User talk:Taemyr

Your recent edits

To CelticGreen's talk page have been removed as vandalism. Try being civil when dealing with people and do not behave in such a manner or your edits will be reverted, including uncivil comments left on talk pages. FYI, to factor a percentage is easy. You take the lower number and divide it by the higher number. Any messages left to cause problems for the sake of causing problems, as your were, are considered uncivil.IrishLass (talk) 14:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

If I leave you a message here, you can reply here. All I'll say is I'll remove your comments from my page too because CG sees them and will likely tear you a new one. SHE gets really pissed being called a he. It was a friendly warning. CG has one hell of a temper. And I, and MS Excel, disagree with your calculation. I'm just trying to keep the peace. I've seen the temper. As you weren't involved and most who were involved last night are really pissed at AnteaterZot, making more out of the situation really isn't going to help. Believe me. It really won't. Tempers are already hot on this, lets try and defuse, not infuse, please. IrishLass (talk) 14:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

How much is 100% of 10? Taemyr (talk) 14:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

About the warning, rather than about percentages. It is noted, I did not try to cause problems, although I agree that the tone of the edit in question left things to be desired. Taemyr (talk) 15:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to move on. It's obvious we disagree (about the percentage)but I don't want tempers to flair unnecessarily and I think we can agree to end with a "ooops" factor and move on. I will move on and hope you do the same. Have a good day. IrishLass (talk) 15:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

This exchange is related to WP:ANI#Severe incivility from User:IrishLass0128. —Random832 16:15, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Notice

Wikipedia operates on the principle that every contributor has a right if they wish to remain completely anonymous. Wikipedia policy on that issue is strictly enforced. Posting private information about a user with the intent to annoy, threaten or harass, specifically their (alleged) name and/or personal details, is strictly prohibited as harassment, and users who do that are often immediately blocked from editing Wikipedia. Such posting can cause offense or embarrassment to the victim of the posting, not least because it means that their name, and any personal criticism or allegations made against them can then appear on web searches.

If you have posted such information, please remove it immediately. Please then follow the link to this page and follow the instructions there, including emailing this address. It will then be removed from the archives of Wikipedia.

If you do not ensure that the personal information you posted is removed from this site you will be blocked from editing this site. Remember: Wikipedia's privacy policy is there to protect the privacy of every user, including you. MBisanz ^talk 07:15, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I have posted no such information. Taemyr (talk) 11:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Its a semantical thing that really the only way people can get across that they are serious about not having their old name which contains personal information revealed (and is findable in the user rename log) is to invoke the RTV. Saying "I've been renamed and don't want my old name posted because it has personal information in it" is a bit on the WP:BEANS side making it seem like its only a personal preference, and not part of our WP:OUTING guideline. My main reason to post the warning was to preclude a "well X doesn't seem like a name you'd want to hide from" or a "and per this rename log, you haven't vanished" which would've been disclosing personal info. MBisanz ^talk 18:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting idea, might I suggest that since people who have issues with a former identity are usually touchy on the subject, Emailusering your idea (which is reasonable) might get a better answer (and cut bitey people like me out of the picture). MBisanz ^talk 01:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Dildo Museum

I restored the redirect. Thanks! NawlinWiki (talk) 12:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

kongregate

My sincere apologies, i have no idea why i reverted that, neither do i even have any recollection of doing so, i will try to be more careful in the future. --UltraMagnus (talk) 17:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Tenmei

Hello, Taemyr, could you guide the user how to behave to editors, and not to do in the AFD? I had not had any chance to meet him directly, but his behaviors on there and relevant pages are, I think getting out of line with personal attacks against me (false accusation, poor analysis on my other contributions, etc). The user does not seem to realize how he has poorly behaved on me, or to pretend to know nothing. At least he is trying to listen to your comment, could you read his newest thread, and direct him properly? Thanks.--Caspian blue (talk) 23:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

“ The sum of Caspian blue's contributions affirm my dour pessimism. If Caspian blue is joined by other like-minded tag team editors who similarly feign wounded indignation, angered offense, and stumbling-block misunderstandings as a disruptive tactic, the success of that strategy is virtually assured. Any hopes for collaborative work on this article are dashed. In the face of what seems like adolescent nationalistic ardour, any scholarly collaboration becomes quickly pointless -- especially in light of the entirely ineffective dispute resolution processes now in place.

Wikipedia has been proven to be quite ill-equipped to deal with a concerted, agenda-driven attack of the sort which has been directed at Liancourt rocks. Without a strategy to avert the kind of failure which characterizes that article about an outcrop in the what the Koreans call the Eastern Sea and others call the Sea of Japan, this quickly becomes worse than a waste of time. The dignified and sober Taemyr asks "What is best?" Stifle thinks deletion is a better course of action. I myself don't know, but I would invite consideration of the following:

”

I am deeply offended and shocked to see such viciousness of his verbal attacks.--Caspian blue (talk) 23:52, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:ANI#User:Tenmei's abusing AfD and personal attacks

Hello, Taemyr. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Caspian blue (talk) 01:27, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Retract your personal attacks

It is quite amaze to see that you rather harshly attack wounded people who has been humiliated by Tenmei as defending him and saying very mildly. My block log has nothing to do with the report and you publicize it to attack me just like Tenmei did. You have no right to do so, (an admin said that saying past block log is a "clear personal attack"). LordAmeth gave him a warning for his personal attack, and you're defending such vicious verbal attacks and adding yourself in the drama. Thus, you are proven that you're unqualified to lecture "civility" and "good faith". I can see ill faith comment by you. If you would not remove such attack, well, I would ask other admin who're there. REGARDS.--Caspian blue (talk) 19:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Considering the fact that your block log involves previous instances of attempts to use NPA to solve content conflics I feel that it is relevant. Taemyr (talk) 20:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I say again, retract "your deliberate personal attack". The AFD was filled with his personal attacks at me out of blue. I don't feel that your personal attack is relevant to my report.--Caspian blue (talk) 21:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

No, the AFD was filled with his more or less meaningless rambling. Very little of which could in any way be construed as a personal attack. And before you jump on this, very little does not mean nothing.Taemyr (talk) 21:22, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

No, I'm rather speaking your personal attack at the ANI. Besides, three administrators perceived that Tenmei's comment are personal attacks and gave him a warning. That's why the closing admin remarked the AFD as such. I repeatedly say to you "retract your personal attack" and apologize to me. That is intentionally addressed by you to attack me. Your comment is to blame me to report him at the page from ill faith.--Caspian blue (talk) 21:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I made no personal attack in the AfD. The only mention I have of you in the AfD is as an editor that should be considered before unilaterally redirecting. Taemyr (talk) 21:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

You made personal attack at the WP:ANI (I fix the place), so retract your insult against me. It is quite irony to see that a user like you who made personal attacks based on ill faith, lecture to people to assume good faith.--Caspian blue (talk) 21:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I made no personal attacks. Since the other blocks where the result of a run in with a sock farm they are not relevant, but it did not seem that way looking at your log. To make this clear I have made this edit [1]. Taemyr (talk) 21:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

You made another personal attack, ha, what are you? what are you thinking? You're escalating the situation with such vicious analysis by your part. That is not a redactation, but another mockery. It is quite obvious that due to people like you, Wikipedia made WP:CIVIL policy. How dare you.--Caspian blue (talk) 21:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Korea#Japan-Korea_Annexation_Treaty

You asked Caspian blue to attend the thread, but before that, I'd like to know what you think of my last comment. Thank you.--Michael Friedrich (talk) 15:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

My thoughts on your last comments was that I don't really know enough about Korean history to continue the discussion in a meaningful sense. Taemyr (talk) 16:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for replying.--Michael Friedrich (talk) 17:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Yonsei

Caspian blue has turned his anti-Japanese POV to another article I was working on -- this time involving a subject which is far away from where I might have expected us to clash. It is arguably possible that, having watch-listed my edits, Caspian blue was led to become involved in an article about fourth-generation emigrants/immigrants of Japanese descent in Latin America, North America and elsewhere in the world.

It may be helpful for you to be made aware of a potential tempest-in-a-teapot which is brewing at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation#Yonsei? I hope to avoid a wrong step; and there's not much you can do to help me avoid mistakes ... but I will appreciate it if you notice anything which you wish I would have written differently or not at all. I can't do much about Caspian blue, but I can try to learn how to do better myself -- even if it means learning things "the hard way." --Tenmei (talk) 00:41, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Read WP:AGF. It's entirely within the real of possibility that Caspian blue was unaware of the Japanese term and wanted Yonsei to redirect to Yonsei University. When he found the article already in place he did the correct thing, at least from his understanding of the term, in moving it out of the way to create a DAB.

As for the AfD, note WP:Speedy Keep criteria 1. AfD's are simply the wrong venue for suggesting mergers. Sadly this criteria no longer applies, as we have a deletion !vote.

The fate of Yonsei is not really helped by your posts on the talk page, since you focus on Caspian Blue, rather than on what actually is the primary topic for this term. There is little there that helps an uninvolved editor to conclude that the Japanese immigrants is a more important meaning. Taemyr (talk) 18:38, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Taemyr -- As for what Caspian blue knew or didn't know, NO -- see diff. There was no misunderstanding, no innocent mistake. This is naught but another tempest-in-a-teapot contrived by someone who logs on to Wikipedia for the express purpose of finding or creating any pretext as causus belli. To pretend otherwise is to wander into a peculiar Never-neverland of non-Euclidean logic.

Ah, so the case was not that Caspian wanted Yonsei to redirect to the university. The case was that he thought it already did. This does not really make a difference to my point. Taking WP:AGF to heart there is nothing here but an editor who does not share your view that the Nikkei generation is more important than the Seoul University. Also be careful about making up terms as you go along, in logic euclidean is a type of relation; Euclidean relation. Taemyr (talk) 03:13, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for becoming more involved than I'd anticipated. Regrdless of how this eventually ends, I'm still extremely pleased with that edit which began No, Tenmei .... -- diff. I don't understand how to apply the reasoning in other circumstances yet. Which means that the good advice is not yet "absorbed," but I'm still trying to figure out how ....

I have copied the thread to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation#Yonsei. ‎

Caspian blue apparently objects to collapsing the text at Talk:Yonsei while moving further development of the thread to the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation#Yonsei ? I'm not going to try to guess what this is supposed to mean? Maybe it's just a matter of being opposed to anything I say or do?

• [2]
• [3]
• [4]

I'm encouraged by the modest edit history addendum. For the past few days, I've typed "Wikipedia is not a battlefield" in edit history boxes; and now Caspian blue demonstrates the sincerest form of flattery by imitation.

However, I'm not going to guess publicly about what the edits above are supposed to achieve?

I don't see what rationale allows Caspian blue to delete the notice that I've copied the thread to a WikiProject talk page ...? I refuse even to speculate. --Tenmei (talk) 22:47, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, in general one should be careful about changing talk page comments that other people have made. So when changes you make to other peoples comments gets reverted it's best to leave it be. Also, I consider it best to keep discussions about the future of a page at that page in order to make it accessible for other editors at a later stage. If someone in a year or so comes by and wonders what reasons were behind the decisions that are made now WikiProject Disambiguation is not the place they will look. To request input from a greater community a link suffices. Taemyr (talk) 03:13, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Tenmei and RFC on Severance Hospital

Your input on Talk:Severance Hospital#RfC:Are three templates legitimate or simple trolling? would be appreciated along with Tenmei's tagging three templates to Yonsei Severance Hospital redirect page[5][6]. Thanks.--Caspian blue 15:27, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

HIJACKED RfC

This is the sequence of edits which are wrongly described as harassment. A simple question about the need for a credible citation consistent with WP:V is twisted into a Gordian Knot for which I am not to be blamed:

• 1. diff: In order to avert a continuing edit war, I initially posted an RfC-template at the top of the article, e.g., Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Economy, trade, and companies.
  • EDIT WAR development: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th

• 2. diff: In less than one minute, I discovered to my surprise that Caspian blue had hijacked the RfC

• 3. diff: I posted a disclaimer on this page ... and the subject was simple: whether a citation is or is not needed for the explicit phrase "Yonsei Severance Hospital"?

• 4. diff: I manually posted a non-controversial statement of the RfC subject on the appropriate page ... but this effort was subsequently hijacked as well.

• 5. diff: Caspian blue defines the RfC as harassment, when -- as shown by the edit history -- this is naught but another self-created charade.

PROBLEM: Caspian blue alone deserves to be held accountable for disingenuous complaints which Caspian blue has created.
QUESTION: What about the initial RfC issue? Without credible citations supporting the use of the explicit phrase "Yonsei Severance Hospital," is it not "trolling" and not disruptive to delete the unsourced phrase after repeatedly asking for compliance with WP:V?

I do not know how to address this needlessly complicated mess. --Tenmei (talk) 06:12, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, first off; have you read [7]? Last time you criticized Korean sources you based that critique on babelfish translations. The term Yonsei Severance Hospital is used in the English sources that Caspian provides. So I don't think you have much of a case vis a vie use of the term. One might or might not actually need to be sourced, but it is so there isn't really a problem there.

Caspian blue is probably correct in classifying diffs such as this; [8] as trolling. Especially since it's a version that does not include the statement you object to.

I would rate Caspian's attempt to shift the focus of the RfC away from the content question as disruptive. Taemyr (talk) 09:48, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Taemyr -- NO. I am not the only one to try to check Caspian blue's soureces in an effort to move beyond this impasse, e.g., see Crossmr's investment of time and thought in re-examining sources which don't quite stand up to close scrutiny. diff.

OK, although the diff you provide only indicates research into what the official name is. Since no one is claiming that "Yonsei Severance Hospital" is an official name it's a bit less relevant. I have ñot checked if Crossmr have done research beyond this. Taemyr (talk) 20:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Taemyr -- NO. This modest question is informed by not-inconsiderable research. The specific phrase "Yonsei Severance Hospital" does not appear to be a commonly published identification. The Hospital in Seoul appears to be named only Severance Hospital, and the request for credible English language sources supporting this synthesis-usage have not been forthcoming. diff; diff

• INSTEAD, the spew of extravagant language successfully poisons the atmosphere without restraint.

OK. I had missed that the english sources tacks "University" into the title. Note that WP:RSUE only applies when English sources exists. Taemyr (talk) 20:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Taemyr -- NO. The Korean-language source Taemyr cites -- diff -- does not appear to yield the this explicit phrase as a translated name. Yes, I went to the trouble of translating both Korean cites. Yes, there does appear to be the associated medical facility at Yongdong which is called "Yongdong Severance Hospital". Yes, there does appear to be an association medical facility at In'chon called "In'chon Severance Hospital". However, the medical facility founded in the 19th century in Seoul appears to have been named only "Severance Hospital" in the 19th century, in the 20th century and in the 21st century.

• INSTEAD, the spew of escalating complaints language successfully poisons the atmosphere without restraint.

OK. Taemyr (talk) 20:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Taemyr -- NO. My consistent postings have tried to work towards modestly position the WP:V#Burden of evidence (using English language sources) squarely on Caspian blue's shoulders, which is neither harassing, trolling or disruptive. My my attempts to be both firm and non-confrontational been accompanied by proofs of specific and not inconsiderable efforts to explain and to turn the tenor of discussion towards constructive resolution -- diff.

• INSTEAD, the spew of invective successfully poisons the atmosphere without restraint ... and an uninvolved reader coming upon this dispute would likely construe the problems as mere bickering or as some kind of modern Capulet-Montague feud.

Excessive tagging is frequently seen as trolling. Especially since you also removed the offending statement. A simple {{fact}}, or the removal of the name, would suffice.

Again, English sources is preferred. But if no English sources can be found, and sources exists in a different language then those can be used.

It *is* mere bickering, you are edit warring over the inclusion of a name. Taemyr (talk) 20:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Taemyr -- NO. The lesson to be learned here is counter-intuitive.

• Caspian blue is right to contrive drama -- it works!
• I am wrong to focus on WP:V and research -- it doesn't work!

In my view, this is both unsatisfactory and oddly perverse. --Tenmei (talk) 15:23, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

The reason Caspian blue's approach seems to work, is not really that he contrive drama. It is that he takes every opportunity to pounce on mistakes. You do not only focus on WP:V you include a continual barrage of irrelevancies about Caspian Blue's conduct. The important facts in your last reply is (1) that you have gotten the Korean sources translated. And (2), which is only provided in the diffs, that the closest the English sources comes to "Yonsei Severance Hospital" is that it writes "Yonsei University Severance Hospital". It is also of interest that other editors have drawn similar conclusions from their research. The rest is noise, and that kind of noise leaves the door open for Caspian to focus on those mistakes that inevitably creep in. Taemyr (talk) 20:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Noise

Pablo Picasso, Portrait of Gertrude Stein, 1906, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City. When someone commented that Stein didn't look like her portrait, Picasso replied, "She will".

I didn't see this until today. I'll have to come back to it tomorrow. Noise is a new concept for me. --Tenmei (talk) 07:24, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I've returned to re-read your comments several times. The attractive concept of "noise" appears novel to me. At this point, I'm uncomfortably resistant to some of what you appear to encompass within the ambit of "noise" .... At the same time, I'm mulling over what might be the potential consequences if I were to proceed as if your analysis were simply correct, accurate, on-point. If so, then what?

A tentative exploration of Noise (disambiguation) led me to Noise (economic) -- potentially useful, suggestive, helpfully parsed presentation of related ways to to think about this topic. --Tenmei (talk) 04:51, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Signal noise, which should be at noise (Information theory). Taemyr (talk) 22:04, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Aha. Yes, I take your point both here and elsewhere. A rose is a rose is a rose .... --Tenmei (talk) 05:45, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Development from seed to seedling.

Your words produce constructive results

Taemyr -- The seed of an idea you planted here on your talk page seems to have germinated in an unanticipated context -- see diff. The edit history at WP:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty/Workshop makes it easy to identify precisely when your 2008 suggestion opened up a new possibility between 01:39 and 01:55 on 29 May 2009 2009.

GIGO ≥ Noise (economic)

GIGO ≥ Noise (information theory)

WP:TLDR = too many words; and therefore, some/many/specific words = GIGO

Aha, yes -- I recall an enigmatic phrase from my youth which I remember because I couldn't grasp the reasons for the awkward preposition: "to the most patient farmer, the best harvest grows." --Tenmei (talk) 17:00, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Cui bono

You offered constructive comments at diff. In my view, Cicero's Latin phrase -- Cui bono -- applies in that setting and it applies no less well here.

Cui bono = "Who benefits?"

Bluntly, I have benefited from your contribution. I have benefited from reading and thinking about your effort to interpose a constructive point-of view. No harm comes from simply acknowledging the usefulness of your participation. I'm not sure that I what I did post at the time implied any kind of "thank you." I want to remedy that failing by thanking you now. --Tenmei (talk) 19:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Nit on image sourcing

Not an important thing at all.... I noted that in Photon Belt, you claimed that there is sourcing saying that Image:Pleiades large.jpg is from the Hubble Space Telescope. It may very well be - but I couldn't find that in the image data - just a NASA template that mentioned in passing that if using images from the HST, one needs to be aware that some of them are not under NASA public domain rules. Do you have more info from somewhere? --Alvestrand (talk) 20:54, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

from the information template: Source=The Pleiades, I have not actually checked that hubblesite.org is official. Taemyr (talk) 21:03, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Re your note

Thanks for the question - it is a phrase that gets around, although I'm not 100% sure where it comes from as I've never seen it expressed that way on any policy page ;) I'm guessing it's origin is WP:DGFA, which states "Wikipedia policy, which requires that articles and information be verifiable, avoid being original research, not violate copyright, and be written from a neutral point of view is not negotiable, and cannot be superseded by any other guidelines or by editors' consensus." I perhaps used it rather loosely though. What I meant to imply was that merely disliking a verifiable item of article content is not sufficient reason to remove it (with all the caveats of undue weight, reliable sources etc). I would only apply the 'policy trumps consensus' principle to our core policies and anything in place for legal reasons though - for anything else, consensus determines policy, so policy is consensus... at least, until a new consensus emerges. I hope that helps explain what I was getting at. EyeSerene^talk 18:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I see. I think that would need a fundamental shift in, amongst other things, the principles of the Wikimedia Foundation, but stranger things have happened... I wish you all the best, anyway ;) EyeSerene^talk 17:23, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Illegal immigration to the United States

If you feel that the page no longer needs to be semi-protected, feel free to file a request for unprotection at WP:RFPP. I will defer to the judgment of the reviewing admin there. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 09:34, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I feel a bit uncomfortable with the fact that no thread have been started at the talk page yet. Taemyr (talk) 09:44, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Illegal immigration to the United States Taemyr (talk) 09:57, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay thank you. Cirt (talk) 09:58, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Mass scale reversion.

{{helpme}} Special:Contributions/151.124.246.1 have been removing all games from the category Category:Free video games,Category:Open source video games and similar. I would like these edits reverted, since it would be better to take this to WP:CfD. However there are a couple of hundred edits so it would be preferable that someone with access to semi-automatic tools could do so. Considering that the edits are good faith, and hence not vandalism, where can I ask for help? Taemyr (talk) 18:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. shirulashem (talk) 19:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Something came up IRL and I should be back at it in about an hour. There are about 60 edits left to revert. Sorry for the delay. shirulashem (talk) 20:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Np. Taemyr (talk) 20:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, done. shirulashem (talk) 20:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 31, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 5	31 January 2009	About the Signpost

Large portion of articles are orphans	News and notes: Ogg support, Wikipedia Loves Art, Jimbo honored
Wikipedia in the news: Flagged Revisions, Internet Explorer add-on	Dispatches: In the news
WikiProject Report: Motto of the Day	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 22:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 6	8 February 2009	About the Signpost

News and notes: Elections, licensing update, and more	Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's future, WikiDashboard, and "wiki-snobs"
Dispatches: April Fools 2009 mainpage	WikiProject Report: WikiProject Music
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Template at Camberwell Baptist

I undid your delete but not with malice. Do me a favor and hold off any active response till we can talk.... travelling for a few days...Thank You--Buster7 (talk) 13:10, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

The {{rescue}} template? It belongs in article space. Where it was already present. Seems a bit moot now though. Taemyr (talk) 03:03, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree that it is now moot.But let me explain the thought behind my duplicating it at the talk page.

• Many AfD articles are written by newbies...
• Newbies...when informed that their article is up for deletion (maybe within the first 1/2 hour) are in a tizzy and start to search for a reason why...
• Maybe they'll come to the talk page looking for an answer and see a friendlier notice than the one they just recieved...
• and they will be slightly relieved and less anxious. It's a way of lessoning the bite that they just got. A salve you might say.

So...while I know that it belongs in article space I hope than you can agree that it may also have a useful purpose in the talk space.--Buster7 (talk) 01:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Template_talk:Rescue/Archive_2#Other_proposal Taemyr (talk) 04:06, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Template_talk:Rescue/Archive_2#Talkpage_or_article_page.3F. If you do not like the template being on the main page, take it up on the talk page, or conduct a straw poll. Right now all of the rescue templates belong on the main space page, with the Afd template. Ikip (talk) 15:36, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009

From the editor — A new leaf

Commons Picture of the Year
Picture of the Year 2008 begins voting

News and notes
Flagged Revisions, historical image discovery, and more

In the news
Political tiff, error repeated in press, predictions of doom

Dispatches
How busy was 2008?

WikiProject report
WikiProject Gaelic games

Discussion report
Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations

Features and admins
Approved this week

Technology report
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Arbitration report
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist.
If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 07:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Alternative to notability

Hello! I am working on an objective alternate to notability in my userspace. Please read User:A Nobody/Inclusion guidelines and offer any suggestions on its talk page, which I will consider for revision purposes. If you do not do so, no worries, but if you wish to help, it is appreciated. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 01:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:

• Philosophers analyze Wikipedia as a knowledge source
• An automated article monitoring system for WikiProjects
• News and notes: Wikimania, usability, picture contest, milestones
• Wikipedia in the news: Lessons for Brits, patent citations
• Dispatches: Hundredth Featured sound approaches
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Islam
• Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Lazdynai

I know and understand the rule. However the correct menaing for disambiguation is between different topics. While the town is a redirect, it is a potential for separate page. Please keep in mind that disambig is a guideline, to make things consistent. However unlike policies, guidelines allow some lax. In this case there is no harm to do how I did, but I think it is useful: is someone looks for a town, they still don't know which one and may think that only one Lazdynai town existed and go to wrong page without thinking that may be a proper choice would be described in Vilnius district. My version of disambig prevents this confusion, and this definitely trumps following the guidelite "to the letter". Please let me know if my explanation is still unclear. - 7-bubёn >t 22:11, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Taking the points as they come. Yes, dab's disambiguate topics, in this case the two of those topics are covered on the same page so there is no need to disambiguate between those two. When the redirect is expanded the need for a dab will emerge, but that will then be an easy fix. Both policies and guidelines allow lax, see WP:Policies. There is two harmful points about the current solution. (1) Readers looking for Krasnoznamensk must load an extra page. And (2) readers following the dab link from Lazdynai and on to Lazdynai (town) will be more, not less, confused when they find themselves back at the article they just left. In general it is a bad idea to try to use dab pages to explain matters, content belong in articles. In this case the best solution is to incorporate the information that the Lazdynai district grew from the Lazdynai town into the lede of Lazdynai. Taemyr (talk) 11:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

(1) Loading extra page happens always when you don't know what you are looking for and the description in the disambig page tells you nothing. (2) There is no dab link in Lazdynai to follow. (3) Anyway, the issue is moot now, since I found out that the Lithuanian one was only erroneously called town in English sources; it was a village of a couple houses, log gone, so it is highly improbable that any meaningful info will be found about it beyond its name and location. - 7-bubёn >t 16:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

• Books extension enabled
• News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
• Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

• News and notes: Commons, conferences, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Politics, more politics, and more
• Dispatches: 100 Featured sounds milestone
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Christianity
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Summits of the Americas

Thanks for your help with the image description. I copied your language in descriptive summaries for the other related articles. --Tenmei (talk) 01:42, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009

Unsubscribe · Single-page · Full edition »

  — 16 March 2009

• News and notes: License update, Commons cartoons, films milestone, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Manufactured scandal, Wikipedia assignments, and more
• Dispatches: New FAC and FAR appointments
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 23 March 2009

• From the editor: Reviewing books for the Signpost
• Special report: Abuse Filter is enabled
• News and notes: Flaggedrevs, copyright project, fundraising reports, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Alternatives, IWF threats, and more
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 30 March 2009

• From the editor: Follow the Signpost with RSS and Twitter
• Special report: Community weighs license update
• News and notes: End of Encarta, flagged revisions poll, new image donation, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Censorship, social media in schools, and more
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:38, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 6 April 2009

• Special report: Interactive OpenStreetMap features in development
• News and notes: Statistics, Wikipedia research and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikia Search abandoned, university plagiarism, and more
• Dispatches: New FAC and FAR nomination process
• WikiProject report: WikiProject China
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 19:49, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 13 April 2009

• License update: Licensing vote begins
• News and notes: WMF petitions Obama, longer AFDs, UK meeting, and more
• Dispatches: Let's get serious about plagiarism
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Color
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:59, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 27 April 2009

• Book reviews: Reviews of Lazy Virtues: Teaching Writing in the Age of Wikipedia
• News and notes: Usability study, Wiki Loves Art, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia Art dispute, and brief headlines
• WikiProject report: Interview on WikiProject Final Fantasy
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:54, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Sandboxe

You may want to comment or merely observe silently as the thread unfolds at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Attack page. --Tenmei (talk) 00:51, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 11 May 2009

• News and notes: Wikimania 2010, usability project, link rot, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Quote hoax replicated in traditional media, and more
• Dispatches: WikiProject Birds reaches an FA milestone
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Michael Jackson
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 18 May 2009

• From the editor: Writers needed
• Special report: WikiChemists and Chemical Abstracts announce collaboration
• Special report: Embassies sponsor article-writing contests in three languages
• News and notes: Wiki Loves Arts winners, Wikimania Conference Japan, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Arbitrator blogs, French government edits, brief headlines
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Opera
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 13:38, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 25 May 2009

• License update: Licensing vote results announced, resolution passed
• News and notes: New board member, flagged revisions, Eurovision interviews
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia: threat or menace?
• WikiProject report: WikiProject LGBT studies
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:14, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Lessie Wei AfD Tweaks

Hey. I just wanted to say thanks for spotting my linking error in that AfD. I overlook little details like that sometime and like in this case, those errors can sometimes be problematic. Thanks again. OlYeller^Talktome 19:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Seeking help in presenting thoughts clearly

I write to ask for prospective help. In a sense, I'm only interested laying the foundation for the I-don't-know-what in the future. Perhaps this may be construed as taking steps to avert problems might be mitigated by a timely comment or suggestion ...?

ArbCom remedy

Voting is underway at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty/Proposed decision. In part because of "Evidence presented by Caspian blue", the locus of dispute was modified and "evidence in the case has expanded to include other disputes in which Tenmei has been involved." You will be surprised to learn that Taemyr has anything at all to do with this so-called "evidence" at "Tenmei's wikihounding and trolling". I don't think this timeless prose is worth struggling to read, but I mention the links to explain a bit more of the reasons why I'm reaching out to you specifically

ArbCom findings of fact included:

• 3.2.2 Tenmei and dispute resolution. "... many of Tenmei's talkpage posts and submissions during this arbitration case have been very difficult for other editors to understand, to the point that experienced participants in dispute resolution have had difficulty in following them, despite what we accept as Tenmei's good-faith best efforts to assist us in resolving the case."

ArbCom remedies included:

• 3.3.2 Tenmei and dispute resolution: "Should Tenmei become involved in any further disputes with other editors, whether concerning the content of articles (beyond ordinary day-to-day editing issues) or more formal dispute resolution procedures, he shall seek the assistance of a volunteer mentor or adviser to work with him in maximizing the value of his presentation by assisting him with formulating it in a clear and civil fashion."

• 3.3.3 Editors advised: "Editors who encounter difficulties in communicating with others on-wiki are advised to seek help from others in presenting their thoughts clearly, particularly when disputes arise or when dispute resolution is sought."

It is clear that ArbCom anticipates future difficulties; and I guess I need to do the same. Arguably, my previous postings on your talk page are congruent with exactly the sort of thing ArbCom wants me to do in future; and I'm willing to invest in learning about how to disagree without being disagreeable.

If you want to discuss this off-wiki, I'm working on figuring out how to set up an appropriate e-mail address.. -- Tenmei (talk) 17:21, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

First, leaving email addresses in the open is not a good idea, since the spambots will catch it. It's much better to point to the Special:EmailUser feature. Ie. since you have a registered email address I can send email to you via Special:EmailUser/Tenmei.

Second, the finding and remedies of ArbCom would end the way it did without any intervention from CaspianBlue. The reason for this is simple, Teeninvestor's use of sources on Tang Dynasty is well within policy, ArbCom knows this and could refer the whole issue to WP:RSN. This means that the case was accepted specifically to look at user conduct.

This brings us to my advise to you; Keep the conduct and motivations of other editors out of your arguments. In a content dispute such comments are never germane, and essentially never helpful.

Other than that, if you are looking for a mentor pr remedy 2 know that;

I edit sporadically and might be gone for weeks without prior warning.

I start in a new job in August, and might drop out from wikipedia altogether then. This too will be without prior warning.

English is not my primary language and you should seek a mentor that is good at written English.

Thanks for the note. Taemyr (talk) 21:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

• From the editor: Browsing the archives
• Book review: Review of The Future of the Internet
• Scientology: End of Scientology arbitration brings blocks, media coverage
• News and notes: Picture of the Year, Wikipedia's first logo, Board elections, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Tamil Wikipedia, Internet Watch Foundation, and more
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 23:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

• Book review :Review of Cyberchiefs: Autonomy and Authority in Online Tribes
• News and notes: License update, Google Translate, GLAM conference, Paid editing
• Wikipedia in the news: In the Google News, London Review of Books, and more
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Chemistry
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 22 June 2009

• Special report:Study of vandalism survival times
• News and notes: Wikizine, video editing, milestones
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia impacts town's reputation, assorted blogging
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 6 July 2009

• News and notes: Commons grant, license change, new chapters, usability and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia and kidnapping, new comedy series
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Food and Drink
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:40, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 27 July 2009

• From the editor: Welcome to the build-your-own edition of the Signpost
• Board elections: Board of Trustees elections draw 18 candidates for 3 seats
• Wiki-Conference: Wikimedians and others gather for Wiki-Conference New York
• Wikipedia Academy: Volunteers lead Wikipedia Academy at National Institutes of Health
• News and notes: Things that happened in the Wikimedia world
• Wikipedia in the news: Assorted news coverage of Wikipedia
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Oregon
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 13:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 3 August 2009

• News and notes: WMF elections, strategy wiki, museum partnerships, and much more
• Wikipedia in the news: Dispute over Rorschach test images, and more
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 06:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 10 August 2009

• Special story: Tropenmuseum to host partnered exhibit with Wikimedia community
• News and notes: Tech news, strategic planning, BLP task force, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Shrinking community, GLAM-Wiki, and more
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 05:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 17 August 2009

• From the editor: Where should the Signpost go from here?
• Radio review: Review of Bigipedia radio series
• News and notes: Three million articles, Chen, Walsh and Klein win board election, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Reports of Wikipedia's imminent death greatly exaggerated, and more
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:26, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Offense

See diff

Taemyr --Please strike your comment at Wikipedia talk:Verifiability. In that context, it is undeserved and it offends. --Tenmei (talk) 00:16, 21 August 2009 (UTC) changed permalink from older revision to the actuall diff in question Taemyr (talk) 13:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

No. Your application of WP:BURDEN often runs into problems because very many editors fails to understand exactly what you are complaining about. I am not the only one feeling this, as seen by Arb.comb. FOF on Inner_Asia_during_the_Tang_Dynasty, see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Tang_Dynasty#Tenmei_and_Inner_Asia_during_the_Tang_Dynasty Taemyr (talk) 13:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

The following captures the cusp of offense. The derisive word choice devalues, condemns, dismisses. Your restatement stands on a different basis. The former continues to offend, even though the thread has now moved towards closure. The latter is unhelpful, uninstructive, unwelcome -- wrong because it is inconsistent with endorsed hortatory principle #10, that the " community has a forward-looking approach to interpersonal disputes" -- and the judgmental mistake is quite different.

because

• ... "you tend to apply ... without at all making it clear which statements you disagree with"
• ... [you tend to apply] "to statements that are already sourced"

NOT THE SAME AS

because

• ... "very many editors fails to understand exactly what you are complaining about"

No. Unlike Capsian blue, whose feigned offense developed into a pattern, my edit history supports no inference that I admit to being aggrieved without cause or thought.

For emphasis, I reiterate one word -- "uninstructive." Your initial comment is offensive and it is uninstructive. Your restatement is uncharitable because it is uninstructive. I try to learn from my mistakes. In this instance, I am learning from yours. --Tenmei (talk) 15:11, 21 August 2009 (UTC)