User talk:Geni

/archive 1 /archive 2 /archive 3 /archive 4 /archive 5 /archive 6 /archive 7 /archive 8

new comments at the bottom of the page please

Thames and Severn Canal

Thanks for editing: please see my comment on the talk page. You added to an existing section, but fundamentally this is very odd because "Phase 1b" is on a different canal, the Stroudwater. So I think this is odd. Incidentally, I could not find any confirmation that the bid has actually been made on the Cotswold Canals trust site; are you sure the reference you gave is accurate? Can you share anything online? (Please reply here) Imaginatorium (talk) 08:56, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm pretty confident that navvies is correct. The current edition isn't online yet.©Geni (talk) 20:16, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

The bid is mentioned on their site here http://www.cotswoldcanals.com/pages/posts/saul-to-stonehouse-restoration-funding-bid-809.php?p=5 .©Geni (talk) 20:24, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

We177

Am I correct in thinking that you took the photo at File:We177 science museum.jpg at the Science Museum, London (and not some other science museum)? And if so, that means its safe for me to list that museum as another home for a surviving example at WE.177#Retirement, right (it wasn't some special travelling exhibit that you saw)? -- Finlay McWalterᚠTalk 00:22, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Geni,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Mute Swan Emsworth2.JPG is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on March 2, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2016-03-02. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Request to use photo

Hi Geni,

I must say your photographs are amazing! I have been experimenting myself with light painting and am just wondering if I may use this photograph in the background of my photograph. Of course I will credit you by posting a link in the description of your page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Southampton#/media/File:Southampton_docks_at_night_4_seconds.JPG

Thankyou in advance.

Aidanr97 (talk) 03:02, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Uri-Geller.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Uri-Geller.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:12, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Wikipe-tan-in-seaside3.PNG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Wikipe-tan-in-seaside3.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 19:02, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Wikipe-tan-in-seaside4white.PNG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Wikipe-tan-in-seaside4white.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 19:02, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Infobox US university ranking

Hi Geni, I counted the transclusions of {{Infobox US university ranking}}, and it appears it has less than 390 transclusions, which does not make this highly visible in my opinion. Note the thresholds described by Template:High-use and Template:High-risk. I've seen templates at indef semiprot while citing Wikipedia:High-risk templates, and believe that semiprot should suffice. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 16:46, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Scratch that. I now believe the level is acceptable both to prevent unregistered vandalism, and to encourage discussion. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 17:50, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Royal Pier, Southampton

On 27 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Royal Pier, Southampton, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Royal Pier, Southampton, used to have a station at the end of it? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Royal Pier, Southampton. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Royal Pier, Southampton), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 16:35, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Wey & Arun lock photo identification?

Hi Geni

As I am now doing volunteer work restoring the Wey and Arun Canal, I feel it is my duty to get its article up-to-date.

I have updated the map (several times) and made some other changes, with more to come when time permits (as the article is badly lagging the restoration progress).

Anyway...

You uploaded a photo of a lock on the canal, but it does not identify which one. Can you try to work out where you took the photo, please? (I know it was 10 years ago!)

Cheers! -- EdJogg (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Fort Victoria (Isle of Wight)

added a link pointing to Car ferry

Keyhaven

added a link pointing to Car ferry

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Geni,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Dendrogramma enigmatica sp. nov., holotype.png is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on September 17, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2016-09-17. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:20, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

• The image has been rescheduled.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:25, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Oriole Park at Camden Yards article vandalism

Huge thanks for blocking Bensaw11 for blatant vandalism of this article. The Ink Daddy! (talk) 02:29, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Barnstar!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Huge appreciation for your actions against blatant vandalism. The Ink Daddy! (talk) 02:52, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Geni. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Biber submarine

Biber find in The Netherlands.

Dear Geni,

With regards to the biber attack on the bridge at Nijmegen i think i can provide you with additional information. As it happens the remains one of the subs used in that attack are now on display in the Fort of Pannerden. A fort located very close to the location of the find. I work there as a volunteer and as such I think I could lend you a hand getting some information. With kind regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sigifrith76 (talk • contribs) 09:31, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm afraid I've not worked on that article in years. If you have stuff to add I'd suggest raising it on the talkpage or adding it directly to nl:Biber_(onderzeeboot). Alternatively you could try contacting wikimedia Nederland who are probably in a better position to work with you.©Geni (talk) 16:29, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Paddlers

As we were discussing.--ClemRutter (talk) 09:13, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Mass protection

Why did you mass-protect every template used on "the Hillary page"? Jackmcbarn (talk) 21:27, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

too bad we don't have Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Cascading_protection for levels other than full. Frietjes (talk) 21:54, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection on templates

It looks like you have added extended confirmed protection to Template:Obama cabinet and Template:US First Ladies, though those pages have not been vandalized recently. Note that the announcement above from September 23rd states that "Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort." Additionally, Hillary Clinton itself is semi-protected, so preemptively protecting subcomponents with a higher level of protection is odd.

I assume this was a mistake, perhaps a misclick. Would you mind changing the protection level of these templates to semiprotected? Mamyles (talk) 14:26, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of ThinkPoint for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ThinkPoint 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/ThinkPoint 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. ViperSnake151  Talk  18:25, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

John Reaves sent me your way...

Can I get a pair of admin eyes on a couple of Commons procedural things that have stalled? Thanks!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 01

43, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Craigievar Express

On 27 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Craigievar Express, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Craigievar Express (pictured) is driven by a steam engine previously used in a sawmill? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Craigievar Express. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Craigievar Express), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 01:11, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Reliable sources on the YouCaring page

Hello Geni, thanks for taking the time to review my post. I'm just wondering, which pieces of information are lacking reliable citation? I have attempted to provide as much citation as possible but I will continue to edit the page until I've met your requirements. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:5CA0:D4C:C030:63D8:48CE:6912 (talk) 10:18, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

All of it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQPq1VLXY7U is a self published video. Heat street is never a reliable source. http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/2104057-Zarna-Joshi-is-now-crowdfunding-because-of-Hugh-Mungus is forum thread which again aren't considered reliable sources. Neither are go fund me pages or individual tweets.©Geni (talk) 10:22, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Given the context of the post, referring to YouTube videos and GoFundMe pages, those actually do provide proof that what the Wikipedia entry is claiming is 100% true. For example, when I say that a YouTube video was created on a certain date by a certain creator and refer to that video as proof, it is credible evidence that what I'm claiming is true (same with the GoFundMe page).I have edited several of the sources to be more reliable, and I believe it's a matter of opinion that Heat Street is not reliable. In this case I believe the opinion is wrong, because Heat Street provides links and videos that serve as proof to the claims made in the Wikipedia entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:5CA0:D4C:C030:63D8:48CE:6912 (talk) 10:26, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

We are talking about a wikipedia article not a forum post. Different standards apply. Specifically WP:RS. Forum posts, and self published youtube vids do not meet them. The rest runs into problems with the No original research Policy. That leaves you with Heat Street and that isn't a reliable source at the best of times and certianly isn't a reliable source for Biographies of living persons issues.©Geni (talk) 10:35, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Upon some searching, both Heat Street and h3h3Productions' videos have been used as citation on other Wikipedia articles about this incident. Once the internet grabs a hold of this story, I will be able to replace the youtube links and twitter posts with articles about them. Once again, simply saying Heat Street is not reliable doesn't make that true; the articles I've cited from Heat Street are indeed reliable sources on this topic/incident. This happened only hours ago, so primary sources are really the only source at the moment. I didn't realize Wikipedia was against primary sources of information, which seems odd to me considering the citation leads readers directly to the source and provides ample evidence that what the Wikipedia entry is saying is indeed true.

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Geni.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Geni. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Geni. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Hello Geni: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Class455 (Merry Christmas!) 17:02, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Happy New Year, Geni!

Happy New Year!

Geni,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Class455 (talk | stand clear of the doors!) 17:49, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

---

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Wikispecies

WS is now slowly developing with less conflicts. I guess you have moved away to other things, but would kindly like to ask you to support with vote here, so we can reach the 25 votes minimum rule in order to be able to get local Checkusers, and get a local policy for CU, which will be the first step of developing more local solutions on WS. Dan Koehl (talk) 22:06, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Union Jack

Hi Geni. You changed Breitbart and another source to the FT which is subscription only. I replaced it, not in disputation but so that the story could be understood by those who can't access the FT site. The story looks to be uncontroversial and reported in a straight forward way. Clearly you don't like Breitbart (though I confess I can't see any problems with this article), would you perhaps expand the wiki page then so that it can be understood without needing to read the FT site? At the moment it reads like a bit of trivia. I'd have raised this on the article's talk page, but I wouldn't want to publicly criticise and admin or an editor of your standing. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:18, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

On this day, 12 years ago...

Wishing Geni a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Lepricavark (talk) 13:30, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Caterpillar inflation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Water colour. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Caterpillar inflation

On 1 April 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Caterpillar inflation, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that caterpillar inflation is a gut-wrenching process? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Caterpillar inflation. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Caterpillar inflation), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 00:01, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Southampton Common, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page River Itchen. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Re: Draft:Blue Funnel Group

Re: Draft:Blue Funnel Group ... appreciate any comments. Despite it being Draft AfC i'm probably more likely to just move it into position myself. Thanks Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:20, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Request to lower protection level for Template:United States presidential election, 2008

Hi there, will you lower the protection level for Template:United States presidential election, 2008? You rightfully locked it down back in October but it seems like overkill to keep it as such 6 months later. Thanks!--TM 01:51, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Nice work keeping calm when the rumours started about Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

		The Recent Changes Barnstar
		When rumours fly, it's good to know someone is holding the gate until the official word comes through. Or doesn't, as was the case here. Thank you.

HRC template page protections

There are a number of templates you protected as a result of a template vandalism to HRC's page last year during the 2016 US election campaign and elections. Do you believe that all of these templates still deserve TER? I'd like to see them demoted to semi- or even unprotected, given that the immediate risk has lessened due to her more-or-less removal from the public eye. (This post inspired by a TER I responded to at Template talk:C-SPAN.) --Izno (talk) 12:18, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tanners Brook, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Millbrook. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:12, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, Geni. 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.

--Muzammil (talk) 18:48, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Geni. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Kojima-related vandalism

Could you protect Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain too please? --UltimateKuriboh (talk) 05:45, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Also Guillermo del Toro, The Room (film), Tommy Wiseau‎ and Mads Mikkelsen‎. --UltimateKuriboh (talk) 05:48, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Konami‎ and What Remains of Edith Finch please. --UltimateKuriboh (talk) 05:59, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Shitposting, Electronic Entertainment Expo 2017, and Kopps. --UltimateKuriboh (talk) 06:03, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Soulcalibur VI, Transgender sexuality --UltimateKuriboh (talk) 06:12, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Aryan, Polygon (website), Bethesda Game Studios. --UltimateKuriboh (talk) 06:21, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Electronic game, ETV Network. --UltimateKuriboh (talk) 06:23, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

[1] and [2] were responsible for some of the vandalism, idk if you guys can affect them on Twitter. If not, remove my message. --UltimateKuriboh (talk) 07:04, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For all your work changing the protection level of pages today! Thanks! Vanstrat ((🗼)) 06:24, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

********* Lane listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ********* Lane. Since you had some involvement with the ********* Lane redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 17:22, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Edit Warring

Your recent editing history at Jamie Waylett shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. --KirkVHouten (talk) 13:51, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

11+ years of adminship

Wishing Geni a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman (talk) 12:36, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

online?

you edited recently, are you still around? Kindly ping when replying. —usernamekiran(talk) 11:53, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Facto Post – Issue 10 – 12 March 2018

Facto Post – Issue 10 – 12 March 2018 Milestone for mix'n'match Around the time in February when Wikidata clicked past item Q50000000, another milestone was reached: the mix'n'match tool uploaded its 1000th dataset. Concisely defined by its author, Magnus Manske, it works "to match entries in external catalogs to Wikidata". The total number of entries is now well into eight figures, and more are constantly being added: a couple of new catalogs each day is normal. Since the end of 2013, mix'n'match has gradually come to play a significant part in adding statements to Wikidata. Particularly in areas with the flavour of digital humanities, but datasets can of course be about practically anything. There is a catalog on skyscrapers, and two on spiders. These days mix'n'match can be used in numerous modes, from the relaxed gamified click through a catalog looking for matches, with prompts, to the fantastically useful and often demanding search across all catalogs. I'll type that again: you can search 1000+ datasets from the simple box at the top right. The drop-down menu top left offers "creation candidates", Magnus's personal favourite. m:Mix'n'match/Manual for more. For the Wikidatan, a key point is that these matches, however carried out, add statements to Wikidata if, and naturally only if, there is a Wikidata property associated with the catalog. For everyone, however, the hands-on experience of deciding of what is a good match is an education, in a scholarly area, biographical catalogs being particularly fraught. Underpinning recent rapid progress is an open infrastructure for scraping and uploading. Congratulations to Magnus, our data Stakhanovite! Links 3D printing Wikipedia goes 3D allowing users to upload .STLs for digital reference, Beau Jackson for 3dprintingindustry.com, February 22 2018 WikiCite report (video) Formal publication and announcement of ISBN citation dataset, see Twitter post, February 23 2018 Plotting the Course Through Charted Waters, workshop on data visualization literacy from Mikhail Popov, Wikimedia Foundation Using Wikidata to build an authority list of Holocaust-era ghettos, Nancy Cooey, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, February 12 2018 Why Should You Learn SPARQL? Wikidata! Mark Longair, blogpost November 29 2017 Back to the future: Does graph database success hang on query language?, George Anadiotis for Big on Data, March 5 2018 To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see below. Editor Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him. Back numbers are here. Reminder: WikiFactMine pages on Wikidata are at WD:WFM. If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:26, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Generation Rescue

...needs protection. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 19:52, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Stilt (ceramics)

Hello! Your submission of Stilt (ceramics) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:12, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 20:16, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited KKR 25, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Local group (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Stilt (ceramics)

On 6 May 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Stilt (ceramics), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that some stilts have been designed to be used within saggars? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Stilt (ceramics). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Stilt (ceramics)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

World War Z

Hi. I see you protected the page World War Z (video game)

There are now two products with the same title (new is at World War Z (Sabre Interactive video game), and the later product appears it will have similar or greater impact than the original.

Cold you take a look at the two pages, and consider renaming the original page to World War Z (2013 video game), and the second to World War Z (2019 video game), with the original page used as a disambiguation.

This seems uncontroversial to me. I leave it to your judgement. There is no real problem with the current state. Thanks.Xoool (talk) 20:02, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

[edit2] [edit] - I can't add the hatnote needed at World War Z (video game) to link to World War Z (Sabre Interactive video game) .. Xoool (talk) 20:03, 23 August 2018 (UTC) .. seems I can .. Xoool (talk) 20:06, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. All fixed now . Xoool (talk) 20:18, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Basil Mott (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to River Itchen

Itchen Bridge (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to River Itchen

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Geni. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Redrose64 🌹 (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:28, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Conway Hall

Wikipedia:GLAM/Conway Hall

Advice on Open Government licences

I understand that we can include text (C&P) from sites with a UK Open Government license. Can you look at [[3]], it links to to four pdfs with architecture's plans that I would like to use. Are these covered by the tag on parent page? Is the a standard way to display the attribution? --ClemRutter (talk) 09:56, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

Why have I received this message? All administrators are receiving it. What prompted you to send this message? Recently, several Wikipedia admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were desysopped on an emergency basis. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh Request for Adminship (RfA) after losing control of their account. What do I need to do? Only to follow the instructions in this message. Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites). Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable). Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers. How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)? You can find out more about 2FA at m:2FA.

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:20, 4 May 2019 (UTC) Template:Z152

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC) Template:Z83

Thanks

You handled that smarter and more robustly than I was proposing to do. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:13, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

To be clear, I'm saying this was a good unblock. An admin does not have only two choices: (1) indef block with no talk page access, or (2) supporting harassment. Talking to a long term productive editor with a clean block log like he's a human being, telling him what he's done wrong, not to do it again, and if he does he's going to get blocked and unlikely to be unblocked again, that's the mark of a good admin. Nobody here "supports" harassment, nobody here "basically told someone to find a new way to harass other people", and to say that Geni did so is gaslighting. Gaslighting from a different end of the spectrum than I'm used to seeing it, but gaslighting. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:23, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Well said Floq. Geni, the last thing we need is another of our more conscientious admins resigning. Hopefully no one will even want you to once things have calmed down a little. FeydHuxtable (talk) 22:32, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for unblocking me, Geni, I appreciate it. I hope you will address the concerns of the other editors below, because I don’t want that any harm to you (or anyone else) he caused from this matter. You have my assurance that I have (and had) no intentions of harassing anyone. starship.paint (talk) 01:03, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Please resign

I've asked you on IRC, but I'll make it official: please resign. You violated policy by unblocking both against the consensus of administrators and without talking to the blocking admin, who objected, and was engaged in an unblock discussion. You also made it easier for people to harass others. This isn't good, and only makes our project worse. You basically told someone to find a new way to harass other people. That's not okay, and I'm honestly shocked that any administrator here would do so. I won't push it further, but I do want to make the request on-wiki. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:44, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

I concur with this. There’s a difference between a user demonstrating that they understand and will not do it again and blindly unblocking while most of your colleagues disagree. By unblocking with no actual assurance from the user and in spite of opposition, you’re effectively condoning the behavior. You are proving WMF right isn’t their statement that the English Wikipedia is unable or unwilling to deal with this type of behavior and as someone who’s been on the receiving end of it, it makes me sick. Praxidicae (talk) 22:01, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

I think your resigning over this is more than is necessary. However, I echo that this was a real, considerate, and destructive mistake. This was a good block and a consensus for how it could be reversed had been agreed to. Starship showing some understanding of why the block was levied is an important protection of important behavior policies. As I noted here and to you on IRC, I think this kind of rogue use of the toolset makes life for those of us who are here in good faith, but lacking the buttons of being a sysop, a worse place. Barkeep49 (talk) 22:07, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

I'll echo Tony's request here. Administrators like you who ignore consensus and enable harassment by trying to brush stuff under the carpet like you did with your unblock of Starship.paint is the reason we have such an atmosphere of abusive behaviour on the project. It's the reason that the Foundation are now having to step in with office actions to deal with it. It's the reason this project is becoming more and more unwelcoming, and why we're losing so many people. The requests that we made of Starship were fairly easy for them to meet, and designed to push them towards better interactions with fellow editors; instead you've basically taught them that if they get in trouble, they just need to wait a while for another admin if the first few on-scene don't immediately unblock. It makes you look like you like harassment, it makes you look like an enabler. Is that really the persona you want to show off? Is that really what you thing the community as a whole should be doing? stwalkerster (talk) 22:09, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

I concur with everyone above. Performing this unblock when you have been inactive for so long shows how out of touch you are with the way things should be handled the and the respect that you should show to the other administrators. It is clear that you do not understand that, so you should revert your own action or resign. Nihlus 23:17, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

On one hand, we can't afford to lose more admins with so many asking to resign at BN. On the other hand, Doc James said repeatedly that he was reviewing this block and would unblock once he got assurances that Starship.paint wouldn't out any more WMF staff and you preemptively unblocked him first. Why, why would you do this when another admin had taken responsibility for reviewing this block? Bad, bad move. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:49, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

We can't afford to have rogue administrators who condone harassment. Period. Praxidicae (talk) 23:57, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Praxidicae, I doubt Geni is condoning harassment. I also still don't think they should resign. But these sorts of rogue actions are indeed why we operate on consensus and Geni should have participated in the ongoing discussion among sysops (and others) rather than taking unilateral action in a way against general procedures for this thing and in a way that made it impossible for those respecting discussion and consensus to reverse. As such, I do look forward, in the spirit of WP:ADMINACCT to reading Geni's response to the concerns presented here. Barkeep49 (talk) 00:12, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Eh its 4am here. On balance things seem stable for the time being and I don't really want to risk a debate that might complicate that. How about next weekend?©Geni (talk) 03:20, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Considering you haven't edited your talk page in years until now, I don't think that's appropriate. You should either make a full explanation here, or you should go to WP:BN and resign. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:24, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

I certainly wasn't expecting a response immediately. I was hoping for a response before a week from now, and admit to a little bit of additional concern that you would take a clearly controversial action knowing you wouldn't be around to explain yourself, but also do understand that real life intervenes. As such I continue to look forward to your thoughts at your earliest Wiki convenience. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:34, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

• You have misused your tools and position.--MONGO (talk) 01:12, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
• Please don't resign Geni. How about an arbitration case on Ballioni's block and Geni's unblock to clear it up? There are comments that Balloni's talk page access removal was undue and that the indef block was excessive and comments that Geni's unblock was incorrect also so there is a value in the arbs looking at this. Govindaharihari (talk) 03:26, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Well, WP:AN would be the first place, but that makes little sense for a block I don't want restored now that an explanation and commitment to not harass has been given. But an explanation does need to be forthcoming. He hasn't edited his talk page in years before this so "I'll wait until next week" isn't really helpful. I'd even be fine with "Look, I messed up, I won't do it again" or "Tony was completely wrong and an idiot and I won't be apologizing for these reasons." but he does need to explain why he went against policy and consensus. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:34, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
• Resign please. Your unblock shows absolute lack of judgement. Five administrators had warned against a unilateral unblock – and you went and actually did that! Please resign immediately and this doesn't need to become an elongated ArbCom case. If you don't think you can respond to our messages in a timely manner, but can unblock in an untimely manner going against admin-consensus, that's reason enough for you to stop using the bit. Lourdes 03:50, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
• As currently the community are so highly charged on this issue, I'll open an arb case request to sort this out. Govindaharihari (talk) 03:59, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
  • @Govindaharihari: please don't. Allow Geni time to respond. While an arb case might be required in the near future, I think it is premature to open one now. Killiondude (talk) 04:06, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Govindaharihari, That seems highly premature. ArbCom likes the community to have exhausted all options first. We have not exhausted all options yet. My concerns are not letting process and reasonable discussion (aka our attempts to form consensus) come to a natural conclusion in one place, let us not make a mistake by failing to let it play out in a second place. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:06, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

At the moment the community is so focussed on this that imo as you can see on this page massive requests for Geni to resign that dispute resolution with the usual user channels is impossible to be neutral, only arbcom remain neutral at this time. Govindaharihari (talk) 04:28, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Govindaharihari, no one but you wants this. This is the last thing the community needs at this time. I’ve said above I’m willing to not go further if there’s some explanation. Lourdes is asking not to have a drawn out case. Seriously, just let us talk this out. Dispute resolution hasn’t been exhausted, and ArbCom is a last resort. TonyBallioni (talk) 04:33, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

There is no neutral dispute resolution in this case, you are asking for her resignation, if you continue to do that there is currently only arbcom that is neutral, no dispute resolution is available. If you retract your request that she resigns I won't post it. Govindaharihari (talk) 04:39, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Govindaharihari, through discussion we can reach consensus. Perhaps after reading more from Geni some of those who are suggesting Geni resign will change their mind. Things can happen slowly on Wikipedia. That's OK. Barkeep49 (talk) 04:49, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

• Tempest in a teapot. Tony was a bit heavy handed with both the duration and taking away talk page access. A simple 72 hour block would have been sufficient to get the point across. Geni was extraordinarily bold, but this place has gotten to where everyone gets butthurt over an admin being bold. It didn't used to be that way. If any admin is going to be bold, better he do it to unblock someone who is likely to not repeat the mistake, such as the case here. Admin are going to step on each other's toes sometimes. Making a big deal of it seems rather petty. I've been here long enough that I've been on both sides. When someone unblocked my block (and yes, the person was blocked soon after), I voiced my opinion and moved on. When I've unblocked someone against the wishes of the admin, they were pissed off but moved on. Big Fucking Deal. We don't own our admin actions, we do them on behalf of the community. Had I not turned in my admin bit, I would restored the TPA at a minimum myself, so Doc James and I agree on that as well. There are no bad guys here, just some overreactions on everyone's part. Admins bump heads sometimes. Move on like professionals. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 12:49, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
• I'm not here to ask you to resign. I'm spending some time with my grandson, and I was amazed to see that when I was away from the computer for just a few hours, I came back to see starship.paint with an in-deff. I finally found some time today to look at the history, and as I started reading that editors talk page I was very impressed with the discussion. (Particular kudos to Doc James) especially in light of heightened current tensions, that page started out as a model of how disputes should be handled. Tony had legitimate concerns, and participants were working through issues and you could see it headed toward a successful resolution… then you stepped in. I find it difficult to believe that you read the entire back story and didn't reach the same conclusion — namely, that this small issue was on its way to a fine resolution. I can't think of anything other than two options — one option is that you jumped the gun without doing appropriate homework, and the second option is that you did some homework and still thought barging in was the right option. Neither option speaks well for your judgment. That said, it is a tense time, and my hope is that you will read carefully what led up to the situation, and come back with an appropriate statement. Take some time, there's no rush.S Philbrick(Talk) 13:52, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
• I get that harassment is of particular importance under the current climate, I also get that there needed to be a discussion about the appropriateness of interjecting in a claimed unblock, the concerns over the kind of judgement that lead to this decision being made and whether there were any violations of policy and accepted procedure… But in future, can everyone please leave out the ad hominem imputations, the hyperbole, the poorly substantiated assumptions and the premature demands for resignation. There was no reason this couldn’t be approached in a measured, factual and professional manner. Promethean (talk) 13:10, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

User:TonyBallioni's block of User:Starship.paint and User:Geni's unblock

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#User:TonyBallioni's block of User:Starship.paint and User:Geni's unblock and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks,— Preceding unsigned comment added by Govindaharihari (talk • contribs) 04:54, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Re: Recent unblock±

Thanks for your explanation of the unblock. I am responding here because other discussion has been held here and so keeping it in place with the rest seems useful. Your message is certainly thoughtful and reasonable. It is one I still must disagree with and will register that here but please feel no need to further respond if you don't care to.

You message frames it as one (banned) editor against one sysop. This is not what the history shows in my reading as it was not one sysop who felt something. It was multiple. There were, in fact, multiple offers of people who offered language that starship could give to remove the block, though admittedly one of those who made the offer lost their ability to follow through due to resignation. I also continue to find your thinking that action is necessary over communication and consensus to be one that makes me feel less. That someone could track down other accounts of mine and make demands of me is of concern to me as someone who does not edit under their name. My guess is that you are correct that starship will not repeat this, but that does not make the original issue not an issue. I have more to say but have already prattled on long enough so I will just conclude with an additional thank you for the response. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:30, 29 June 2019 (UTC)