User talk:Sandstein

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

• Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.

• Do you have a question about arbitration enforcement? Please read my FAQ at User:Sandstein/AE.

• If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: [[example article]].

• If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.

Start a new talk topic

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Sandstein! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:09, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sandstein. You have new messages at Causa sui's talk page.
Message added 17:00, 26 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

causa sui (talk) 17:00, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Questions regarding you comments to the "Magnetic Tower of Hanoi" article

Hello Mr. Sandstein,

In reference to your comment on the Magnetic Tower of Hanoi article, could you please explain:

• Single purpose account
• Conflict of interest account
  

Also - don't you expect third-party coverage later on?

Overall - do you think the subject warrants a stand-alone article?

Uri-Levy (talk) 11:27, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Sure, see Wikipedia:Single-purpose account and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, respectively. I've offered my opinion about whether the subject warrants a stand-alone article in the deletion discussion.  Sandstein  13:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Mass killings under Communist regimes

You might recall this article. I suggest that Paul Siebert does not understand WP:CONSENSUS as his posts at

[1] Reverted the changes that have been made in violation of the editing restrictions. See talk page,

[2] where he somehow feels he alone determines consensus,

and [3] with the (ominous?) otherwise I'll have to take other steps. You have 48 hours

none of which sounds remotely like seeking consensus by a few miles. Cheers. Collect (talk) 20:38, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not currently active in arbitration enforcement, as I've come to seen it as a waste of time due to insufficient Arbitration Committee support. I recommend that you make a report at WP:AE if you think this requires administrative action.  Sandstein  21:55, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

It is not at that level yet, but I feel that as you placed the restriction, it is you who well ought to be made aware of the problem. Cheers. Collect (talk) 21:57, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Sandstein, it might be helpful for an experienced, neutral, temperate and collaborative admin to cast an eye over the discussion in this section, and also the Shall we try again discussion that follows it, with a view to negotiating a way through the impasse, stabilizing the article's lead in a version that at least complies with the editing restrictions while content discussion continues, and heading off what looks like a nascent revert war. Can you suggest anyone? Writegeist (talk) 19:25, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

"Lede 3" complies with all "editing restrictions" as far as I can tell. The only one threatening a "revert war" was Paul Siebert with the "48 hours or else" deadline. Cheers. Glad to see you agreed with me at Johann Hari by the way. Collect (talk) 19:28, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Writegeist, I think the place to ask for somebody like that would be WP:DRN, although admins have no particular authority in content matters. There are various other options for getting out of editorial impasses described at WP:DR. I, myself, regret to say that I have had quite enough of the poisonous editing environment that surrounds this sort of topic to attempt to contribute to that discussion. Also, after a look at the page history and at the restrictions currently in place, I get the feeling that if I were to involve myself with this nonsense again I would have to block almost everybody who has edited the article since February, although that might be a solution of sorts too.  Sandstein  19:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Collect: No names, no pack drill. I carefully refrained from pointing fingers re. revert warring. The accusatory mode that's so much in evidence in relation to this difficult article is far from helpful.

Sandstein, thank you for your advice and thoughts. I empathize! Writegeist (talk) 20:27, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Notes about Articles for deletion/Hetek

Hi. After your note about Articles for deletion/Hetek I have checked user Nedudgi. You can do also. Nedudgi has contribution only in enwiki and huwiki. Nedudgi has been blocked for infinit time in huwiki. The reason is "harci zokni", which means sock puppet soldier. Since Nedudgi was the only one who suggested to keep article Hetek I have a question: Can reconsider your note? --Euty (talk) 11:23, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

There's nothing to reconsider, I've only relisted the thread. If you think Nedudgi is a sock puppet, you can ask for an investigation at WP:SPI.  Sandstein  11:37, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I accept there is nothing to reconsider. But I am sorry, that I do not think Nedudgi is a sock puppet. It was considered and it was proven in huwiki. So does not matter what I think or what you think. It was proven Nedudgi is a sock puppet and Nedudgi was blocked for infinit time in huwiki. It is a nonarguable proven fact. One can argue what should follow from it. Actually, that I do not know. Sincerely. Euty (talk) 11:47, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

What is it that you would like me to do?  Sandstein  11:50, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Nothing more, than read my notes. Since you have read them, I thank you for it. About the deletion let's see what will happen. Euty (talk) 11:59, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

AfD question

Regarding your closing of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian-Heinrich, Prince of Sayn-Wittgenstein-Hohenstein - would it be alright to see if I can recreate an article on him as a stub, referenced to reliable print sources, without all the genealogy? - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

If the stub demonstrates that he meets WP:BIO, certainly.  Sandstein  06:53, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

AE request

Paul Siebert has filed his ultimatum-promised action at AE, and seems to have forgotten to notify you. I am doing so, as I feel the fact that I have acted as best as humanly possible in accord with your strictures, and that my posts here show that, that his act is almost an abuse of the process. Cheers. Collect (talk) 12:01, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't see why I should have been notified. As I said above, I am not currently active in AE, and I leave it to other admins to determine whether and how to address the situation that is the subject of the AE request to which you refer.  Sandstein  13:09, 1 November 2011 (UTC)