User talk:EdJohnston

How anonymous editors can leave messages If you want to leave a message for me and you are unable to edit this page, post at User talk:EdJohnston/Anontalk where I will see your comment.

Talkback

Hello, EdJohnston. You have new messages at De728631's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, EdJohnston. You have new messages at In ictu oculi's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Neelix (talk) 14:32, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Wild (Jessie J song)

Can you remove the protection template please? It has charted on 3 charts now. Thanks for protecting it up until now.  — AARON • ^TALK 18:41, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Done. EdJohnston (talk) 18:47, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks.  — AARON • ^TALK 19:01, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Stéphane Sansoni move request

Hi, Ed. You closed a move request at Talk:Stéphane Sansoni. In your closing statement, you say: "It is widely known that certain tennis bodies routinely strip diacritics, as pointed out by User:Bobrayner." But you seem to use it as evidence against removing the diacritic. If reliable English sources such as these "certain tennis bodies" remove them, then so should we? Isn't that the basic advice of WP:AT, which overrides WP:FRMOS? Powers ^T 01:40, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Some English-language newspapers and some sports organizations never print accents. It is unwise to accept a tennis organization as a reliable source for *spelling* of a player's name if we know they censor the accents. We need to find out how third party sources (that do allow accents) refer to the player in English text in actual practice. EdJohnston (talk) 01:56, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

But that's assuming your conclusion. You're assuming that accents are appropriate if you only look at sources that include them. Powers ^T 17:14, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

If you believe that official tennis organizations are a reliable source, you could post at WP:RSN and see what they think. An organization that systematically removes accents as a matter of policy is probably not a good one to ask whether the player normally has accents in their name. EdJohnston (talk) 17:33, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't see any way an official tennis organization would not be considered a reliable source. I mean come on -- if not them, then who? And again, you're assuming the conclusion: you're assuming that an org that doesn't use diacritics must be wrong, therefore unreliable. This is the exact same circular reasoning used in the discussion, and it's still flawed. Powers ^T 11:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to ask this question at WP:RS/N. EdJohnston (talk) 13:03, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I have done so, since you insist. Powers ^T 20:08, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

ANI notice re Mhazard9

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.. I have filed a block evasion complaint against Mhazard9, who you blocked yesterday on a 3RR complaint. You may wish to comment. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:08, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Fan user

Hi, over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mariah Carey's fourteenth studio album, there is a user called User talk:Hashtag beautiful who is just an obsessed fan who is trying to say that an article he has created, a recreation under a different name, should stay over the original, and is being personal toward me, saying that I have an "agenda" against Mariah and that for that reason my vote doesn't count. To the contrary, I love Mariah and have edited several of her articles. But I can see that what he is doing is wrong. I have explained further on the AfD. Can you do/say something to this user please.  — AARON • ^TALK 21:51, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

I suggest letting the AfD run for at least 24 hours and then ask at WP:ANI for a speedy close. You left a message for User:AuburnPilot who did the last protection and he may have an idea of what to do. The article doesn't appear to qualify for WP:CSD#G6 speedy deletion. EdJohnston (talk) 22:31, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

YourHumanRights

YourHumanRights (talk · contribs) was recently topic-banned from everything related to abortion, at WP:AE ([1]). He's already been blocked once for violating his topic ban ([2]). Since that block has expired, he's immediately resumed violating his topic ban at Talk:Preterm birth ([3]). He's obviously got no intention of respecting his topic ban, and rather than go through another filing in triplicate at WP:AE I thought I'd notify you to ask whether you'd be willing to enforce the sanction for this unambiguous repeat violation. MastCell ^Talk 03:34, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Now blocked. EdJohnston (talk) 04:14, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks much for the quick response. MastCell ^Talk 05:41, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Decision at AN3

Hi. I am seeking clarification regarding your decision at AN3 here [4]. Based on the diffs provided, it should not be unclear what is going on in this situation. The user who filed this AN3 report was acting in response to his original block. If admins are not going to hold editors accountable for making spurious reports complete with misleading information, then they will continue to abuse Wikipedia processes and other editors. Thanks. Taroaldo ✉ 01:46, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

We are used to a high percentage of spurious reports. People misunderstand the rules all the time. It is likely that the complaining editor is going to be in trouble soon, but an unclear report is not the best place to be taking action. It was noteworthy that there was little or no talk page discussion about the disputed points. Surely this is something you would have time to do. EdJohnston (talk) 02:02, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Communication is challenging in this case: I got a snarky response from him [5] to a talk page comment in which I was supporting an edit he made. When editors disagree with him, things like this Wikiproject talk thread happen. But your points are well taken. Thank you for the quick reply. Regards Taroaldo ✉ 02:36, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Sông Công RM

RMs are supposed to be closed based on discussion and guidelines rather then the agenda you had when you came in. The RfC you linked to was closed as "no consensus". The "mass moves" argument is just a lot of hand waving. Most diacritic titles on Wiki are where they are because at some point someone "mass moved" them there. Nobody has even put forward an argument in favor of putting Sa Dec at Sa Đéc town. This was part of a set of bad faith "mass moves" that were made back in September.[6] Kauffner (talk) 11:53, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

The 'brand new editor' User:TenMuses was reponsible for the mass moves, so there was an argument for undoing them as a straight admin action. Regarding the merits of diacritics (or not), there seems to be a recent trend among move discussions, and not just for Vietnam. It takes time to find and link to all of them, but if you think I missed some recent ones that went the other way, let me know. Those within the last twelve months are most relevant. If you think there is a case to be made for Sa Dec, why don't you open a new RM just for that. EdJohnston (talk) 13:01, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

You have could taken "a straight admin action," but you didn't. The voting on this issue has always been very close, so I am not seeing any "consensus". Britannica and National Geographic use diacritics for many languages, but make an exception for Vietnamese. The English-language Vietnamese media once used these marks, but no longer does so. Kauffner (talk) 14:53, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't recommend any more unilateral mass changes to add or remove accents. Given the state of the controversy, any mass changes with no usage of RM would be seen as edit warring. User:TenMuses does not seem to have continued their campaign; otherwise a block should be considered. EdJohnston (talk) 18:31, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't worry about that kind of thing. If my Wiki-stalker is busy with this issue, he's not attacking my articles. Kauffner (talk) 00:54, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Decision at VPP

Your decision at VPP appears to not have been fully informed[7]. I request that you rescind your decision accordingly. My objection is explained in further detail here:

• Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation#Objection

Your attention to this matter is appreciated. Thanks. --B2C 00:33, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

We make progress through discussions. My closure was intended to reflect the views expressed in the original thread at WP:VPP. Possibly you just want this reversed. If instead you are open to a revision, it would help if you propose your own wording change for WP:DAB in the thread you have opened. EdJohnston (talk) 01:00, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

How to best add/not add this news report

Hi Ed, you have in the past blocked me from editing, and I feel you are an impartial person to ask for help. Is there anything wrong with this news article:

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Falun-Gong-Derided-as-Authoritarian-Sect-by-2783949.php

I can't seem to add it to the Falun Gong wiki. Please help. If you agree with the other editors this is not relevant or notable to the wiki I will not insist on adding it.

Thanks! Bobby fletcher (talk) 02:11, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

It's up to the other editors at Falun Gong as to whether this material belongs. You're proposing to add to our article a statement that Margaret Singer made to a newspaper in the year 2000. In my personal opinion this is a stretch. If you read the Margaret Singer article you'll see that she had some problems convincing her professional colleagues that her judgment on cults was valid. She used to give expert testimony in court cases, but at a certain point the courts stopped being receptive to her theories about cult brainwashing. EdJohnston (talk) 02:30, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

RE: La jaula de oro

Close it, this shouldn't be treated as a different RM (I can open a new one in some days anyway). The real reason why these targets are like this is that the film page was created in a red link page and the album page was incomplety moved. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 18:00, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

In the meantime, someone else has closed the RM. How often does that happen? Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 20:10, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Publishers Clearing House

Hey Ed. The proposed 'Odds of Winning' section has been up on the Talk page for a week and I think was supported by Bilbo. Regarding the changes I made, he said "I'm fine with that" but never gave me explicit permission to move it into article-space. Thought you might have some input on the best way to proceed, as I'm not sure it's quite non-controversial enough for me to make the edit without more direct permission. It's about two-thirds of the way down this string. CorporateM (Talk) 20:28, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, EdJohnston. You have new messages at Oda Mari's talk page.
Message added 10:02, 16 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Oda Mari (talk) 10:02, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

AfD discussion

Hey man, I noticed that you also supported deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hadith regarding the use of Nikah Mut'ah after Muhammad. Two other editors have suggested that since there are about a dozen articles on individual Hadith regarding the same topic, we scavenge what we can from them and simply merge everything into one place. The idea sounds like it has some promise and since you showed interest, I would like your feedback on the idea. MezzoMezzo (talk) 12:19, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Move

FYI your move here was reverted. The edit summary is incorrect, since although this article, like 7-800 other db6 (admins Edgar131 and Graeme Bartlett's count) was indeed moved by placing db6 uncontroversial move templates, there still remain some Vietnamese rulers who have not been moved. The SPI Checkuser has concluded a possible match, but no admin has yet commented on action. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:22, 17 June 2013 (UTC)