User talk:Carabinieri: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
MadmanBot (talk | contribs)
MadmanBot (talk | contribs)
Line 257: Line 257:
[[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]]
[[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]]
Following a [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/suspend sysop rights of inactive admins|community discussion]] in June 2011, consensus was reached to [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Procedural removal for inactive administrators|provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year]] (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return&nbsp;if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated&nbsp;should this occur, please post to the [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard]] and the userright will be restored per the [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Resysopping|re-sysopping process]] (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at [[WP:RFA]]. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->[[User:MadmanBot|MadmanBot]] ([[User talk:MadmanBot|talk]]) 00:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Following a [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/suspend sysop rights of inactive admins|community discussion]] in June 2011, consensus was reached to [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Procedural removal for inactive administrators|provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year]] (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return&nbsp;if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated&nbsp;should this occur, please post to the [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard]] and the userright will be restored per the [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Resysopping|re-sysopping process]] (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at [[WP:RFA]]. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->[[User:MadmanBot|MadmanBot]] ([[User talk:MadmanBot|talk]]) 00:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

==Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity==
[[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]]
Following a [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/suspend sysop rights of inactive admins|community discussion]] in June 2011, consensus was reached to [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Procedural removal for inactive administrators|provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year]] (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return&nbsp;if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated&nbsp;should this occur, please post to the [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard]] and the userright will be restored per the [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Resysopping|re-sysopping process]] (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at [[WP:RFA]]. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->[[User:MadmanBot|MadmanBot]] ([[User talk:MadmanBot|talk]]) 00:30, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:30, 25 August 2014

Committed identity: 4418df765c72e439097e8fc2bd73dbfb2f50ca95 is a SHA-1 commitment to this user's real-life identity.

If I have commented on your DYK nomination and you have responded, then I will read your answer on the nominations page.

Archive
Archives

DYK review

A while ago you reviewed a DYK of mine on revolutionary movement, that after some discussion was falling under a radar. I now have another DYK that seems to have slipped from the front lines, could you perhaps look at it? It's the Template:Did you know nominations/International Sociological Association. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:41, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Code (band) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Code (band) 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/The Code (band) 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 template from the top of the article. Northamerica1000(talk) 07:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Carabinieri, new to this but noticed your post from 2007 seeking more information on Battle of Tarnawka in early-mid September 1914. Have you identified more detail re this. Some references in a 2010 diary - "War Diary of My Prussian Grandfather" Kurt Asimis, ISBN 13: 9780981329406. I am trying to track history of my German grandfather who is likely to have been captured by the Russians around this time and location. Beuthner (talk) 10:48, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Beuthner[reply]

DYK prep set assembly

Carabinieri, I noticed that you shifted about the prep sets overnight, while constructing your own. I wanted to let you know why I was undoing some of your shifts.

First, I try to tailor sets so that all if not most of the hooks will be seen during the day of the local country. So I try to avoid U.S. hooks in a set, like prep 2, which will eventually run during the U.S. overnight hours. At most, I'd use one; in this case, I had zero, and now there are two.

Second, I try to list the more impressive articles earlier, unless they happen to be ideal for the quirky slot. So the unimpressive "cultural homogenization" hook, which was inserted into a second slot, will be moving much later in the set.

Third, I'm pretty strict about not running two bios in a row. I'm puzzled as to why you have rearranged things so that you have two writer bios in a row in prep 3, but one of them will be moving back to prep 2.

I will try to make sure the arts and sports hooks are properly spread out when I'm done. I'm happy to discuss this further. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:07, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There was a discussion about whether or not to try to run hooks during the day hours of the country they deal with back in 2007 (Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know/Archive_18#Priority_articles_take_2) and it was pretty much rejected. In any case, the current guideline is also to try and spread hooks about the same country around, particularly articles about the U.S., which there tend to be a lot of. I generally try to move the unimpressive hooks to the middle of the set (generally I feel that we shouldn't use them at all), but I thought the one about cultural homogenization was better than most. I don't see why two bios shouldn't be next to each other since that is a fairly weak similarity as opposed to them being about the same country or both being about sports or art, etc. For example, since you swapped the hooks, PREP2 now contains two hooks about music, while PREP3 doesn't have any.--Carabinieri (talk) 15:32, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't move any music hooks—centerless grinding and Noureddine Aba were swapped with cultural homogenization and Jami Floyd—and I'm not sure I'd count Mai as one, since it's a film and only tangentially about music (the star of the film had previously been a singer rather than an actress). Two bios in a row is specifically listed as to be avoided in WP:DYKSG#J4: "Try to avoid having two hooks of the same general type next to one another in the update (for example, two US hooks or two bio hooks together)." Since bios (or US hooks) should never be more than half of the total, it's not hard to keep them separated, especially with seven hooks and a maximum of three bios as now.
With all things being equal, I do like to try not to bury a hook when it won't be seen. The proportion of US hooks isn't so high at the moment that we need to run several during US nighttime, though I suspect I've gone further than I need in the other direction. (A lot has changed in DYK since 2007, as best I can determine.) As for the unimpressive articles, we don't have a mechanism for not using ones that have been passed. My philosophy for them is to slot them lower rather than higher, and certainly not in the second spot, which (with the third) I try to keep for those really good articles that don't have an image along with them. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
For some reason I had Noureddine Aba pegged as music-related in my mind. Oops. I still agree with the overall sentiment voiced in 2007, that people aren't generally more interested in reading about their own country than about others. And if they are, Wikipedia's objective should be to enlighten them about what's happening beyond those borders.--Carabinieri (talk) 16:11, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's inevitable that people are going to see hooks about other countries: US gets a maximum of half of a set, which means at least half is from the rest of the world, and other countries get one or maybe two in a single set. I'm looking at it the other way: that people who would most likely be interested in a hook are unlikely to get a chance to see it if it runs when they're asleep. Why should the only New Zealand hook in a week's time run during the country's overnight hours? Why not try to do it during some part of their daytime? BlueMoonset (talk) 17:13, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(watching) Last week I had three DYK while I was asleep, one causing headaches, - that is another reason to avoid running a hook on a country when that country sleeps, on top of living people liking to see (and have others see) hooks about them in daytime. I agree that 2007 is long ago, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:11, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't buy into the notion that people are more interested in hooks about the country they live in, which is what you're both assuming. I'm also not certain people generally write about the country they live in - I often don't.
I don't try to sell that. - We had a problem with Kreuzschule (assumed copy-vio, which wasn't), that I could have easily solved in a minute, whereas a different editor spent hours. So perhaps it's worth looking if a main contributor will we awake, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:31, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Composition roller

Nyttend (talk 11:41, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1969 Curaçao uprising

I reviewed your DYK for the 1969 Curaçao uprising. I found the video unhelpful and deleted it. For me to approve it for promotion, could you please cite the sentence I mentioned, regarding the $40 million in damages? I think the DYK would be ready for promotion after that. Leave me a talkback after that to let me know that you added the reference. Thanks! - ʈucoxn\talk 00:55, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Het Vrije Woord

Hello! Your submission of Het Vrije Woord 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! Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:15, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1969 Curaçao uprising

Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:21, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look. We have addressed your concern. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:41, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of "Re Fong Thin Choo" to DYK: Minor error

Hi, thanks for promoting "Re Fong Thin Choo" to "Template:Did you know/Queue/2". The "(building pictured)" phrase in the hook needs to be deleted as the suggested image was not used. — SMUconlaw (talk) 09:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Dweir Baabda

Hello! Your submission of Dweir Baabda 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! Chamal TC 11:16, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Coronal cloud

Hello! Your submission of Coronal cloud 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! Orlady (talk) 20:23, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Carnival of Huejotzingo

Orlady (talk) 00:02, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Carabinieri, I'm guessing that the Removed page wasn't around when you were last active on DYK. Basically, every promoted hook that is manually removed from a prep area, queue, or the main page DYK section should be noted here, including the reason it was pulled back. I've just added the Christina Maranci page; if there have been any others, please add them. (Note that this doesn't involve hooks swapped between prep areas or prep and queue, just ones that have been removed altogether, usually involving the reversal of a template promotion.) Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The reason I hadn't listed the nomination on the Removed page is that I hd promoted it only very briefly and didn't feel much damage had been done. Anyway, thanks for straightening that out for me.--Carabinieri (talk) 09:25, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Christina Maranci

Issues of notability have been fixed. Proudbolsahye (talk) 06:27, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Hook for Albert Stevens

Note: This is for DYK that is about to go live. (In Queue 5 Template:Did_you_know/Queue)

I wonder if there is still time to edit the hook for Albert Stevens? There was a lot of discussion and hashing out of the hook originally, but it seems a bit hard to parse in its current form. This is semantics perhaps.

Current:

How about this:

I think that is more concise, and I added a comma where I think it's needed. Thanks for looking at this and your other work! I like to saw logs! (talk) 03:07, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not getting around to this in time. I'd suggest taking issues like that to WT:DYK.--Carabinieri (talk) 22:47, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Coronal cloud

Carabinieri (talk) 16:03, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with CITIPEG hook

To be aware: Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Possible legal problems with DYK and hook in prep 2. No fault of yours, of course, this is something I've only just become aware of. Prioryman (talk) 21:37, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. It seems BlueMoonset has taken care of it.--Carabinieri (talk) 22:45, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, for the moment, though there is more work to be done to resolve this problem (don't worry, I'll take care of it). I'll notify you when I'm done so that you can re-review the article and what I anticipate will likely be a new hook. Prioryman (talk) 23:50, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shavarsh Krissian DYK

Source has been added. Thank you for raising these concerns. Proudbolsahye (talk) 04:57, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Chen Be-yue

Gatoclass 00:04, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Graph power

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:02, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apikoglu

I am trying to move the page to Apikoglu but theres already a page with a redirect on it. Its prohibiting me to do so. Proudbolsahye (talk) 22:35, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved it for you.--Carabinieri (talk) 00:24, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Bark bread

Orlady (talk) 00:03, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Sameh Fahmi

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:02, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stonebergia dyk

When you get a chance would you be able to give a review of my suggested alternative hook for the Stonebergia dyk? Thanks.--Kevmin § 16:38, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not having reviewed it in the first place. Someone else has gotten around to it, so everything seems to be in order now.--Carabinieri (talk) 01:47, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Carabinieri, Gatoclass has suggested a new ALT hook for this one. Since you were the one who objected to the various hook suggestions, can you please vet this one and give it the appropriate icon? Thank you.

I was also hoping to ask you that, when you raise objections to hooks or other matters in a review, that you include the appropriate icon at the beginning of your comment. Otherwise, if you leave the prior approval tick standing, it looks as if you're registering an issue, but that it isn't serious enough that it needs to stop the hook from being promoted, which is a very mixed message if you're saying a hook isn't interesting, a comment that usually means the hook should not be promoted. Another result of the new icon is that the hook will no longer show up in the # Verified column of the List of Hooks by Date table on the queue and nominations pages, so people looking to promote hooks won't waste time looking under a particular date. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:28, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of National Pyrotechnic Festival

Hello! Your submission of National Pyrotechnic Festival 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! Ruby 2010/2013 22:21, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Constantinople Massacre of 1821

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Mailov brothers DYK

I have replied and fixed the issues. Proudbolsahye (talk) 03:12, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Issues fixedProudbolsahye (talk) 04:52, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for SS Patria (1913)

Chamal TC 16:37, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for National Pyrotechnic Festival

The DYK project (nominate) 00:05, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Mezquital Valley

Hello! Your submission of Mezquital Valley 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! Yoninah (talk) 23:46, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Geology of Cyprus

Hello! Your submission of Geology of Cyprus 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! BlueMoonset (talk) 02:07, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see new note on DYK talk page. Yoninah (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Željko Reiner

Hello! Your submission of Željko Reiner 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! Harrias talk 17:49, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Mezquital Valley

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Geology of Cyprus

The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Long-tailed Ground Roller FAC

Hello. I’d like to thank you for commenting on the Long-tailed Ground Roller’s FAC nearly a year ago, and apologize for having to step away from Wikipedia prior to the FAC’s completion to deal with my studies. I've gone through all of the old commentary and believe that I have resolved it. I’m confident I have the time to finish the FAC, and I have re-nominated the article here. I would greatly appreciate it if you could give the article another look. Thanks. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 17:57, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CITIPEG DYK review

Could I please ask you to take a fresh look at Template:Did you know nominations/CITIPEG‎, which you reviewed earlier? Prioryman (talk) 22:24, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FOUR RFC

There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:19, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of North Sea Airways for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article North Sea Airways 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/North Sea Airways until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

gidonb (talk) 01:31, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]