User talk:WJBscribe

User:WJBscribe	User talk:WJBscribe	User:WJBscribe/Gallery	User:WJBscribe/Barnstars	User:WJBscribe/Drafts
Userpage (commons · meta)	Talk (Archives)	Gallery	Barnstars	Drafts

Hi! Please leave a message and I'll get back to you... Don't hesitate to get in touch if you have a question or need help. I'll do my best and can probably point you in the right direction if it isn't something I can sort out myself. Will

Crat discussion observation

Nice summary of some of the issues in the Trappist RfA. However, while you may be familiar with Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Template editor user right, it is possible some 'crats might have missed it. Given that it is so central to the issue, it might be worth mentioning. (Oddly, I lean toward acceptance, and the very real possibility of the new user right might weigh against that choice, but I think the 'crats should be fully informed.)--SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:14, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you - I have added a link just in case. All users are of course welcome to offer comments on the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Trappist the monk/Bureaucrat discussion and I have added a note to that effect. WJBscribe (talk) 15:22, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

This should be no big deal, right? RfA is way too much of a thing these days! Guy (Help!) 15:29, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for intruding, but I was curious how late !votes were taken into account. The RfA technically closed at 00:00 on September 16, but there were 5 or 6 supports and 1 oppose after the deadline. If they are not taken into account it changes the % support by about 0.6%, namely it lowers the percentage in favor below 70%, which is why I was curious. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:34, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Comments are welcome after the stated end time, which is in effect the earliest that an RfA will be closed. WJBscribe (talk) 16:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification and for the thoughtfulness and care you are putting into this decision, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:11, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I read in your comments that you are weighing the extent to which comments did or did not express reluctance or uncertainty. You might perhaps want to consider the difference between oppose commenters saying, on the one hand, that they were unsure about their oppose, and saying, on the other hand, that they felt bad about opposing but were nonetheless comfortable about their position. Thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:00, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

all four legs or none at all

WRT the issue of "all or none" I would offer an analogy: A nation offers licenses to be a smith - gold, silver, black etc. The license allows a person to work in any of those fields - even though most only work in one material, and are not truly "jacks of all trades". If a person says "of course I will work in every metal", whether or not they actually will do so, their license is given. Woe betide the person who says "I will only work really in only one metal, because that is what I know" then they attract opposition. Not a single "oppose" of note was based on any actual actions undertaken by Trappist, and a small number used "civility" as their reasoning (I note that calling a hypothetical example given by an editor "bosh and twaddle" (Teddy Roosevelt phrase) was, indeed, found actionable by ArbCom recently - but I think the civility case against Trappist is weak). Collect (talk) 15:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Note: I would like to know precisely how many RfAs are closed precisely at 00.00 Universal Time. I suggest that in that direction les madness -- very few are started at that time either. And the proposed new "right" does not yet exist in Wikipedia, and I suspect it would take months to get a new specific flag added. Cheers. Collect (talk) 15:53, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Good point. I was taken aback at how fast the RfC was proceeding, but even if approved, there's probably quite some time until implemented. --SPhilbrick(Talk) 16:05, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

• As far as I recall, and I don't have time right now to check back, bureaucrats have the discretion to extend the RfA period in order to attract more participation in an attempt to establish consensus in a deadlocked situation. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

RfA for technical support

Hi, Wikid77 here. I am ready to run for admin, to support the complex protected templates and wp:CS1 Lua script modules which I have written, but also help to solve other technical issues and wp:Help_desk requests to clarify deleted articles. It is partly (mostly) my fault that the complex Lua Module:Citation/CS1 (talk·hist·links) is working (to support 2.1 million pages) but has no dedicated admin, because when I wrote that Lua module (and 70 updates), based on User:Uncle_G's cite prototype, I underestimated how the enormous complexity would be a burn-out for other editors or admins. You see, years ago, I equated adminship with "full-time manager" and I did not understand how admins can take occasional wikibreaks, and share the workload. However now, I realize how staying here for years as a volunteer computer scientist and creating numerous complex templates (Template:Convert/spell) or large Lua modules was also increasing the mindboggling difficulties for technical admins, to read what I am saying for {editprotected} updates but then fear installing those changes to complex tools I have written. Instead, it will be easier if I accept the duties of admin, and help side-by-side with other technical admins to maintain all these tools which other users depend upon. Also, with me solving more of the template/Lua problems, it will free the time of other admins to work on JavaScript gadgets or the wp:WMFLabs tools, or bug reporting for the wp:VisualEditor. Again, I am sorry I wrote these highly complex templates/modules but did not take the time to assume admin duties to support them, when I have been here the whole time, watching from the sidelines(!). I have an indef topic-ban (2 years) in wp:RESTRICT (re: Murder of Meredith Kercher) which I have left as a strong reminder to work in general consensus with numerous other editors, or face censure by them. I have asked for a wp:REQUESTNOM, but I might just self-nom, if needed. -Wikid77 (talk) 20:36, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Heya Wikid77. Have you also taken a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Admin Nominators? Just that it's another avenue to look into for a nominator. Best of luck, — -dainomite   16:33, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I have contacted User:Kudpung, and we plan to talk again in a few days about preparations. -Wikid77 16:42, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good, I look forward to your RfA Wikid. — -dainomite   17:29, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Socratic Barnstar
		To WJBScribe, thank you for your careful evaluation of the recent RfA. Axl ¤ [Talk] 09:45, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Best wishes. Axl ¤ [Talk] 09:45, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Unfinished usurpation

Hallo, I have successfully usurped username Ivannah (with 2 "N"s in the middle) on 26th of Sept., but en.wiki is still not attached to my global account... Could you please find out why? Thank you very much. --Ivannnah (talk) 06:36, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

The usurpation appears complete. You not should still be editing as Ivannnah (talk · contribs) - you should be able to log in as Ivannnah (talk · contribs) on enwiki instead (with the same password you used for Ivannnah (talk · contribs)). If you can, simply got to special:MergeAccount after doing so to complete the finalisation of your global account. WJBscribe (talk) 22:07, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Favor

Could you tell me who the original creator of Archive.is was? The page is now deleted, and I don't need it un-deleted. But if checking this requires restoring the complete revision history, or if it's just easier to do that, feel free to restore it to my user space.

FYI This was restored once to a userspace (not mine), but I believe the complete history is not present there, so I can't determine who the creator was. Thanks in advance if you have a moment for this. equazcion → 23:59, 29 Oct 2013 (UTC)

It appears that the complete history of the page is now at User:Lexein/Archive.is - there are no deleted revisions left at Archive.is. Poeticbent seems to have created it after making this edit. WJBscribe (talk) 00:30, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Ah I see, thanks for checking into that for me :) equazcion → 00:35, 30 Oct 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. WJBscribe (talk) 00:37, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Admin's Barnstar
		Many thanks for efficiently clearing a big backlog at WP:RFD. The Whispering Wind (talk) 00:36, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. You're welcome - I used to close a significant proportion of RFDs, although that was admittedly a while ago.... WJBscribe (talk) 00:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

+1 I came here to give the same barnstar. Thanks! --BDD (talk) 00:58, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Gratitude

Respected Will "WJBSCRIBE", thanks for placing your ({{TempUndelete}}) to Article Ape is a Punished Man. Your guide and patronage would shine me more and am expecting this light from you. Thanks once again.Nannadeem (talk) 15:23, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Important Notice: Your 2013 Arbitration Committee Election vote

Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis

Damn, shall have to redo my votes. All that time wasted! Who am I kidding, I basically just followed NuclearWarfare's guide with a couple of tweaks... WJBscribe (talk) 11:06, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Heh. NW (Talk) 15:20, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry

I guess I should've just let you log in and resign it. Usually IPs doing that are up to no good.--Jasper Deng (talk) 10:55, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

No worries - quick spot. You'd reverted it before I realised I wasn't signed in! :-) WJBscribe (talk) 10:57, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

recreation of How to write Simple English articles

I'd like to recreate it as a redirect to Simple English Wikipedia. —rybec 19:49, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

The RfD discussion doesn't prevent you from doing that. The basis for deletion was primarily the cross-namespace nature of the redirect, and your new proposed redirect is not a cross-namespace one. Of course, there's nothing to stop your recreated redirected being nominated for deletion, but it would require a fresh consensus to delete it. WJBscribe (talk) 19:54, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, that's what I was hoping you'd say. —rybec 20:48, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Protection of Langley Grammar School

You protected Langley Grammar School in 2007 due to the page being unwatched. It seems that either unprotecting it (six years is a long time) or putting it on pending changes (due to the low activity) would be appropriate. Cheers. Crazynas ^t 10:54, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Endorsing this request on behalf of WP:WPSCH. We have eyes on it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:18, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely fine. Have unprotected - I restored the protection because vandalism wasn't being spotted, but if people are now watching the page it hopefully isn't needed any more. WJBscribe (talk) 01:09, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

pjahr → Przemek Jahr

Hello. Other Wikies make no problems, what am I to do to rename at en: Wikipedia ([1])? pjahr (talk) 14:31, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

The problem was that you didn't explain that the global account "Przemek Jahr" already belonged to you. I see you have now made a request on the correct noticeboard and will take a look at it. WJBscribe (talk) 12:51, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

User:Bonu

Hi, I have the global rights from the German Wiki for Benutzer:Bonu, but not in the English and the Dutch wikis. I checked and "User:Bonu" does not have a page on your enwiki. As I am not so experienced in these matters but would like to sometime create a similar page "Marianne Mittelholzer" in en.wiki, which I have created and documented thoroughly on de.wikipedia.org it would be nice, if I could do it with the same username. Could you please explain, if this is possible and how I should go about it? Or can you establish me directly, as the userpage does not exist? Thx for your help! -- Bonu from de.wikipedia.org 62.12.245.162 (talk) 22:15, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

• Issue resolved, thx - I found the usurpation feature [[2]] and user:xeno helped to get my login right. Bonu (talk) 11:57, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

When does a delay become a snub

At what point will you personally begin to feel snubbed by Stierch? Another 12 hours? A day? A week? At some point it would become clear that a WMF paid employee is also doing undisclosed paid editing on the side and attempting to keep the paid content secretly intermingled with the volunteer content, right? If that's permissible, I think we need to welcome User:MyWikiBiz back to Wikipedia. - 2001:558:1400:10:FC49:2FE8:A83C:ECDE (talk) 16:44, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/MER-C 3

I appreciated your comments at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/MER-C 3 in particular about the weight of the single oppose. While it may not have been said in the discussion, a unanimous RFA is a special thing, and while I cannot say for sure, it did seem to be preventing that from happening. Anyway, I wanted to stop by and say I respected your decision and willingness to act. Mkdw^talk 02:57, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Precious

pictures of personalities
Thank you, Will, for your services as bureaucrat ("doing a job no-one else wants to do"), for images of personalities showing lively presence, for being "one of the project's 'we can't ever lose him' guys", for telling others, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (2 July 2007 "There's no use in weeping", 16 October 2008)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:12, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Re: admin reject

I know quite a bit how to contribute to Wikipedia, and I am AConfirmed.

Admin tools would be handy for my anti-vandalism campaign, though, so if you could please set up an interactive admin tutorial for me, I'd be happy to take it. Aharonz1 (talk) 13:26, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_January_11#The_Funkadactyls

Honestly, It looks like its time for result on this discussion [Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_January_11#The_Funkadactyls]]. --Miss X-Factor (talk) 04:31, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Given you seem to have some of the same worries I do, I think I'll be taking your advice. I disagree that it was a procedural issue--that this was under a cloud seems pretty obvious. I don't see how it can be said that he didn't resign "for the purpose, or with the effect, of evading scrutiny of their actions that could have led to sanctions." But you all have a lot more experience at this than I. And I'm really bothered by the fact that he's claiming he didn't realize at the time that closing a discussion he had strong opinions on wasn't a good idea--I just find that very hard to believe. But thanks again for the advice, I think it wise. Hobit (talk) 11:25, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 December 25#Next gen consoles

Hello, WJBscribe! You closed this RFD discussion as delete. In the discussion, one user noted that, should "Next gen consoles" be deleted, then the Next generation (video game consoles) redirect should also be deleted. I agree, since that title covers the same topic as "Next gen consoles": Next generation game consoles. Would you consider deleting that redirect as well? Thanks in advance, Heymid (contribs) 09:41, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

I see your point, but as this second redirect was only mentioned by the last contributor to the discussion and wasn't tagged for deletion, I think it should be the subject of a separate nomination. WJBscribe (talk) 11:56, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Template:Web

I'm requesting you to create Template:Web with the content from Template:Web/sandbox if you would please, as you are the one that SALTed the title. Thank you. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 23:44, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

You're mistaken, I deleted that redirect as a result of an RfD - Plastikspork (talk · contribs) protected it against recreation. I have no objection to your proposed content for the page. WJBscribe (talk) 21:45, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

• Ahh. Thank you. I'll take it to Plastikspork. I often assume that the one that deleted it is the same that protected it (like it is a one shot deal using some admin tool for deleting pages).  :\ — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 23:35, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

E-mail

Hi WJBscribe, I've sent you an e-mail. It's a little long but is nothing urgent. :) Best. Acalamari 11:33, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

A request

Hi Will, there's an RfC underway to discuss whether to remove the opt-in choice from having one's edits displayed by the new Analysis tool, which is the replacement for X!'s edit counter, and which is being hosted by the Foundation. You can find the RfC at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Edit Counter Optin. It's something that will have wiki-wide implications.

The RfC is due to close around 3 May, and I would like to suggest that you close it, or that you head up and choose a team of closing admins (or editors/bureaucrats), if you'd rather not do it alone. I was thinking of suggesting you because you're a highly trusted and experienced bureaucrat, and I haven't seen you express an interest in these issues.

Do you I have your permission to put your name forward? I'll completely understand if you'd rather not, because it would be quite a bit of work to read through the whole thing. I'm thinking of alerting the Foundation too, so there might be privacy-related pages to read. So if you'd prefer to say no, that's absolutely fine. Best, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:54, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for thinking of me. I am travelling at the moment but will be around by 3 May. As you identify, I have no strong views on the subject and am happy to be involved in closing if people would like me to be (either alone or as part of a group if that is preferred). Hope all is well with you. WJBscribe (talk) 21:40, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Will, that would be really helpful. I'll post on the page that you're willing to do it. Perhaps you could decide nearer the time whether you need others to help you, and if so who would be best. I suppose it'll depend on how much work you think is involved in closing it. Thanks again, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 23:00, 12 April 2014 (UTC)