Jump to content

User talk:Armbrust/Archive 10

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12→Archive 15



Contents

More boldness and RPP

Like during our previous discussion, you are not an admin. Please explain your removals of the edits that clarified the position of your actions within the boundaries of administrators. [1] →Στc. 04:09, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

According to WP:TPO: "you should not edit or delete the comments of other editors without their permission". And as I said in the previous discussion, I highly doubt you opinion, that requests at WP:RFPP can be handled only by administrators (with the exception if protection is required). Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 10:44, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes on paper you can close RFPPs however 1) you should identify as a non admin in the interests of openness. Ja people can check but they generally don't. 2)You will need to be prepared to deal with the fact that there is no practical way to stop people from appealing to an admin by whatever method they happen to chose.©Geni 01:25, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Garbage

Dear Armbrust, I inform you that Digirami has defined your admonition of 28 February 2012 as garbage and continues to delete it along with all the warnings of criticism he received, although it is strictly forbidden as it is considered vandalism. Also rejects any form of dialogue, remains immovable on its position. Thanks. Greetings.--93.56.241.95 (talk) 10:31, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

According to WP:BLANKING: "Policy does not prohibit users, whether registered or unregistered users, from removing comments from their own talk pages. [...] The removal of material from a user page is normally taken to mean that the user has read and is aware of its contents." According to this you are violation the three revert rule, because "restoring talk page notices is not a listed exception to the three-revert rule". Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 10:41, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

ANI discussion (re:Cybermud) revert

I've commented out your archiving of that section, as it seems to me to only be half done--while I did block the user for violating the topic ban, there is still an open question as to whether this should also cause the topic ban to be extended. I hope you don't mind; if your intention was that you felt no steps needed to be taken on the topic ban, could you explain why? Qwyrxian (talk) 13:31, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 13:38, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! - Admin anniversary message

Thank you! Armbrust, you're involved in so many things here... Deryck C. 11:23, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Aye, I also thank you. I'd completely forgotten the date my rfa closed. Cheers! ​—DoRD (talk)​ 04:19, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Wow - that had completely snuck up on me - I didn't even realize today was the anniversary! Thank you very much for the message, and, for that matter, for reminding me that today is the day! Hope all is well. Bobo. 00:10, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

+rollback

Added the flag for you. Thought you may find it useful. Best regards -- Samir 06:08, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:50, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

2012 All England Super Series Premier

Please use the talk page there to tell what you want instead of using non-saying templates, to give everybody the chance to satisfy you. For me there is no place for an appropriate inline citation, so please tell us what you want and we will do it. --Florentyna (talk) 19:22, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done Further discussion should take place at the articles talk page. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 20:57, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for birthday message

Thanks for the well wishes, its the first time I've gotten one in the 4 and half years since I added that infobox to my user page -- Marcsin | Talk 02:57, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

CAMRA at MfD

Sorry about that - got confused as to the status of dab pages, which aren't really articles. Havet taken it to AfD. PamD 07:51, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 10:01, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

CFDS

Hi, I just wanted to leave a note that I'd commented on several of your recent nominations at WP:CFD/S. Kudos on your hard work with these sports categories! Cheers, -- Black Falcon (talk) 23:25, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Corrected some and withdrawn some others. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 00:39, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. Would you mind if I renominated Category:Article Alerts at full CFD (since Headbomb objected)? I agree with your proposal and don't mind tackling the subcategories. Best, -- Black Falcon (talk) 02:02, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
I would support the rename if nominated. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 02:03, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 March 11#Category:Article Alerts. I've not yet nominated the subcategories, pending the outcome of this discussion; once the main category is renamed, however, I will list the others for speedy renaming. I must temporarily take a break (a few hours at most) but I'll revisit my and your comments on the WP:CFD/S page as soon as possible. Best, -- Black Falcon (talk) 03:19, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in replying to your comment at WP:CFD/S. I had off-wiki commitments these past two days and, as a result, was unable to respond. I appreciate your prompt action and have no objection, based on your reasoning, to the darts category being renamed. Best, and thanks, -- Black Falcon (talk) 02:21, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem. It is however at full discussion now, thus it can't be speedily renamed. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 09:05, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Your edits

Hello, I thought I responded to your concern well. All you said was "the same again", "the same again", "the same again." It seems you trying to avoid the issue. If you want the reference, click on the individual events. If you want precedence, I can point you towards the 2011 World Championships in Athletics article or the Athletics at the 2008 Summer Olympics article. As you can see, not every individual event is referenced. But if you click on the event, you will find the sources. The front results page is more of a guide to the real meat. If you have any questions, please ask. Philipmj24 (talk) 14:42, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

The section is clearly unsourced. If there other athletics articles, that have similar section without references, than maybe they should tagged too. The this bad precedent shouldn't continue. (I also want to note (without checking), that I'm very sure, that the references on the events sub-pages contain only primary sources. If this is true, than they could tagged with {{primary sources}}.) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 15:21, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
By the way following the same logic, why does the "Medal table" section need a reference? Everyone could just count the medals for the nations from the "Results" section. (This isn't an argument for removing the reference.) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 15:23, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Warning?

Do not warn me for reverting a sockpuppet. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:30, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

If this user is a sockpuppet, than why isn't the account blocked? Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 19:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
It is. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nangparbat. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
There is a SPI, but the account isn't blocked. See: Special:Contributions/Yogesh_Khandke. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 19:34, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Then you just warned the wrong person, I did not revert Yogesh Khandke. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Oops. My mistake. Sorry! Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 19:40, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
It is a little bit funny, thanks for removing your warning. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:41, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Electrician protection declined.

I will keep an eye on the spam link edits. Is there a guideline as to how many before it qualifies for semi-protection? It does seem unfair that electrical companies can advertise on Wikipedia. Also did you look at the questionable link that I did not remove? I don't know if the link has enough advertising in it to qualify for removal. How to Become an Electrician Vocational Skill Set Information Center--Canoe1967 (talk) 00:36, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I decline the request for semi-protection, because the problematic link was added on 21 February 2012, and since than only this problematic edit occured more than 2 weeks ago. Off course if the IP returns to repeatedly re-add the link, than you can re-report the page at WP:RFPP. As for the second link, I would say it contains the same amount of advertising than Lester-Wyatt Electrical Services. It is also not very relevant to the topic. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 00:45, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Decision accepted. I feel it can be moved to the 'resolved' section, and I will continue to watch it.--Canoe1967 (talk) 01:14, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the message

I'd lost track... (who said 'What's new?') Peridon (talk) 10:33, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for message!

 You remembered! Greg Heffley 22:11, 14 March 2012 (UTC)


The Signpost: 12 March 2012

Re: Happy birthday

I know I'm responding a few days late, but… Thank you for the generosity! Cheers all the way from the fabulous Hollywood, California. ;-) —stay (sic)! 03:09, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Category moves

Just curious, why don't you move the category's content(parent categories, interwiki links, etc) before you move the pages, that way they will not be redlinks that you are moving to. Are you planning on eventually doing this, or what? Blake (Talk·Edits) 14:54, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Because this will be done by a bot, Cydebot (talk · contribs). (Or if I'm faster, than after I finished all the renaming) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:55, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for Thresher & Glenny

Hi. Thanks for arranging the deletion review of the Thresher & Glenny article. I've had to create a new Wikipedia account as my old BePoWiki account didn't meet the username policy criteria. If you could keep me updated with progress of the deletion review I'd be very grateful. Thanks Vjdigital (talk) 13:52, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't do such a service for nobody. If you want to be up to date about the deletion review, than you should watch Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2012 March 16. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:12, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the link, very useful. Vjdigital (talk) 11:00, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

RFPP

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Please refrain from declining requests, or using the {{RFPP}} request until such time as you pass RFA. This template means the request is done and may be archived, which is not the case until an admin has evaluated it. Comments are welcome, decisions, using that template, however, are not really useful, and only make the admins spend more time checking the page, because requests that appear answered really are not. Thank you. Courcelles 00:04, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Facepalm Facepalm over WP:CREEP. If I made mistakes, than please point them out! Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 00:12, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Also, if it isn't allowed to non-admins to use the {{RFPP}} template, than why isn't there an edit filter for this? Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 00:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Bcause the edit filter is really only supposed to be used to stop abuse. There's been some expansion past that, but not much, and with the condition limit, there can't be. And this is hardly instruction creep, two years ago, it would have been just as non-started for non-admins to decline reports at RFPP as it is today. Courcelles 04:25, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
And your mistake was not checking the history to see that Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-03-19/Discussion report was a c;ear G3, instead of a declined. Courcelles 04:28, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Your moves

I have to concur with Headbomb's request; the page move of B-type main sequence star to B-type main sequence made absolutely no sense and only introduces confusion for the reader. Please be more careful. Regards, RJH (talk) 18:51, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok. I thought the edit summary was logical. Move them back if you disagree. I don't care. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 18:58, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Do you know that you just templated an Administrator?

See this edit, per WP:DTTR... is that really necessary? --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 20:11, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Was this edit from him also really necessary? Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 20:14, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:NASCAR Newsletter (March 2012)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject NASCAR at 03:02, 25 March 2012 (UTC).

Help!

{{help}} Could someone change "online" to "offline" in User:Armbrust/Topicon? Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:45, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

sure. Frietjes (talk) 14:54, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

Hope you stick around Armbrust

The work you do is far more important than a block, so that is all you need to really consider. The other editors should have respected WP:BRD and not forced through changes to the snooker templates without the consensus of the snooker project, but when it's two against one then you're outnumbered and outgunned. The best thing to do in a situation like that is to post an RFC on the snooker page and get some input from other project members. Betty Logan (talk) 04:16, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

  • Armbrust, I second Betty's message. Your work around the project is pretty worthy. Don't leave. Take some time off if you wish. But do return. I'm there always for assistance. I'll keep checking in here to see whether you've returned. Wifione Message 18:21, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
This section has gone stale. If you want to say anything on this topic, than just remove the templates at the top and bottom of the section and say it.
Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 18:40, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. --Chris (talk) 16:18, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I've started a discussion at the project about these template changes, Armbrust: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker#Template changes. Join us when you can! Betty Logan (talk) 01:51, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
User:Crazycomputers has agreed to unblock you and User:Frietjes on the proviso that you agree to not make any further alterations to the templates until there is a consensus, as per User_talk:Crazycomputers#Armbrust. If you wish to accept his offer then post an 'unblock request' on your talk page and an admin will sort it out. Betty Logan (talk) 05:15, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Armbrust (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I agree to the unblock conditions offered by Crazycomputers, namely that I will not make any edit to the templates until the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker#Template changes doesn't reached a consensus. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 4:01 pm, Today (UTC+5.5)

Accept reason:

Assuming good faith. Armbrust, the next block will be very long. So please, not even once again. Wifione Message 10:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

As he's unresponsive to concerns, returned to edit-warring immediately after his last block, and does not appear to be at all reflective on his actions, I wholeheartedly disagree with any unblock until WP:GAB is met. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:54, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Bwilkins, I'm so sorry. I did not see your message otherwise would have stopped from unblocking Armbrust pending your views. As it is, I'd already unblocked him a moment ago. Do suggest if you wish any change in my action. Kind regards. Wifione Message 10:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
I do thusly suggest, and I do not wish to wheel on it. The "I'm about to retire" warning is apparently being used as a tool against the project to "explain" edit-warring, which is something Armbrust (as a wannbe admin) knows better than to do. As such, the project requires continued protection. He he not accepted or stated that his actions were incorrect, and was indeed has 3 blocks for edit-warring in just over a month. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:03, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
You always have the option to reblock if it blows up again, but there is a discussion now to resolve the dispute and Armbrust has given his word not alter the templates. On the basis of the positive impact he has had on Wikipedia over the years I think he's earned a bit of good faith along the way. Betty Logan (talk) 11:08, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the good faith portion got lost a little when his first block for edit-warring in Feb occurred...and went out the window with his first one in March. This final one was absolutely unacceptable from ANY editor, especially one of Armbrust's caliber and standing on this project (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:11, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
I can appreciate your stance on this, but blocks are ultimately only meant to be preventative not punitive. So the question here is, do you honestly think Armbrust will break his word? He probably won't like it, but I think now he's given his word he will stick to it. The way forward is clearly hacking it out at the snooker project whether it's in three days or now, and I'd rather just get on with it. Betty Logan (talk) 11:20, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes. Due to the back-to-back nature of his edit-warring blocks, I do think he will repeat. He has not (as per WP:GAB) acknowledged ANYWHERE that his edit-warring was inappropriate, which means he believes he was right in his actions. That type of ham-fisted auto-reverting was a gigantic "fuck you" to the project, its rules, and the policies that he himself has in the past worked so hard to uphold (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:24, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Adding: it was also a "fuck you" to yourself, and other editors who have worked with him, and tried to help. Hell, even I was reaching out to him to get some idea of where his mind was, and he merely removed it without replying: that's the action of someone who doesn't care about his actions, the people helping him, or the project (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Well sorry, that you feel this way about the removal of this comment. But I'm not "dude" for you, we're not friends and likely will never be. See my name at the top of the page. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:30, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
"Dude" does not suggest we're friends. It's an exclamation of disbelief. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:39, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Nevertheless I didn't like it. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:41, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
...and I didn't like edit-warring, but I still reached out to help. Your attitude towards any type of help is what makes me believe even right now that you should not be unblocked. Clearly, people (including myself) have a level of respect for you - don't push them away because of a word you don't like, or because their help is beneath you (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:48, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Well I just tried to reinstate a format, which was used on this templates for a very long time. It looks like this was not right. AFAIK edits need consensus on Wikipedia, and if there is not than they are reverted (which I did). Shouldn't this mean, that they shouldn't be done again? Should I have reported Frietjes after he again made the changes without consensus? Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:54, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for proving why the recent unblock should not have occurred. You know as well as anyone that consensus can change. You know that article, templates, policies are always being edited. You know that after WP:BRD, we discuss ... and if the other party does not discuss, you stop reverting and follow dispute resolution processes. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:08, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes, consensus can change. But that doesn't mean, that if somebody makes a change, than the consensus automatically changes. Right? Also as far as I can see from File:BRD1.svg, the discussion should be initiated by the person, who wants to make the changes. Or should the image changed? Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 12:19, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes, you're right - however, that never gives you permission to re-revert. Ever. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:42, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Okay, will not do it again. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:12, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
If I didn't know better, and if I was an admin, I would have blocked this account on the basis of WP:GOTHACKED. The edits Armbrust are making are odd and out of his usual behavior.—cyberpower ChatLimited Access 13:29, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
I actually considered this - even the discussion above makes no sense, considering Armbrust's tenure here. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:42, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
I scanned his entire userspace and couldn't find an identity hash which kind of puts us in a conflict. Block him as a compromised account, or trust that this is really Armbrust who is being disruptive for whatever reason?—cyberpower ChatLimited Access 13:55, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
AGF a bit - the recent edits are primarily the same types of edits that he's been doing prior to mid-March, so I am personally convinced it's him. Tough two weeks (plus the argument above) that sure did look like someone else (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:58, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
You can compare my newest image with the one from 2010. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:12, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm convinced. I can AGF here. I've going through a rough month myself just recently and was causing issues that could've gotten me blocked. Perhaps Armbrust is just having some personal issues right now and maybe needs a break for the moment. I have a perfect script that will help enforce that break.—cyberpower ChatLimited Access 17:49, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Removal of rollback

As per the policies on the use of the rollback tool, I have been forced to remove your access to it due to multiple uses of the tool during edit-wars. The tool has specific uses, and unfortunately your recent actions have been contrary to the approved use. You may, in the future, request review of this decision (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:36, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok, although I didn't use rollback to edit war. (If you disagree with this, than feel free to point them out with diffs.) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:41, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar from Tito Dutta

The Special Barnstar
This barnstar is for your excellent work in Wikipedia:Birthday Committee.Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 17:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 17:51, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Right after posting the message, my internet disconnected, so, I could not add the section header, thanks for doing it, I have added the barnstar in your award page in this edit! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 18:07, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for that too. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 18:10, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Also a suggestion/opinion, if possible you can break your award page into section - by award type or award year (eg. 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012). It'll be easier then for other editors to quickly add new awards in last section (or the correct section) --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 18:18, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Good idea.  Done. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 18:42, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for Happy First Edit Day wishes! --Tito Dutta (Message) 03:17, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the HB

Thanks for the happy birthday. I really appreciate the message! --Tiberiu Balint (talk) 19:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Help us develop better software!

Thanks to all of you for commenting on the NOINDEX RfC :). It's always great to be able to field questions like these to the community; it's genuinely the highlight of my work! The NOINDEX idea sprung from our New Page Triage discussion; we're developing a new patrolling interface for new articles, and we want your input like never before :). So if you haven't already seen it, please go there, take a look at the screenshots and mockups and ideas, and add any comments or suggestions you might have to the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:46, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 March newsletter

We are over half way through the second round of this year's WikiCup and things are going well! Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions), of Pool B, is our highest overall scorer thanks to his prolific writings on television and film. In second place is Pool H's Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions), thanks primarily to work on biological articles, especially in marine biology and herpetology. Third place goes to Pool E's Scotland Casliber (submissions), who also writes primarily on biology (including ornithology and botany) and has already submitted two featured articles this round. Of the 63 contestants remaining, 15 (just under a quarter) have over 100 points this round. However, 25 are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly. 32 contestants, the top two from each pool and the 16 next-highest scorers, will advance to round 3.

Congratulations to Vanuatu Matthewedwards (submissions), whose impressive File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg became the competition's first featured picture. Also, congratulations to Florida 12george1 (submissions), who claimed good topic points, our first contestant this year to do so, for his work on Wikipedia:Featured topics/1982 Atlantic hurricane season. This leaves featured topics and featured portals as the only sources of points not yet utilised. However, as recent statistics from Wisconsin Miyagawa (submissions) show, no source has yet been utilised this competition to the same extent it has been previously!

It has been observed that the backlogs at good article candidates are building up again. While the points for good article reviews will be remaining constant, any help that can be offered keeping the backlog down would be appreciated. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:11, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

April Fools Day AFDs

Oh timezones. I am dumb. Thanks for being on top of it. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:24, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I could only do this, because it was listed at Wikipedia:April fools/April Fools' Day 2012. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:03, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Revert at Timeline

Please don't be a killjoy. It's still April Fools in a large part of the world. – Lionel (talk) 01:21, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

If you want, than you can revert, but don't forget to revert again later. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 01:28, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
I have every intention of getting that timeline to FL... with the caricature... no matter how many reviewers I have to bribe.– Lionel (talk) 01:38, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 April 1

I see nothing wrong with my suggestion that the 'humorous' ones be moved out of the 'real' project page, certainly nothing troutable. Dru of Id (talk) 09:19, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but as this was a "April Fool's MfD", I didn't read the discussion at all and the close was in the spirit of April Fool's. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 10:44, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2012

Image Upload "Chloride Process For Titanium Dioxide.jpg"

Hello, I don't understand what the problem is. The picture is a screenshot (page 3) of the following presentation in the web: http://www.ti-cons.com/Ti-Cons/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9&Itemid=10&lang=en. What Did I wrong? Regards, Christian Cjweiland (talk) 16:50, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Well the problem is, that according to the above link: "© 2009 Ti-Cons Dr. Jendro and Partner - Jendro, Weiland and Partner Management Consultants". Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:59, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm from the company Ti-Cons, what must I do to be allowed to put it my wikipedia article? Cjweiland (talk) 11:46, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
If the company has given permission to use the file under a free license, than follow the steps described on Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:52, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
I did send the following email to "permissions-en@wikimedia.org" but got no reponse so far, I guess because of Easter. Cjweiland (talk) 09:12, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
You have to wait. The OTRS cue is backlogged. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:01, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

File Help

Hello, I noticed you have File mover rights. My goal is to evantually obtain these rights through good work. I have mostly been dealing with fighting vandals but I would also like to start working with images and such. How would I do this? Where do I start? Would I have to work in the Commons? Or does Wikipedia have its own image space? I am a newbie and am asking for some help please. WheresTristan Let's talk·Contribs 23:52, 4 April 2012 (UTC):

The filemover userright is for users, who have experience in the file namespace. You currently have only one edit in these namespace and didn't upload any files. This userright is granted to users "who regularly work with media files and have demonstrated familiarity with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines surrounding renaming this type of media". You can demonstrate this by making valid rename requests and upload files with descriptive names. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 10:00, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello Armbrust. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 23:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Ronnie O'Sullivan

I am going to request semi-protection and then I will remove the IP's addition. It's best if you don't revert again because you're at three reverts now, and they'll come in on you like a ton of bricks if you break 3rr. Betty Logan (talk) 21:20, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

However according to WP:3RRNO: "Removal of libelous, biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced contentious material that violates the policy on biographies of living persons (BLP)." is an exception. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:21, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

YouTube vs 2nd hand journalism

Are you seriously suggesting that articles from the bbc or from the guardian are more reliable than YouTube footage of the actual event? This is a ridiculous assertion. journalists make mistakes whereas YouTube footage of the match is uncontestable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.28.80.214 (talk) 21:34, 8 April 2012‎

No-one is contesting that he actually won the Masters, which is what that Youtube link seems to show. There is certainly no video footage of Neil Robertson saying what he did, and the other source about Steve Davis is not reliable. Betty Logan (talk) 21:43, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
According to WP:NOYT: "YouTube and other video-sharing sites are not reliable sources because anyone can create or manipulate a video clip and upload without editorial oversight, just as with a self-published website." This makes Youtube unreliable source. The BBC and the Guardian websites have "editorial oversight", and this makes them reliable. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:47, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. It's clear you have a higher respect for the bbc and guardian journalism than I have! They make mistakes all the time - especially in a minority sport like snooker. It's a fair point about neil Robertson, it will be hard to find in print but there may be ... YouTube footage of it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keefr (talk • contribs) 21:51, 8 April 2012‎
Youtube footage is still not reliable. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:53, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Excemption is not a word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keefr (talk • contribs) 21:54, 8 April 2012‎
What? Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:56, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
In your comment about living people you use the word Excemption. It should be either exemption or exception... I think! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keefr (talk • contribs) 22:00, 8 April 2012‎
You're right.  Corrected. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 22:05, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2012

Thanks

The Golden Wiki
For helping build the community by remembering our special dates. MBisanz talk 22:50, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 22:51, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Your HighBeam account is ready!

Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:

  • Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
    • Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
    • If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
  • The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
  • To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
  • If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
  • A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
  • HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
  • Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
  • When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 20:32, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Re:Happy Edit Day

Thanks for the Edit Day greetings. I can't believe I've been doing this for four years now. Time certainly flies as they say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul MacDermott (talk • contribs) 12:55, 15 April 2012‎

Happy Birthday!

Hey, Armbrust. Just stopping by to wish you a Happy Birthday from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! Ramesh Ramaiah talk 14:31, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:42, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Cecropia Says Hi!

Thanks for the AdminAnniversary greeting. The virtual cake was virtually delicious! Cheers, - Cecropia (talk) 10:18, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

What cake? Did Wikipe-tan made you one? Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 10:23, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Re:Happy Birthday (2012)

Thanks for wishing me and late happy birth day to you mate!--NAHID 16:33, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 16:34, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks also for posting your birthday message on my talk page. Happy birthday to you too, birthday twin :-) –– ljhenshall (talk page) 22:30, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 April 2012

Huwiki, snooker, kínai nevek

Szia. Amikor megcsináltam Ronnie O'Sullivan cikkét kiemeltre a huwikin, velem átíratták a kínai neveket. Most akkor hogy van ez? Madridista92 (talk) 18:45, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Nem tudom. De szerinted melyik magyar snooker rajongó fogja tudni, hogy "Ting Csün-huj" = Ding Junhui. Micsoda baromság. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 20:05, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Értelek, illetve megértelek. Csak hát vannak a nem latin betűs írásokra vonatkozó irányelvek, azokat meg nem tudom megkerülni. Az már más kérdés, hogy mennyire van ez az egész túlszabályozva. Mindegy, csinálok egy köztes megoldást. Madridista92 (talk) 14:05, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Én is mégértem, hogy az irányelvet követni kell. De vannan olyan helyzetek, mikor figyelmen kívül lehet hagyni őket. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

 on the prall

asten (talk) 17:58, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


Thanks. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 19:32, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Regional county municipalities in Montérégie-Est

The other categories you listed would need to be moved too. Is the nature of your opposition merely procedural (failure to list the other categories), or should it go to CfD? -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 05:37, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

It looks like, this was already moved to the "Opposed nominations". Full CfD needed now. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 08:58, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Snooker rankings.

Hi, I disagree with your revert. First, those players were officialy ranked, just look at the official rankings that are in notes (where I found them). So, it's wrong to remove them from the first revisions. By removing them, you just create an unofficial ranking that just shows your point of view, not the one from the WPSBA. Second, the rankings are made on two years, you can't remove someone just because he s not there now, Quinten Hann was still ranked even when he was banned, just look at Snooker world rankings 2005/2006. Moreover, your version is wrong, Liu Song isn't in the first revision even if he was playing in the main tour. Have a nice day. BIRDIE ✉ 16:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

The first sentence of the page is "The professional world rankings for all the professional snooker players who qualified for the 2010/2011 season are listed below." Which means, that players, who were not on the Main Tour shouldn't be listed by definition. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 16:16, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for the adminship anniversary reminder. :) Steven Walling • talk 19:08, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 April 2012

READY FOR ADOPTION.

Fidel, 20, User since 2009 Username Fidelove very inexperienced


THANKS A LOT

WP:NASCAR Newsletter (April 2012)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject NASCAR at 15:31, 25 April 2012 (UTC).

2012 World Snooker Championship

Just pointing out you went over three reverts on that page. I'm not going to hand out any blocks now but will consider it if the edit war continues. Please try to keep WP:3RR in mind in the future. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 22:58, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I have made a report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Armbrust and User talk:78.147.184.47 reported by User:Ks0stm (Result: ) about the edit war. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 23:40, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Armbrust/Archive_10&oldid=1252518972"