User talk:Elahrairah: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Reverted edits by JamboQueen (talk) to last version by Viriditas
JamboQueen (talk | contribs)
mNo edit summary
Line 137: Line 137:


This character has reemerged as [[Special:Contribs/Seringapatam|Seringapatam]]. Given that you expressed interest in reopening the SPI in the case that he tried anything new, I thought I'd let you know. [[User:DCI2026|<font color="Cyan" face="Verdana">'''dci'''</font>]] &#124; [[User talk:DCI2026|<font color="purple" face= "Times New Roman"> TALK </font>]] 22:14, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
This character has reemerged as [[Special:Contribs/Seringapatam|Seringapatam]]. Given that you expressed interest in reopening the SPI in the case that he tried anything new, I thought I'd let you know. [[User:DCI2026|<font color="Cyan" face="Verdana">'''dci'''</font>]] &#124; [[User talk:DCI2026|<font color="purple" face= "Times New Roman"> TALK </font>]] 22:14, 17 March 2013 (UTC)


== What to do? Yes that is the problem!==
An extremely difficult situation has arisen, stalemate, where a possible precedent may be set in connection to media journalism and media speculation as main sources. The outcome is very important and will set the tempo for similar events in future. We need as many sharp pencils we have in the box to answer this question. The subject is not so much at issue more the use of journalistic prognosis or even just speculation in a subject that cannot be really verified. Come and help! --[[User:JamboQueen|JamboQueen]] ([[User talk:JamboQueen#top|talk]]) 09:09, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:15, 19 March 2013

Talkback

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

Tb

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

Happy Holidays!

GOCE February 2013 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors February 2013 events newsletter

We are preparing to start our February requests blitz and March backlog elimination drive.

The February 2013 newsletter is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis

Sign up for the February blitz and March drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 23:36, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion: Felix Kjellberg

Hello :-)

I came to ask why the page Felix Kjellberg was deleted?

I can't see anything wrong with it. I've been talking to another user after (s)he informed me of some things that needed to be included, and we seemed to have everything sorted.

I'm actually a little insulted, even though I suppose you did not mean it in a harmful way, I did spend quite a long time on that article.

Is there any chance we could improve and bring back this article?

Many thanks! Weir NI (talk) 19:54, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Please don't take the deletion personally, it is not meant to be a comment on your ability as a writer. I deleted the article as it has already been previously deleted as a result of this deletion discussion. The article you created has a different title but it's about the same subject. The content of the article you created does nothing to demonstrate that the concerns raised in the original deletion discussion have been addressed, as evidenced by the references, which are almost all to inappropriate, self-published sources. Basalisk inspect damageberate 20:04, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I'm afraid Felix Kjellberg is a complicated source to find references on, as he's Swedish and hasn't done interviews with English/American newspapers or telegraphs. The best I was able to find was an expressen.se article. I had talked this over with another user and he said that it was "probably reliable (not 100%)", but I can't manage to find any other links. I included the links to his YouTube channel as it includes the date he joined and has videos relating to the text in the article. Is there any possible chance we could fix this article and bring it back? Thank you. Weir NI (talk) 12:15, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Sockmaster at it again

Hi Basalisk. As the admin who took action on this SPI case, I thought I would bring it to your attention that this guy is back with new accounts and IP's, still editing disruptively and completely ignoring all efforts at communication. You can add User:天才冒险家, User:Bedco Chan, User:118.88.229.122 and User:119.118.160.137 to the list of socks/known IP's (seen here), though as I've said before, I think these are probably just the tip of the iceberg. I thought I might expedite things by bringing the matter directly to you, but if you'd just as soon I resubmit the case on SPI, I'm more than happy to oblige -- just let me know. I'm already thinking about returning the issue to ANI, as I'm beginning to wonder if protection for the page might be in order, though I've been trying to avoid it, since the nature of the article means that IP involvement in filling in details is usually quite helpful and welcome and in any event I'm not sure it will stop this guy since he'll just register a new account. I'm just about out of ideas on how to stop this obnoxiousness, frankly. I've dealt with some persistently disruptive users before, but this one is a bit outside my experience. What is the usual course of action with a sockmaster with unending IPs like this? Protect the page and then whack'a mole the socks? No better option? Well, in any account, thank you for any action you can take or advice you can provide on the matter. Snow (talk) 06:17, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE news: February 2013

Guild of Copy Editors Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/February 2013 wrap-up

Participation: Out of 19 people who signed up for this blitz, 9 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: During the six-day blitz, we removed over twenty articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the March drive in a few days! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Torchiest, BDD and Miniapolis.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:34, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Elahrairah. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nae Worries

Thanks for fixing it. An obvious mistake, don't sweat it.

Wee Curry Monster talk 01:35, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Advice

Thanks for writing. I want to take the time to clear the air and work with you one and one. I responded at my talk page. Looking forward to hearing from you. Regards, DVMt (talk) 02:03, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of Halo multiplayer maps for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Halo multiplayer maps 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/List of Halo multiplayer maps (2nd nomination) 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. James086Talk 18:15, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi how are you? Re: User:Ihardlythinkso.

I noticed that you also have been on the receiving end of a torrent of abuse due to an unpleasant interaction with User:Ihardlythinkso. This user has been poking fun at me and following me around the site for months insulting me at every turn. I was wondering perhaps if I opened a "Request for Comment" on this user would you second it? Thank you. OGBranniff (talk) 05:10, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I don't really like escalating conflicts of this type but I do think some sort of direction is required for this user, and if you initiate an RfC I will make a brief comment. I'm not really inclined to help construct one though. Just let me know what you decide to do. Basalisk inspect damageberate 16:03, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, and I just remembered this rude and profane comment from User:Ihardlythinkso. Maybe some anger management would be in order. He seems stressed, that's a shame. Thank you and I hope you are having a good evening. OGBranniff (talk) 00:24, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, yeah, interesting little note there. In any case, hate to bother you, but I just posted this on a fellow-administrator's talk page User_talk:Drmies#Quick_question about "Ihardlythinkso" if you care to check it out. Thank you. OGBranniff (talk) 03:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Elahrairah. You have new messages at CorporateM's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wee's talk page

Basalik, I only post on Wee's talk page if it is extremely necessary. In this case I was forced to comment over there after he made this childish comment on the talk page of the article. Had I answered him on the article's talk page it would only have meant more disruption to the content discussion at hand. If you can honestly say that comment warranted an answer in place, then we have very different views on what kind of comments are acceptable in an article's talk page. Last time I conducted the whole conversation in my talk page after he deleted my original message, just to avoid this. Trust me, I don't enjoy being abused by him whenever I end up forcibly commenting in his talk page. Regards. Gaba (talk) 19:59, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're not being forced to his talk page at all. The best kind of response to such comments is to ignore them, but if you don't have the capacity to be the bigger man and feel that such comments require a response, you can do so at the article talk page. There is no need to let it spill over onto his talk page. That just stokes the fire. Basalisk inspect damageberate 20:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, next time I'll let these kind of comments by Wee slide (even though the optimal solution would be for him not to make such unhelpful comments in the first place...). I'll just note that it makes it very hard to establish a collaborative environment in an article when one of the editors downright bans another from contacting him in a civil and friendly way, even for trivial matters like making a childish comment that disrupts a discussion and should be removed. Regards. Gaba (talk) 20:30, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just remembered this other rather unhelpful and disruptive comment made also today by Wee in another article's talk page. Note that I abstained from responding to that one either in place or in his own talk page. Regards. Gaba (talk) 21:02, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Belchfire block extension request

Hello. Belchfire is still evading his block, this time as 174.21.89.148 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I'm not sure what you have to do to confirm this but since you extended his last block for socking, I thought I would let you know that he's still doing it. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 07:01, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Add it to the SPI case and someone will see to it ASAP. Regards Basalisk inspect damageberate 14:47, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It was taken care of by other users/admins. Viriditas (talk) 23:46, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This character has reemerged as Seringapatam. Given that you expressed interest in reopening the SPI in the case that he tried anything new, I thought I'd let you know. dci | TALK 22:14, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]


What to do? Yes that is the problem!

An extremely difficult situation has arisen, stalemate, where a possible precedent may be set in connection to media journalism and media speculation as main sources. The outcome is very important and will set the tempo for similar events in future. We need as many sharp pencils we have in the box to answer this question. The subject is not so much at issue more the use of journalistic prognosis or even just speculation in a subject that cannot be really verified. Come and help! --JamboQueen (talk) 09:09, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]