User talk:Becritical/Archive 3

Be critical of the uncritical, of gullibility. Be critical of the imPOV rished critics. Be critical of criticism, of criticism's lack, of selective criticality (used merely to attack). Be critical of everything till criticism comes full circle into knowledge, and into knowledge of fallibility.

Will need your input

...for the WP:99% guidelines.--Amadscientist (talk) 22:43, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Occupy Wall Street

Leave a message on my talk page if you need me to do anything further. (I'm cleaning up the threads on my talk page so don't be alarmed when you see your thread missing). Regards, Whenaxis (contribs) ^{DR goes to Wikimania!} 22:52, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you for your help and advice! B^e——C_ritical 22:59, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you didn't mean to do this [1] ;-) AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, don't know how that happened :P B^e——C_ritical 03:22, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 20

Hi. When you recently edited Anontune, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wired (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of AnonPaste

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on AnonPaste requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. GouramiWatcher ^(Gulp) 22:05, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

in re ANI

WP:ANI / User promoting a movement

Hey, I'm surprised that you haven't weighed in on the ANI discussion about the OWS article and specifically COI/other issues with User:완젬스. I think Penyulap may have mischaracterized the collaboration of other editors at the OWS article, and is too lenient with User:완젬스 perhaps because s/he isnt quite aware of the discussion history. But lately I haven't been following the discussions and article progression closely though, so I could be wrong. I thought there were several regulars including yourself, working together through compromise despite occasional disagreement. El duderino ^(abides) 22:12, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Like I'm supposed to know about it? B^e——C_ritical 23:16, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That explains it. I was thinking of adding a link at the OWS talkpage anyway. El duderino ^(abides) 23:29, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would've done that myself but was concerned it might appear as canvassing. I'm not sure though. Just something to consider. Equazcion ^(talk) 23:44, 22 Apr 2012 (UTC)

Wiki doesn't make it easy. I would have to have been checking you guys contribs or something. B^e——C_ritical 23:58, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As long as it's done neutrally, which I think it was.Use of "relevant" (there only because it was the sole current thread he's in) and "possible.". To follow-up, I'm a bit surprised at Amadsci's most recent post. But I'll refrain from any more play-by-play here. El duderino ^(abides) 00:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Amadscientist was responding to the fact that I had posted the complaint at ANI more than anything else. He has personal issues with me, which may have started with this, but there were other OWS things that may have done it too. Not sure exactly. But anything I suggest can predictably be opposed by him, so his reaction wasn't too surprising to me. I had a feeling once this showed up on BeCritical's talk page that he'd come to ANI to get a shot in. Equazcion ^(talk) 00:45, 23 Apr 2012 (UTC)

Or maybe Amadscientist is responding to the fact that you seem to not understand policy and ignore discussion and seem to take aim at removing opposition on Wikipedia and being as annoying as you can to those you actively oppose on Wikipedia like a batteleground Equaz.--Amadscientist (talk) 05:52, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Occupy Wall Street , did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use your sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Edison (talk) 03:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think BeCritical made a technical error there rather than meaning to blank the article :) Just for the record. Equazcion ^(talk) 04:34, 23 Apr 2012 (UTC)

It happened last time I tried to put a POV tag on that article too. B^e——C_ritical 04:54, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Becritical. You have new messages at Whenaxis's talk page.
Message added 21:01, 23 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

DRN Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Occupy Wall Street". Thank you. --Amadscientist (talk) 06:40, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested

...in this proposal, which just showed up on my watchlist rather magically. Equazcion ^(talk) 21:20, 26 Apr 2012 (UTC)

Very much so thank you :D :D :D B^e——C_ritical 21:43, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability mediation - choosing final drafts

Hello BeCritical. This is a note to let you know about a discussion I have just started at the verifiability mediation. It is aimed at making a final decision about the drafts we use in step 6, so that we can move on to drafting the RfC text in step 7. If possible, I would like everyone to comment over at Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal/Cases/27 February 2012/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Final drafts proposal. Thank you! — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 04:07, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your edit at User Pages

Thought you might be interested in what I just posted at Jimbo's page. -- Avanu (talk) 01:52, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Hello, Becritical. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Equazcion ^(talk) 20:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Occupy Wall Street". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 10 May 2012.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 01:40, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation issues

After reading the mediation guide, which I hadn't bothered to do until now, it became clear that mediation is strictly for content issues. If behavior is mixed in, it could increase the chances of it being rejected. I've already cut down my initial comment to exclude the behavioral stuff, and I'd suggest not responding to Amadscientist's behavioral prods at the mediation page. That stuff may need to be dealt with somewhere else (though at the moment I'm not sure where). Equazcion ^(talk) 07:20, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, okay. B^e——C_ritical 13:32, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to take part in the discussion. Thanks. Gandydancer (talk) 14:04, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation accepted

The request for formal mediation of the dispute concerning Occupy Wall Street, in which you were listed as a party, has been accepted by the Mediation Committee. The case will be assigned to an active mediator within two weeks, and mediation proceedings should begin shortly thereafter. Proceedings will begin at the case information page, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Occupy Wall Street, so please add this to your watchlist. Formal mediation is governed by the Mediation Committee and its Policy. The Policy, and especially the first two sections of the "Mediation" section, should be read if you have never participated in formal mediation. For a short guide to accepted cases, see the "Accepted requests" section of the Guide to formal mediation. You may also want to familiarise yourself with the internal Procedures of the Committee.

As mediation proceedings begin, be aware that formal mediation can only be successful if every participant approaches discussion in a professional and civil way, and is completely prepared to compromise. Please contact the Committee if anything is unclear.

For the Mediation Committee, Lord Roem (talk) 13:15, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Pretty sure...

...he meant a "level-two" section header, as you did. (== ==) Equazcion ^(talk) 05:34, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, right makes sense (: B^e——C_ritical 05:52, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oversight requests

Regarding this statement — please don't request oversight at the administrators' noticeboard: it's one of the most public pages at Wikipedia, so leaving a request for oversight there is likely to produce a Streisand effect. Instead, please send an email to the oversight team. Nyttend (talk) 20:57, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thx (; B^e——C_ritical 21:06, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Amadscientist. Thank you. Equazcion ^(talk) 00:31, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:POLICYPRICK listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:POLICYPRICK. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:POLICYPRICK redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:26, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:PETTIFOGG listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:PETTIFOGG. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:PETTIFOGG redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 01:47, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability mediation - choosing the RfC structure

Hello BeCritical! You are cordially invited to a discussion at the verifiability mediation in which we will be deciding once and for all what combination of drafts and general questions we should have in the RfC. We would love to hear your input, so why not hop over and let us know your views when you next have the chance. Thanks! — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 16:09, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation request re: "Formation of the New York General Assembly"

I am convinced that you and other editors wishing to include this language in the OWS article are critically ignoring WP:V, and I have requested mediation here. The request is still pending and I don't believe any discussion can yet take place, but I wanted to at least notify you of the request. Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS) (talk) (contribs) 16:51, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability mediation - to protect, or not to protect

Hello again Becritical. Do you think the upcoming verifiability RfC should use a system of protection and transclusion, as was found in the recent pending changes RfC, or should we just keep the entire RfC unprotected? There are good arguments both for and against, and at the moment we are at a stalemate. Could you give your opinion on the matter? The discussion thread is here. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 14:26, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability RfC - final call for alterations

Hello again BeCritical! This is to let you know that I have made a final call for alterations to the verifiability RfC draft. Unless there is a very good reason for it not to, the RfC will be going live around 10.00 am (UTC) on Thursday June 28. Even if you would not like to see any further changes to the RfC draft, it would be a great help if you could check over the draft page and make sure everything is working properly. Thanks for your continued patience with this. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 14:15, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of AnonPaste

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on AnonPaste requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Keφr (talk) 10:48, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copy at User:Becritical/AnonPaste B^e——C_ritical 01:28, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

In this issue:

Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
Research: The most recent DR data
Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 18:51, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

BRD project

I have outlined a proposal for a potential project that you might be interested in at User:Betty Logan/BRD enforcer. The essence of it is a peer review system in relation to challenged unilateral edits. I'm contacting you because you expressed an interest in a previous discussion in regards to a more stringent enforcement of BRD. If you are not interested then no worries, I'm just testing the waters at this stage to see how much interest there would be in such a co-ordinated task force. Betty Logan (talk) 15:52, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stripe (company), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Visa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BRD enforcer

I've drafted out the proposal at User:Betty Logan/BRD enforcer#"Request for stable state" project proposal. Hopefully I've addressed any concerns people had, and this is the version that will go before the Wikiproject proposal committee. It's been streamlined a bit to focus on operation and the name has been changed, but other than that it's doing the same job. Anyway, this is a message I'm dorpping on everyone's page so they can check it out and make sure they are ok with it. Betty Logan (talk) 22:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The formal proposal is up and running at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Request for stable state. If you are still interested in supporting it you will need to add your name at the official proposal. Betty Logan (talk) 02:56, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays!

Be well and have a wonderful holiday!--Amadscientist (talk) 00:20, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, you too!

OWS Talkpage

I wanted to let you know that I will not be arguing for or against the inclusion of the section you are discussiong. Whatever editors decide I will live with. I recuse myself from the discussion as I have become involved with the DR/N process and feel that it is best if I not be a part of the consensus on this issue due to the fact that this debate is what introduced me to DR/N. Also should any disputes come to DR/N from this article I will recuse myself at DR/N unless it is something I had little to no invlovment in. I am sure whatever editors come up with will be fine as you guys are sticking closely to policy and procedure. Good work. Have fun and happy editing!--Amadscientist (talk) 02:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Icthus

Christianity newsletter: New format, new focus

Hello,

I notice that you aren't currently subscribed to Ichthus, the WikiProject Christianity newsletter. Witha new format, we would be delighted to offer you a trial three-month, money-back guarantee, subscription to our newsletter. If you are interested then please add your name tothis list, and you will receive your first issue shortly. From June 2013 we are starting a new "in focus" section that tells our readers about an interesting and important groups of articles. The first set is about Jesus, of course. We have also started a new book review section and our own "did you know" section. In the near future I hope to start a section where a new user briefly discusses their interests.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 21:02, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi Becritical! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editing encouraged!!! But being multilingual is not a necessity to make this project a success. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! EdwardsBot (talk) 19:28, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Advice

What was wrong about your question is that it was not a theoretical question about electronics, but a direct request for professional advice about how to use a product not in accordance with the manufacturers specifications and with dire possible consequences, including electrocution and fire.

There is no one on the reference desk who can act in the capacity of a professional electrician, and even then, they would be unprofessionally reckless to do so without reading the manufacturers specifications and visually inspecting your electrical system in person.

Any answer you could have possibly gotten would have been totally worthless, and potentially life-threatening.

Using a product not in accordance with the manufacturers instructions is extremely ill-advised without consulting either the manufacturer or a certified professional electricain first. That cannot be done on the reference desk.

By the way, sticking your finger into water contained in an improperly used appliance was an incredibly stupid thing to do. You could have been electrocuted. Continuing to use the device not in accordance with the manufacturers specifications after you knew there was a problem was just as dumb. I like having you around as a fellow editor, and would be sad to see you gone before your time.

I just lost an 18-year-old student of mine to electrocution in an accident caused purely by his own stupidity. Sad, because he was not normally a stupid kid by any stretch of the imagination. Even a one-second lapse in judgement can kill when you're working around electricity. Please be careful. Good luck! Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 15:19, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about your student.

For some people, the conditions of our lives preclude doing everything in the manner specified by our professionalized society. We have to take chances with our lives and the lives of those we love, because to do otherwise is unsustainable. Do you think that no one, for example in Africa, has an appliance like this? Do they call an electrician? But they do have access to the web. Having even a general answer to my question might, conceivably, have saved lives. What I'm saying is yes, if you have money and are in an ideal situation, what you say is true. But not all of us live in such ideal situations. You're probably a teacher at a Western university, in a city, and you probably have plenty of money to have things done right. But not everyone is in your situation. We're going to use these appliances, whether or not we know how. Even at risk. And we can't ask the manufacturer. We can't ask them, because they are legally bound to just say "do it how we said." I was asking to understand in real life, not the legalized pseudo-reality of the manufacturer where they don't give a shit if you live or die as long as they aren't liable in court. I fix electric heaters, too. I do so because they put elements in the heaters which cause them to break very quickly. But the heaters are still perfectly good, they simply want to be paid for a new heater. If you put the heater on a line where there is a lot of drop-off, the heater lasts for many years. But if you put it on a line nearer the electrical source, the heater burns out very quickly. They design it that way so you are bound to their industrial teat (heaters from the 70s before they learned to do planned obsolescence on them last for many years also). In the same way, they design electric plugs to be extremely tight, so that you struggle to get them out of the plug, putting yourself at a real risk of shock because you are struggling and you are liable to get your hands on the elements. They don't care, apparently, how people in real life use the plugs, so long as they aren't liable in court. I'd be happy to pay an extra dollar to have a snap on the plug so it wouldn't come out unless you wanted it to (as long as the snap wasn't manufactured to break). But they don't care (they also design the ground to break off extremely easily, so you either have to use it ungrounded, or buy a new one; and in court they can say you were using it improperly so they're not liable). I guess if you can't ask anyone for real knowledge, and you can't do everything according to some professionalized formula, you just have to take the risk and experiment with things and find your own solutions. B^e——C_ritical 16:45, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Becritical. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Re: Popcorn Time

As it is an open source project, anyone can fork or create their own versions. Thus, unless the fork is officially endorsed or recognized as a continuation by the original authors, I consider the program in its current form, which is what was discussed by the article, to no longer exist, hence the past tense. ViperSnake151 Talk 06:14, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Namecheapblues

you sir, are a god.

one issue - people can't copy and past sections of your talk page, to spread the word. Is there a fix?

Are you familiar with WP:ARS? Namecheapblues (talk) 15:30, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to User:Becritical a shining light to those who want to save the project. Namecheapblues (talk) 15:30, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks (:

I don't know why you can't copy and paste sections of my talk page. Do you mean my userpage? I think that would require the appropriate tags being copied. B^e——C_ritical 00:09, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

fighting the echo chamber for the greater good

message one of three

User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#A_desperate_scream_from_outside_of_the_echo_chamber Namecheapblues (talk) 15:30, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

Thank you Namecheapblues (talk) 13:07, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(: B^e——C_ritical 21:38, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cfsn listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Cfsn. Since you had some involvement with the Cfsn redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:55, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stripe (company) nominated for deletion

Thought you might want to know, as a past contributor. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stripe (company) --X883 (talk) 18:37, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Welfare, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Social Security (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]