, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm now being tag-teamed on The Body over a re-arrangement of a single sentence so that its grammar is proper. Moni and I had agreed to wait for help and be in truce in the meantime, so Courcelles came in and reverted me in her stead, and then spoke condescendingly of my good intentions but wrong-headedness in precisely the sort of language deemed inappropriate by WP:OWN. I quit. I can't take it. The people involved in the three Buffy page disputes seem to love arguing for the sake of it. Reverting a grammatical correction on the basis that the article is a FA therefore shouldn't be touched by someone who isn't them? Really? I changed this sentence: "In art class, she talks with him and they share a moment of understanding about being troubled while they sketch." The sentence now properly reads: "In art class she talks with him as they sketch, and the two share a moment of understanding about being troubled." As they're not troubled about sketching, the sentence was backward. And those two have been freaking out and fighting with me because it's "their" article. I don't care anymore. I've never seen anything like it. Well, that's not true. Many months ago I was working on the Salem Witch Trials page which was in serious need of help, but one editor considered it his page and harrassed so many of us who were working on it that he got banned, but I quit the page before it got that bad. Editing here is something I do for fun and relaxation and because I think I have something to offer. But now I just feel as though I'm going to scream. Not once did they change one thing back, or rewrite a sentence or two, or agree that this could stay but that should go back as it was, just full-scale reverting over and over with the single reason: because we wrote the articles and you don't understand how to edit them. And the changes were so minor! I'm sorry if it's rude to say so, but their behavior does not seem sane to me. I have to stop before my behavior is no longer sane. Thank you, though.--TEHodson 22:10, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

There's people like that on a lot of articles TEHodson, they're very defensive and it's a bad thing because the article suffers.

There's also worse articles to try and edit (Daily Mail/Mail Online)

Jenova20 14:58, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Clone

Hi, check this out: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Main_Page It's a clone of Wikipedia to make as much money as possible. Jenova20 12:57, 14 June 2011 (UTC)