User talk:TParis

Regarding PA accounts

Hey TP, I was wondering if there was anything wrong per-say about Public Affairs accounts on here, some sort of conflict of interest maybe. I ask because I found this account, 31st Fighter Wing Public Affairs (talk · contribs), the other day when I was looking through the Aviano Air Base article revision history. I wasn't sure what to do but I figure you'd probably know more than anyone else I know. Regards, — -dainomite   02:27, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Technically it violates our policy on usernames. Usernames must represent single individuals. They cannot represent a group or organization. I always recommend to PAs that they use accounts that represent them and then declare on their user page their official role.--v/r - TP 03:17, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Ahhh okay, thank you. Was there a specific noticeboard or something where I should have "reported" the username? I ask only because there seems to be noticeboards for everything under the sun so I assume so, but the truth is I just haven't taken the time to look for it, heh. — -dainomite   03:25, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes - but. There is a noticeboard, it's called WP:UAA. However, I generally stay away and let someone else handle it. I don't need some Lt Col from PA seeing my userpage and tracking me down with a pissy attitude and no concern for the difference between SSgt me and Wikipedia Admin me. Up to you if you want to do the same, I dont think any harm is done by leaving it be. And generally, the folks at UAA ignore username violations that havent edited in a month.--v/r - TP 12:37, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Ahh yeah, wouldn't want that needless hassle. I don't blame you for shying away from those cases. I've always debated whether or not to upload a picture of myself from a PD-mil image and stick it on my userpage but in the end I'm just like "meh" I guess, and I don't end up doing it, maybe one day. Although I have uploaded a few photos that I have taken myself. The two mil userboxes I have is enough, at least for now. A friend in my unit found me one day on here. I don't even remember how he came across me either; maybe the same way you stumbled into me, who knows. It was pretty funny to me when he did find me because on our previous deployment I was joking with him about making an article about myself just being a wise-ass and he got all serious and said "you aren't notable enough to warrant an article, it would be deleted". But, back on topic. I see the rule #6 on UAA, dually noted. Regards, — -dainomite   13:31, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Hah! Found another one CJIATF 435 Public Affairs (talk · contribs) However, instead of taking it to UAA I just posted the COI welcome message like User:EatsShootsAndLeaves did to the 31st PA account and bolded the noshare/corpname paragraph. —  dainomite   21:19, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, some folks are stricter or lighter on names based on if there are spam edits or not.--v/r - TP 21:29, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

CSteipp Identity

Hi TParis, as we talked about on irc, this is me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CSteipp (talk • contribs) 22:57, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Hasty

Too soon. Jreferee's last edit -- [1]. Give them time to digest the comments on Ayn Rand and their talk page; right now it's ready more clueless than intentionally disruptive, and you should start at WP:AE because the disruption is editing (even though he can only do so because of admin status -- it's still not what I would call an "admin action.") Suggest you revert the filing for now, and continue discussion before proceeding with enforcement venues. NE Ent 23:24, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Did you read his talk page? I notified him it was an Arbcom sanction. That should've told him he needed to revert right away. His response was that he wouldn't. This is the next step.--v/r - TP 23:34, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

I support the move to ArbCom. Jreferee already responded on the article talk page, where he took an explicit position on the substance of the article (suggesting his edit was for personal preference, not an attempt to implement any perceived consensus) and then said, "I'm headed out for a bit, but feel free to revise". That's swell for me as the only admin who regularly edits there, all the other editors are locked out of taking that flip advice. And unsurprisingly it's got them a little ticked off. If TParis wasn't requesting action, someone else would be. --RL0919 (talk) 00:04, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) She's dead, what's the harm in having the Wrong Version while things are explained to them? NE Ent 00:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Because it's not a content issue. If it were, I'd butt out since I'm just the patrolling admin and my job isn't to determine the 'right version'. That's for the regular editors, in the editing sense, on the talk page. It's a 'admin edit warred through full protection' issue which needs to be addressed. WP:PROTECT says, "Pages that are protected because of content disputes should not be edited except to make changes which are uncontroversial or for which there is clear consensus (see above)." This Arbcom motion says that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy...."--v/r - TP 00:09, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Armenian Genocide

I know this is a contentious subject, and am wondering if there are AE restrictions on articles relating to it? And who to report to regarding genocide denial on this issue, as well as a few others in fact. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:56, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

There are, it's the case on Eastern Europe. You'll need to report issues to WP:AE. Be very careful, though. Not trying to be patronizing, but we both know that you're actions have been controversial in the past. WP:AE will review the matter in it's entirety and anything they determine sanctions-wise requires Arbcom or community consensus to overturn. It's worse than WP:ANI.--v/r - TP 20:02, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Just curious about it so far, I am not a fan of genocide denial ) I require a favour, I have been working on an article on Female infanticide, but when I went to move it to mainspace it turns out there was an article on it from 08 which is now a redirect, can you do the move for me please? Darkness Shines (talk) 11:23, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Probably, just let me know.--v/r - TP 13:41, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Whenever is good for you mate, I am waiting on some books on medieval europe to wrap that section up but I figure apart from the rest of the world needing to be added it is good enough as it stands for mainspace. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:26, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

So I went and read over what you're trying to do. If I were you, because you are the sole author of the material you've written it, I'd just copy and paste it over that redirect if I were you. That way, you maintain the history of the rest of the article for attribution in the article it was merged to.--v/r - TP 15:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

A tad annoying, nobody had been bothered to write on this, and it will never by my article, well done for reading it, not pleasant reading is it. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:06, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Rand

Just wanted to stop by and say the 1RR restriction for the article was a very good idea. I wish I had thought of it myself! Mark Arsten (talk) 23:44, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

That's why they pay me the bi...ohh wait.--v/r - TP 23:45, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Typo at WP:ARCA: search for "not undue Arbitration actions" ("not undo"). Johnuniq (talk) 02:53, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up.--v/r - TP 03:03, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive254#RfC validity review requested

Hi TParis. Would you revise your close of Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive254#RfC validity review requested? You wrote "Closure was endorsed as within admin discretion", but I JethroBT (talk · contribs) is not an admin. Maybe insert "RfC closer" in place of "admin"?

Also, would you add a link to the AN discussion at Talk:Ayn Rand#Request for comment: Qualifying "philosopher" in the lead sentence, noting that the close was upheld after a community review? Thank you, Cunard (talk) 10:26, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Top Namespace Edits

Hello TParis, I frequently use your tools, and they are very informative. I was curious if it is possible to increase the amount of results for the "Top Namespace Edits" tool (the default being 100). Or if there is another tool that serves the same purpose to find more than 100 results. I have been curious about this for awhile, so I thought might as well go straight to the source. Regards, STATic message me! 03:24, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm having trouble recalling exactly which tool you're talking about, can you give me a link?--v/r - TP 12:54, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh really? You probably have more tools then you can remember aha. I was refering to this. My mistake for calling it Top Namespace Edits, I had my results for the main namespace bookmarked, so I thought that was the name of the tool. STATic message me! 13:07, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

RENT MY VACATION HOME

1. ADDED BOOKS TO REFERENCES AND YOU DELETED IN 5 MINUTES.Perpetual Income: How-to Generate Cash Flow from Low-End House Investments by Bryan Wittenmyer (Jul 1, 1999)Page 32

Rent Reviews and Variable Rents Hardcover – December 1, 1984 by D.N. Clarke(Author) J.E. Adams (Author) PAGE 38

2.DO YOU HAVE A REASON FOR THIS.

3 ARE YOU WORKING FOR VRBO OR PAID IN THE TRAVEL INDUSTRY.

4.WHY WOULD YOU DELETE THIS THEN WITHOUT CHECKING THE BOOKS.

5.PLEASE FOWARD THIS TO THE RIGHT SECTION TO BE LIVE AGAIN AS THIS WAS UNFAIR.

6. IF NOT UNFAIR GIVE REASON AND YES WE HAD BOOKS REFERENCE US WHEN YOU DELETED IN 5 MINUTESJayfrankauthor (talk) 10:19, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

7.ALSO THIS IS A LIBRARY AND YES I AM YELLING !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND TELLING EVERYONE .

8.WE BLOCKED YOUR SITE FROM OUR LIBRARY AS AT THIS POINT YOUR SITE LOOKS CORRUPT.

9.I AM INCLUDING A LETTER TO JIMMY WHALES FROM THE SCHOOL

10. I AM A FIGHTER AND THIS WILL NOT JUST GO AWAY. I AM IN FOR THE LONG HAUL AND I TRY TO MAKE A IMPACT ON THE WORLD NOT JUST A YES MAN.(DONT TREAT ME DIFFERENT THEN EVERYONE ELSE.)

10.if you did not do this then forward and be of help NOT A PERSON WHO ABUSES POWER AS MOST HERE ARE.!!!!.

Jayfrankauthor (talk) 10:29, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Jayfrankauthor (talk) 10:19, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

When you email Jimmy, be sure to spell it "Wales".--v/r - TP 12:55, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Possible peer review for a GA article to FA status.

Hi TParis. Your user page seems to indicate a good editing background/peer review possibility for a Christianity article. I am thinking of recommending a page upgrade for a GA article to FA article status which may involve looking at one key book if this might be possible for you. It is presently available as a free twenty page preview on Amazon books. The book is the popularly received "Evil and the God of Love." Any possible interest? AutoJellinek (talk) 20:14, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't feel comfortable reviewing a GA. Sorry.--v/r - TP 20:31, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute closed

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

1. Hitmonchan (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
2. IFreedom1212 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
3. Tarc (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
4. Josh Gorand (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
5. Baseball Bugs (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed. He is also topic banned from all pages (including biographies) related to leaks of classified information, broadly construed.
6. David Gerard (talk · contribs) is admonished for acting in a manner incompatible with the community's expectations of administrators (see #David Gerard's use of tools).
7. David Gerard (talk · contribs) is indefinitely prohibited from using his administrator permissions (i) on pages relating to transgender people or issues and (ii) in situations involving such pages. This restriction may be first appealed after six months have elapsed, and every six months thereafter.
8. The standard discretionary sanctions adopted in Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sexology for (among other things) "all articles dealing with transgender issues" remain in force. For the avoidance of doubt, these discretionary sanctions apply to any dispute regarding the proper article title, pronoun usage, or other manner of referring to any individual known to be or self-identifying as transgender, including but not limited to Chelsea/Bradley Manning. Any sanctions imposed should be logged at the Sexology case, not this one.
9. All editors, especially those whose behavior was subject to a finding in this case, are reminded to maintain decorum and civility when engaged in discussions on Wikipedia, and to avoid commentary that demeans any other person, intentionally or not.

For the Arbitration Committee, Rschen7754 01:29, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Why are these sanctions not on the page itself. Why am I having to see this on a list to another admin (not that I have anything against this admin. Actually one admin I highly respect) Seems to me that that arbcom case was closed without everything being done correctly. TParis, please feel free to correct me if I am wrong but, there is nothing under sancations when this case was closed and I am officially requesting an explanation as to why this was done and I have to view sanctions as a stalker on an admin's page. What the heck is going on here exactly?--Mark Miller (talk) 01:46, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

It may be that he's still working, these things take a while to close. ~Charmlet ^-talk- 01:50, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Um, by "the page", what page do you mean? This one: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning_naming_dispute#Remedies? If you mean the "sanctions" section of the same page, that's empty because it's reserved for sanctions (i.e. blocks/warnings) that happen as a result of the remedies above. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 01:52, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

I am also still closing the case. --Rschen7754 01:53, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Very good point. I shall keep calm and carry on. Thanks!--Mark Miller (talk) 01:54, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm glad it's finally over. Thanks.--v/r - TP 01:58, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Frankly...so AM I. good work to all. I know this stuff is not always easy to finish off. I do believe Rschen7754 will do everything needed to close the case. I would like to express my personal gratitude to Rschen7754 for the work they are doing. I know we don't always get along (I am Amadscientist) but I have observed their efforsts and work and feel satisfied that they know well what they are doing. Thanks again folks!--Mark Miller (talk) 02:04, 16 October 2013 (UTC)--Mark Miller (talk) 02:04, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Business Wars

Please advise someone is starting business wars with me on Wikipedia. They put false information about my company and about it's employees here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Seaman_Guard_Ohio. Furthermore you will notice most of the information is about the company when the article is supposed to be about a ship. It's not only inaccurate, but it's not even related to the article! I tried to edit it but they keep changing it back and now they have given me warnings as if I was the perpetrator of this business war! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmartin77 (talk • contribs) 13:41, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

EMail

Hello, TParis. 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.

Dave Dial (talk) 19:42, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I've replied to you.--v/r - TP 20:11, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment

As you previously participated in related discussions you are invited to comment at the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC for AfC reviewer permission criteria. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:01, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Editcounts

Greetings, mate Tparis. Nice to meet you. I am nos registered on en-wiki, but i am user in es-wiki. Mi username on that wiki is Leonpolanco. I use often your tool of editcount (https://toolserver.org/~tparis/pcount/). But it is having dificults on es-wiki. It doesn't give the number of edit for the es-wiki, it appears the advice "Leonpolanco no existe" or other advice saying the account doesn't exist, though it exist; or it appears the advice (es.wikipedia.org esta Wiki no es válida). What is ocurring? Might you solutionate it, please? How could I report this dificult?. I let you my email, for your answer: leonpolanco@hotmail.com. Thanks. --189.202.28.73 (talk) 20:41, 18 October 2013 (UTC)