This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
circumcision boss LOLing at the little one's pain — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.96.133.158 (talk) 17:20, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Look, please could you be a bit more coherent with this circumcision stuff and less into spamming incoherent things on many people's talk pages.... EggCentric 18:43, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Egg Centric. You have new messages at Jeepday's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You need to understand there is a unique Jewish mindset caused by thousands of years of persecution that can make one want to keep on to a tradition because it is also identity - even if that identity does come from the dark ages. I once semi-seriously considered a sort of "atheist conversion" to Judaism, before finding out such a thing basically wasn't possible, as I admired and continue to admire this solidarity so much. But part of said conversion would have been my circumcision, and that while I decided against this for other reasons, that alone could quite possibly have ended up being a deal breaker. Basically, the Jewish community needs to come to a conclusion by itself that decency should prevent them from seeing this as a pact with god, but actually mutilation. There is no good in us gentiles telling them not to do it. All we can do is put the arguments out there and hope that progressive Jews pick up on them and spread them around their communities. Maybe eventually Israel will make child circumcision illegal. But while the current attitude remains, circumcision does a Jewish boy far less harm over all than it does a normal boy, for it greatly helps him to integrate in that community which as I said has no no real parallel. This is all pragmatic thought - in principle I am against exceptions in law for religious reasons of any kind.
But that doesn't excuse pro-circumcision activism for anyone other than Jews - as you say, it is a dark ages thing. But while not wanting to speak for a Jewish community I am not and never have been a part of, I hope the above helps you see where they are coming from.
Meanwhile, as I typed all that out, another couple of baby parts were lopped off, quite possibly without anesthetic, never to be seen again. EggCentric 14:48, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
That is an eloquent statement. I tend to be skeptical about a person's self-reported identity, "I am a Methodist" or "I am a Republican" does argue for a group identity, yet beneath such professions one finds a web of individual choices and motivations, all as inherently selfish as the will to live. No one is really a "Methodist" or "Republican" but a self-selected member of a like-minded host who justify and defend each other. I look beneath the self-reported label to the behavior which the purported group establishes as legitimate for the individual; for example, cannibalism was a religious practice, and had a profound religious meaning to its practitioners. Would we accept their argument in behalf of cannibalism? Rather, look to the prehistoric emotions of the human beast, who glorifies all his primitive warfare and instincts by imbuing them with a religious aura, making him proud of his bestiality in a uniquely human way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.199.159.75 (talk) 11:11, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Darkie Fan
EXPLAIN WHY YOU ARE A FAN OF DARKIES AT ONCE! 90.222.103.163 (talk) 00:35, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
May 2012
You have been blockedindefinitely from editing for mistaking socking and trolling for humor. Playtime is over.. 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. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:56, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
You certainly aren't yellow on the inside
Egg on one's Face Award
I admire your honesty in seeking to rectify the consequences of your actions despite the potential block and ridicule. Ankh.Morpork 01:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, but apparently no good deed goes unpunished! EggCentric 13:25, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
See, that is your problem right there. If you had said to me: I" messed up and did something stupid that I thought at the time would be funny, but now I have caused a big mess instead." I doubt I would have blocked you at all, a trouting and a "don't do that again" would have done the job. But you persist on seeing yourself as the misunderstood martyr. You screwed up. If you can't or won't admit it I can't see that unblocking you would be a good idea. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:25, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I have admitted all that. That isn't incompatible with anything I have said. But if it helps, I messed up and did something that I thought at the time would be funny, but now I have caused a big mess instead. EggCentric 17:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Unblock
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.
This is beyond ridiculous. I haven't trolled, and I haven't socked in violation of the sock policy either. Nor have I violated WP:POINT as someone else seems to think. Let's be completely clear what happened. Taking a look at FisherQueen's talk page (being something of a talk page stalker) I see that a new user Anontune (talk · contribs · count) has renamed themselves to something ridiculous - Wer34k234ksdfodbguwe4fod (talk · contribs · count) - choosing that username because, he said, it wouldn't be taken [10]. The username and the rationale is a so ridiculous that I find it quite amusing to create two usernames (Wer34k234ksdfodbguwe4fob (talk · contribs · count) and Wer34k234ksdfodbguwe4foc (talk · contribs · count)) that were very similar to it - one complained to the "real user" [11], while the other one told the "real user" not to worry because the first username was a hypocrite [12] having himself stolen his username. This was clearly a joke, playing off both the eccentricity of the name and the reason for choosing it, which I assumed FisherQueen and the user with the peculiar name would like, and I believe I have been proven correct in their subsequent reactions. Anyhow for some reason this was considered a trolling "sockfarm" and both my two users, and the "real user" - PLUS the screename the real user used to have that could belong to anyone, were indef blocked. Obviously I couldn't allow that to happen to someone who had done nothing wrong, so I came clean as soon as I was aware of it. And then I get blocked indefinitely for socking and trolling! I hadn't the faintest reason to think there was any problem; indeed the precedent I had in my mind when I did this was the santa-claus-like user that goes around on Christmas giving out presents. Reopen the ANI thread and have this looked at by more, impartial, eyes. If there is a proper community consensus for indefinite block I will respect it (while scratching my head). I should also point out the blocking admin was by his own admission [13] drinking when making this block. Not that I have a problem with drunk editing but it does make one question his judgement. Almost as much as this ridiculous block does.
Accept reason:
per rationale I am about to type below. Floquenbeam (talk) 18:08, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I've amended your unblock template to correct the coding; it should display correctly now. No comment (as yet) on the merits, but on point of information - did you use sockpuppet accounts? Knowing which socks you used may help show that they were used within the rules. UltraExactZZSaid~ Did 13:42, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Hrm. By the book, the socks did indeed violate policy - they impersonated another editor. Consider what would have (or could have) happened if you had gone about this maliciously - you could have done significant damage to another editor's reputation. If I went douchebagging about as User:Cgg_Eentric, it might bother you. Good on you for coming clean the instant it went sideways, but I have yet to see any sort of apology to 4od. And that would, I think, be a necessary first step. UltraExactZZSaid~ Did 14:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Naturally I aplogise unreservedly and without hesitation to 4od. It was not my intention for anyone to believe that those users were actually related to him. Indeed, even if their claims were taken on face value (which they weren't supposed to be) then they claimed to be different users. I believed (and still do although I don't plan to argue the point unless it is absolutely necessary) that they came under the "Humor accounts" exception EggCentric 14:23, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
As blocks are meant to be preventative and not punitive, I struggle to see the purpose of this block. The editor has recognised his wrong-doing and admitted to it of his own accord; I have no idea how this can be construed as a case of reducing "likely future problems".Ankh.Morpork 14:33, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Egg made accounts in an attempt at humor - but did so in precisely the same way that other editors have in the past gone about harassing other editors. Remember too that the discussion looked like someone discussing an issue with Fisherqueen, getting renamed, and suddenly having multiple socks. The involvement of the innocent victim muddied the picture considerably - but, at the time, the block was justified and entirely within policy. Could it have been handled differently? Possibly. But it is what it is. The question now becomes - is this something Egg Centric will ever attempt again? Does he/she understand that not everyone on this project will find humor in violations of policy, even well intentioned ones? I see that there is a humor exemption, but that applies to declared sock accounts - these socks were not immediately declared as socks, which added to the confusion. He claimed them later, but the damage was done. UltraExactZZSaid~ Did 14:41, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes I shall be more cautious in future, and in any case will not use socks for any reason where they could be construed as impersonating other users or are within my knowledge violating policy. I am also, frakly, extremely unlikely to use socks for any reason at all, especially humour, with the exception of editing anonymously from time to time within policy. EggCentric 14:50, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Also, forgive me if I missed this above - have you ever used any other sockpuppet accounts in the past? Since this is a sock block, it might come up. Thanks. UltraExactZZSaid~ Did 14:44, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Plenty of anonymous editing, especially before I got this account, but also sometimes after getting it, for various reasons (e.g. too lazy to login or at internet cafe or whatever). In any case, nothing "dodgy". EggCentric 14:50, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
For clarity by anonymous editing in the above two posts I mean editing as an IP when not logged in, not using another account. EggCentric 14:54, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Support trout and unblock. I'm sure Egg Centric has learned something from this. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:58, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Support trout and unblock. Also support checkuser to clear the air and not leave Egg with a cloud hanging over them. ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 15:10, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I like that idea and would in fact prefer it to no CU, given the comments by a couple of other users on Beeb's talk page. Not sure what's wrong with my "interests"... EggCentric 15:14, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Support trout and unblock. Point's now made. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:32, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I was asked about checkuser-ing this account. It looks EC owned up to both accounts, so I don't think there's much more to say. If there are other suspected socks, an SPI case can be filed, but I think we're OK otherwise. TNXMan
Thank you for helping Tnxman307. ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 15:54, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
IMHO, you're about to let them off for something pretty serious - and I still don't seem to think they get that. Impersonation is wrong, period. An "innocent" party has been harmed through this. Indeed, months from now someone may see those "humour" accounts, and actually attribute them to the other user, and nobody will remember this sheer stupidity that has occurred here. I'm all for humour, but to actually CLAIM these accounts were created for such a purpose disgusts me - do you personally know the user that you were having a joke at their expense? (talk→BWilkins←track) 16:55, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Add: moreover, after reading the unblock request again, it's so WP:NOTTHEM that it tells more about their belief in the block than their half-assed discussions further down. That unblock request as it stands now CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be actionned whatsoever, as it would condone the behaviour. Who gives a shit if the admin had an adult beverage: the block is valid no matter what (talk→BWilkins←track) 16:58, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't understand. Are you suggesting my claim is a lie? If not, why does that claim disgust you? And while I don't know the user I know enough about how most people work to know that someone who changed their username to that would usually be receptive to that sort of thing. EggCentric 17:56, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I've been asked to consider this unblock request on the basis that he has now owned up to what he did. I'm not entirely convinced that is the case. Egg acts as though the real problem here is that I don't have a sense of humor. What he doesn't seem to get is that nobody thought this was funny. He goes on an and on about how it was obviously a joke. Well guess what trolls think they are doing? That's right, they think they are being funny, when they are anything but. This supposed joke didn't backfire because I lack the ability to detect a joke, it backfired because it looked exactly like the kind of trolling we see here all the time, users who create multiple throw-away accounts with "mash the keyboard" usernames intended solely for disruption, fully expecting they will be blocked. Egg is still painting himself as the misunderstood good guy in all this, and as long as that is how he continues to see it I do see a valid preventative prpose to this block. Comparing oneself to Santa Claus when all you have delivered is a lump of coal is not what I expect to see in an unblock request from someone who actually understands what they did wrong. And as for blaming this all on my having had a drink on a Sunday afternoon, well it doesn't really merit a response but I can tell you that I am a grown man of almost forty and I weigh in at about 225 pounds (102 kg) and had consumed one small beer by the time I made that remark.My judgement was not impaired and I was not intoxicated. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
OK, thanks for having a look. UltraExactZZSaid~ Did 17:27, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
It may or may not be wise for me to say what I'm about to say, but I have a pathological case of honesty so I'm not going to pretend to feel ways I don't. As a point of fact, Wer34k234ksdfodbguwe4fod(talk·contribs·count), the relevant user, has stated they found it funny. I still find the original text funny. Not a classic python sketch, not laugh out loud hilarious, but mildly amusing. Now, having said that - I have acknowledged that you do not find it funny and also I have clearly stated, and state again for the record, I won't do such a thing again. I also acknowledge that you would have blocked them if it wasn't for my actions, and have apologised for that. Asking me to concede that it wasn't funny - I can't do that. And yeah, I am a misunderstood good guy. That remains how I see myself. Good guys make mistakes. And, for clarity, that doesn't make you a bad guy, of course.
Now to be perfectly clear, what I do mean by "I won't do such a thing again"? Well, first of all, I won't make any jokes using socks that aren't clearly labeled as mine. But secondly, and more broadly, I will be far more careful not to make any statements that are not literally true, less they be misunderstood. EggCentric 17:39, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
That was a fairly poor unblock request, but subsequent comments by EC make it hard to argue with the basic underlying fact that he is unlikely to do anything remotely like this again. The joke impersonations were dumb, and wrong, and not as clearly a joke as EC seems to think (I didn't think it funny, and I'll laugh at almost anything). The block of EC without prior discussion was (IMHO) too aggressive, especially since the "target" of the joke/trolling found it humorous and evidently doesn't harbor any ill will to EC [1]. But that's just what it is, MHO, and doesn't mean the block was out of policy or wrong or anything.
Egg Centric, I've unblocked, without requiring further hoop jumping first. However, I ask that you do the following now that you're unblocked:
Tag the userpages of the two accounts as joke accounts of yours, and unrelated to Wer34k234ksdfodbguwe4fod.
Rethink the fairness of mentioning B's beer. That was unreasonable, makes you look bad, and contributed to this unblock dragging on longer than necessary.
Thanks, will do. The beer thing was actually meant as an explanation, as I have certainly done daft things on wikipedia under the influence, and I couldn't at the time see the block as rational. But as it seems to have been taken as an insult, of course apologies to Beeblebrox for that too. EggCentric 18:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Egg Centric. 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.
So I do! Do you prefer reply by email or on-wiki? EggCentric 17:57, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
How do I source this? Can I just WebCite the oversight permissions page? It may be a bit close to primary research and perhaps I'm better off leaving it unsourced (and just truthful!) EggCentric 21:25, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi Egg Centric, and thanks for contacting the helpers. Unfortunately, you cannot use Wikipedia as a source in an article on here - see WP:CIRCULAR for more information. If you need anymore help, please reactivate the helpme tag and someone will come assist you. Cat in the Hat | To the Thinga-ma-jigger | Whistle for Things 1 and 2 22:13, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Archiving
Hi Egg Centric, would you like me to setup auto archiving for you? I notice your talk page is lengthy. ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 21:33, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes please. Actually I set it up before (see User_talk:Egg_Centric/Archive and the archive box above) and then it just stopped one day, I'm not sure why. EggCentric 21:35, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Done - It should visit within 24 hours to archive this page. I'll come back around to make sure everything went well. ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 22:08, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Much appreciated, thank you EggCentric 22:13, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Clearly editors who show evidence of EUI should be indef'd until they install Ignition interlock device's on their PCs. Nobody Ent 23:08, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
I know you had your tongue in your cheek typing that, but it would be a better alternative to a ban or indef block! EggCentric 11:04, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. joe deckertalk to me 06:08, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Stupidmosquitothing.png
Thanks for uploading File:Stupidmosquitothing.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:57, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Oh I knew they're sockpuppets of Don't Feed the Zords, but no idea who that may be in real life and why he may be obsessed with getting that article deleted - him being the subject is a plausible explanation. If the case, while it would in no way excuse any of his wiki activities, it would increase the arguments for removing the article considerably, if I understand the BLP policy.
Drama abhors a vacuum EggCentric 01:19, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
There we go, I sorted out some drama for ya, and it took less than 24 hours. Do I get a medal? (Chocolate preferred) EggCentric 19:32, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Egg Centric. You have new messages at Gareth Griffith-Jones's talk page. Message added 11:37, 22 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. noq (talk) 12:30, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bavaria non alcoholic beer until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. noq (talk) 12:37, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Sexual diversity discussion
Just wanted to drop you a note of appreciation. Technically you were in the wrong because we're supposed to assume good faith, but you and I both know the poster in question was not operating in good faith. Keep up the good work. thx1138 (talk) 16:01, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. I believe it's the duty of everyone to tell people like that what we think of their views. If it's left to only gay right activists, they can convince themselves it's only a PC-homosexual-lobby conspiracy. They can't dismiss everyone else so easily.... EggCentric 16:33, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
'
>click show to see a solidarity penis
>The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
You've asked a question in your edit summary, to answer, I left it in incase someone wanted to do a sock check or something like that, but wiping is fine too of course. Either way. Penyulap ☏ 01:20, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Good catch, thanks for letting me know, I've updated it - that was when the bot was mainly running AWB scripts, but now it runs Pywikipedia scripts on a crontab which means that they automatically start every 15 minutes or 30 minutes in some cases which means that a talk page message will no longer stop it from running! :) TheHelpfulOne 00:22, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi Egg, I left you a message at Talk:Circumcision#inability_to_reach_anything_approaching_consensus, asking you to please remove your very off-topic question from the article Talk page and take it up with Jakew directly via email. Would you please consider doing that? I do not understand why, of all pages, Talk:Circumcision seems to be the hardest Talk page in all of Wikipedia to keep on-topic. Would you help me and Yobol to try to get the discussion there back to what it should be--discussing improvements to the article? Thanks. Zad68 02:34, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
I was about to say something similar. I will not discuss off-topic material at Talk:Circumcision, especially about myself or other living people, so you're wasting your time in trying to get me to do so. You will simply find yourself warned for commenting on contributors rather than content. I'm reachable by email through WP; if you ask a question politely and respectfully, I might answer. Jakew (talk) 08:02, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
I understand. I have removed the question. EggCentric 11:23, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
All three trials were stopped early due to data-dependent processes (formal-stopping rules), and this may have introduced a risk of bias to the studies.
Male circumcision for prevention of heterosexual acquisition of HIV in men
Nandi Siegfried1,*,
Martie Muller2,
Jonathan J Deeks3,
Jimmy Volmink4
Editorial Group: Cochrane HIV/AIDS Group
Published Online: 7 OCT 2009
Nandi Siegfried is a South African public health specialist and has been an active member of the Cochrane Collaboration since 1998. She served as co-director of the South African Cochrane Centre until March 2004. Nandi is the Deputy Co-ordinating Editor of the Cochrane HIV/AIDS Review Group (CRG) and in partnership with the CRG established the successful African HIV/AIDS Mentoring Programme which aims to increase the number of HIV/AIDS reviews relevant to the African region.
Presentations: Using reviews to inform health care decisions in poor countries: achievements and challenges
Martie Muller, Statistician and associated member of the SA Cochrane Centre, Medical Research Council, Cape Town and senior scientist at the Institute for Maritime Technology, Simon’s Town. Areas of interest: biostatistics, meta-analysis, diagnostic test accuracy, functional data analysis, spatio-temporal modeling.
Jimmy Volmink is the Head of the Department of Primary Care at the University of Cape Town, South Africa. He previously worked as the Director of Research and Analysis at the Global Health Council in Washington DC, USA and as the director of the South African Cochrane Centre located in Cape Town, South Africa. He serves on committees and advisory boards of various international organizations, including the Cochrane Collaboration and the World Health Organization. He is an editor of the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group and has authored numerous journal articles and book chapters.
Jon Deeks is Professor of Biostatistics, Director of the Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, and leads the Biostatistics, Evidence Synthesis and Test Evaluation Research Group in the School of Health and Population Sciences, where he also holds a position of Joint Research Lead.
In the case of circumcision trials it was not possible to blind personnel delivering the intervention or the participants. It is possible, however, to blind the assessors, and we therefore only rated the blinding of assessors as adequate, inadequate, or unclear. Participants and study personnel could not be blinded to the allocated interventions (circumcision or not). It is unclear whether this lack of blinding could influence the outcome (HIV status) via, for example, sexual risk behaviour or differentiated treatment by study personnel.
Attrition was high in all three trials. We rated the risk of bias due to incomplete outcome reporting as moderate in all three trials, as acceptable statistical survival analysis techniques were used to estimate HIV event distribution over time by accumulating for staggered enrolment and incomplete discrete follow-up.
Other potential threats to validity
All three trials were stopped early due to data-dependent processes (formal-stopping rules), and this may have introduced a risk of bias to the studies.
Feedback from Elizabeth Royle, 8 May 2009
Summary
In the What's New section the authors make the following statement: "Update of previous review of observational studies; now contains data from three large RCTs. Evidence conclusive and no further updates required."
I appreciate that this review may provide very clear results, but would question the validity of the assertion that no further updates are required. My understanding is that large effect sizes tended to ameliorate over time as more trials are performed and incorporated into meta-analyses. This may be due to an initial publication bias of trials with positive results followed by publication of those with less clear or negative results over time. At any rate, in this case, whether the effect size is reduced through the updating process or becomes even more significant, I do believe that the review authors have an obligation to perform updates on a regular basis in order to ensure that their review incorporates all the available data, and continues to provide the best evidential basis for future healthcare policies in this area.
Fearless187.32.220.234 (talk) 00:17, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Hog morse
As the creator of this article, you may be interested in some comments I left at Talk: Hog morse. SpinningSpark 16:44, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I strongly suspect you're correct. After all I took this from a cracked article, and they're hardly known for putting excessive effort into fact checking. EggCentric 17:03, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Luke Magnotta
Hi your revert of my edit is out of policy WP:TPG - I suggest you to self revert - I object to such use of the project and if you insist and refuse to self revet will report you for investigation - please avioid this and self revert - this is not a place for such experiments - Youreallycan 21:44, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
What are you asking me to revert? I removed the bit you removed while confirming that I had done so after your request. I'm not sure I can do any more really. EggCentric 21:54, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
You could have not opened your thread it would have been good - - opening it and then revert warring its existence and then attempting to delete it was a missie - no big issue - just accept it and move on - Youreallycan 23:23, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi - the issue appears to now be resolved/concluded - I have no objections to you now hatting the discussion - I would still prefer the deletion/archiving and have no objection to that either - any points we needed to learn from the issue appear to have been resolved - I have recently moved to an editing standard of one revert and then discussion and am a little sensitive to being reverted. Sometimes, a quiet removal without loud multi user input is the best way to go, which was me desire at the beginning, anyway, no hard feelings from my side - regards to you-Youreallycan 07:00, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Mad Sunday
Before next year's race, you may want to get some Rain-X...it works very well. ;)
Would laying on the horn behind X4 PAU and acting like a lunatic work to get him to move out of the way? I would have made him very nervous... ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 02:25, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
I don't have to wait till next year, that road is still one way all week! I have used rain-x in the past, but almost forgotten about it... good idea. EggCentric 13:46, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
You should not feed the trolls, as you did at User talk:94.4.117.83. I tried to remove the post in good faith, but the edit filter blocked it. Again, I don't recommend doing as you did. See the link above for more information. Thank you. 69.155.141.125 (talk) 20:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
I'm not feeding them so much as mocking them. If they get a taste of their own medicine they are likely to go away. However, I'll remove it. Incidentally I too have been hit by that edit filter just yesterday, I do think it should be changed... EggCentric 20:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Can I please request you consider removing this. I know you thought it was funny, but I can anticipate some people finding it highly offensive. As it adds nothing constructive, it may be worth just quietly reverting yourself. --Dweller (talk) 16:31, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
I would do but it's been replied to, so the chips will fall where they may. TBH I can't really see it as being seen as that offensive, it's the kind of thing that sounds like it could be but doesn't actually offend anyone. EggCentric 16:35, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Understood. --Dweller (talk) 19:52, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Let People Censor Their Own User Pages, Champ
Jakew, I agree with you here. Zad68 19:45, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
I thought I should give you a head's up, although trolling is perhaps the wrong word. Not that I can prove anything yet. EggCentric 15:30, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Prove what exactly? I want to know what is going on as messages from a random person threatening my user is slightly odd. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 15:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Can you please explain what I have done wrong? Have I accidentally broken a rule or offended you in any way? TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 15:33, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
User:Egg Centric, you're confusing me, too. Can you help me understand what you are seeing in this user's contributions? A new user patrolling ip edits is a little unusual, but I started on patrolling right away when I was new, too, and the edits I looked at seemed appropriate... am I missing the ones you looked at? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
I've been waiting for twinkle to activate, so the last few weeks I've played around with twinkle started to learn how to use it, and then a few weeks back I started doing recent changes sweeps and mostly IP edits as I find they usually have the most vandal activity. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 15:39, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Responded via email. EggCentric 16:51, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
You have not broken any rules or offended me in any way. I don't believe we have interacted at all. Continue (and I suppose feel free to email) EggCentric 16:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
No. You can email me if you want. Otherwise I do not intend to engage you. EggCentric 21:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Egg, of I may say so you are acting very weird about this and not making a whole lot of sense. I don't know how you can warn someone for trolling and then say you haven't interacted with them at all when they ask you to explain why you made those cryptic remarks. I'm assuming this is not another failed attempt at humor, but none of know what it actually is. Generally if you have an accusation to make you should either post evidence supporting your position or keep it entirely to yourself. You have instead elected to make an accusation and then refuse to explain it. It's more than fair for IrishWarden to ask you explain yourself inn the same forum that you chose to make that accusation in the first place. Beeblebrox (talk)
Fine. The guy's obviously up to no good but I can't tell in exactly what way. He's new to online encyclopedias yet already, by his own account, loves admins and hates vandals. Eleven minutes after registering, he installs twinkle. For an hour afterwards he works on his user page. His user page prettied up, around 90 minutes after registering he's reverting vandalism (or so he claims in the edit summary). Of course, by the next day his user page does contain the question "Was Hitler the best Politician ever? - Share your thoughts on my talk page" but that's not a problem because "please note I do not support what Hitler did this thought is just to see what people think". Why does he care what fellow Wikipedians think about such a trollish topic after less than 24 hours here, alledgedly? What does this edit, again in the first day (more or less) mean, especially with respect to his current signature?
And that hasn't even required me looking at any of the edits in July!
There is not a shadow of doubt in my mind that something is amiss here. The most charitable explanation is that he is a former vandal who is now a "poacher turned gamekeeper". If that is correct then he should admit it, if not publicly then by email. It is not hard to come up with less charitable explanations.
None of that is to say that the above is evidence that should convince an impartial jury beyond reasonable doubt nor do I advocate that he ought to be blocked because of it, because so much of it is stuff that adds to a gut feeling that I can't fully express. But I'm convinced I'm correct. EggCentric 22:16, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
He is under no obligation to admit anything to you or to anyone else. The question on his talkpage is admittedly in very bad taste, but the rest of your "evidence" can easily be dismissed if we assume good faith, as we always should barring direct evidence that a user is acting in bad faith. I'm speaking from personal experience here, if you use too much of your own imagination when vandal fighting, you will eventually make a seriously embarassing mistake and jyou could alienate a user who could have become a long term contributor. A much better way to approach this, instead of making vague accusations, would have been to politely ask him why he would put such an inflammatory comment on his user page and how he thought it would help Wikipedia improve to do such a thing. the rest of what you say about the teahouse edit and his current signature... I have no idea what you are implying and I doubt he does either. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:47, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm not interested in proving anything to anyone. The only reason I have responded to anything here, on wiki, is out of respect for yourself. Nevertheless my time only goes so far and I am not going to produce a report analysing every edit he made, I just took a quick look there so that I had something to provide give you and show my thoughts were not completely basis-less. I have no doubt if my life depended upon it I could put together a very comprehensive dossier but in the end the proof of the pudding is in the eating and if he is an editor in good standing in six months' time I shall apologize. EggCentric 22:54, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
if you look at my talk page I was told to install twinkle and the person said try and revert vandal without twinkle initially. Secondly look at bottom of user page, someone made the template for me.nTheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 07:12, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
New message from Gareth Griffith-Jones
Hello, Egg Centric. You have new messages at Gareth Griffith-Jones's talk page. Message added 00:11, 10 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Maybe User:TheIrishWarden is a troll, hiding disruptive edits beneath a cover of useful ones. Maybe, when he makes an incorrect edit, it is not because he is a brand new user but because he is trying to deliberately disrupt the encyclopedia. If so, gather the diffs that show that, and request a block at WP:ANI. What you're doing now, although you may not realize it, makes you look very odd and a little creepy, as if you were harassing a new user for no obvious reason. I know you don't intend to do that. Because you're a decent person, and also because you know that presenting the appearance of harassment only complicates the matter if you are right. So I'm asking you, please, to either (a) Make your case clearly at ANI, (b) Quietly watch until this user either becomes a little more obviously trolling or convinces you that he's editing in good faith, or (c) just leave him alone. Is that reasonable? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:50, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
I really want to learn and co-operate with you I don't want to 'disrupt' wikipedia in anyway, I just made some bad edits. When you were new you must have made mistakes and look 95% of my edit history is good. I just made a bad judgement on the 'gay perve' case and gave the wrong warning with the image case (later reclassified the warning). I hope we can become civil, work together and maybe you could teach me some stuff. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 18:57, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
It's no trouble, I'm going with (b). Thanks for the heads up btw, I am no stranger to making the wrong impression! EggCentric 19:11, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
can I still revert vandalism, war users and then if I have to report them ( past 4th warning )? TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 20:51, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
You can do whatever you like, it is just my strong suggestion that you don't interact with anyone other than to ask questions of experienced editors. EggCentric 20:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
What I'm going to do Is only revert vandalism if I am sure it is vandalism and if unsure I will ask someone or leave it alone. I'm sure I can ask you if I have any worries or questions. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 21:09, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
It would probably be better if you asked someone else. {{helpme}} would be an option... EggCentric 21:16, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
ok, well I now know what's right and wrong and 99% of my edits are good so I don't have anything to worry bou. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 21:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
'control trolling'
I sent this msg to the IP:
Oh sorry about that, I just look for vandalism and obviously putting gay pimp may seem like a personal attack to the person. I am deeply sorry about that, I shall either leave or check about things in future. You have taught me a lesson! I have been on here for a few weeks and have progressed a lot quickly and I still have much to learn so if you have any problem in the future with any of my edits please tell me what I have done wrong. If you messages me and said I was wrong I would have removed the warning, it has blown a bit out of proportion for an bad edit. Also it was tagged as a vandalism edit and Cluebot had previously reverted it also the edit summary saying 'he was a gay pimp' made it look like vandalism. Sorry about that. Thanks TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 3:48 pm, Today (UTC+1)
[edit]
You should have told me about what I did wrong, next time I will have to report you for not assuming good faith and personal attacks as it was pure bullying. It is unacceptable and I will stand for it — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheIrishWarden (talk • contribs) 15:00, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Protip: inviting scruitiny of your edits will not end well for you*, at least not if it attracts the right kind of editor. Anyone with a background of dealing with trolls can see what you are up to. Note that neither that IP, Gareth, or me as far as I know have any connection with one another at all but it's immediately apparent to us. EggCentric 15:05, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
*well, except in the sense that it could cause a lot of drama, which I suppose you may consider a result
P.S. If, however, I am wrong, you have nothing to worry about. I haven't got the power to block you and even if I had I wouldn't, at least not yet. You have not been sanctioned at all. Just edit productively and I will eat my hat. EggCentric 15:09, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
I am not putting any scrutiny on my edits except the mistake I made. I really see no reason why this went so out of proportion. The user should contact me saying that I had made a mistake. I am not a troll and if you do think I am tell me your proof. I will listen to your reply and thats the last I am communicating with you. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 15:31, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
This is the end of this, I have sought external advice and they said my user and contributions are fine and in order. I wish not to hear from any of you again. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 17:32, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Regarding the Bill Duke edit 'gay pimp' and subsequent waves it has caused, I'd like to point out that I never received a message from TIW as described atop this section. --83.119.142.202 (talk) 14:30, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Meh, the guy obviously has a tenuous grasp on reality, see here for example - I haven't tried to impose sanctions on him, I gave him a suggestion at his request on how to avoid appearence of trolling - and there was not insertion of random letters... I explained three times to him now that the letters were an attempt at inserting the image inline in a way that HTML supports but not wiki-syntax. That's the good faith interpretation anyway. The bad faith interpreation is he's putting a trollish spin on things. But anyway I said I will stay out of this! EggCentric 14:36, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you to the IP for clearing this nonsense off my page this morning before I got to it. The daft thing about it is, that TIW has copied something that he originally posted on your page addressed to you,and pasted it on mine yesterday afternoon, and then commented on it as if I had been the originator of the expression "... a blatant concern troll." – but we all know that its originator is User:Egg Centric. TIW really must pay more attention to what he posts, how he posts and his style of writing. I repeat, he has no place here. I can confirm that none involved here, either talking to or about TIW, have had any previous communication. Kind regards to all of you, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 16:43, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Egg Centric. You have new messages at TheIrishWarden's talk page. Message added 15:36, 12 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
From your conduct, as well as the content of your messages recently it occurs to me that an alternative to the troll theory is that you're about twelve. In which case I suggest you come back in a few years time. Nevertheless so long as you aren't doing anything harmful you won't hear from me again, although I can't speak for my "friends" - I doubt that the IP is going to be happy although if he doesn't suffer (like the two of us it seems) from last-word-itis then he may decide discretion is the best part of valour, 'n all that. EggCentric 15:40, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Are you saying I shouldn't be gueesing at his age, or that I shouldn't be having an issue with "editing while young"? If the latter, I have no problem with precocious young editors (at least in principle) but I haven't the slightest compunction in expecting from them the same standards that I would from an adult. Those standards are just not on display here. EggCentric 22:21, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm trying to say that's it's fine to be a younger editor, as long as you act like a mature adult. Several experienced users here have told me that they are teenagers themselves. It's fine if you act like an adult here. Nothing personal against you. Best, Electriccatfish2 (talk) 00:02, 13 July 2012 (UTC).
Well TIW claims at various times to have colleagues[4], to be at college (which in Ireland is generally a college of further education, that is to say would make him 15-18*) or indeed to be past his teenage years or to be rather young [5] (last diff shows all three!). So I'm sure he'll eventually decide whether he's a teenager or not, but it's really no concern of ours. Once again, I completely endorse the right of teenagers to edit here. I'm in my mid twenties myself and remember how irritating arbitrary age restrictions are. Indeed I would even support a bit of tolerance for hormonal acting out. There are limits though. EggCentric 20:44, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
*Of course, there are a few of the "less able" members of society at college later than that...
my research
Yer...that was Scottish! :) I will be publishing hopefully yes! Ok, send me an email to nusa.faric.11@ucl.ac.uk and I will send you the ethics form and the questions. meanwhile you can read the instructions and fill out a questionnaire following this link http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hydra_Rain. Thank you! Nush 90.210.83.229 (talk) 21:27, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
So you are telling me that this :http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Garden_strawberry&diff=502219465&oldid=502219424 is not vandalism. Also they said strawberry is also called a pine berry which is correct although they had no references for it. I gave the IP one warning for the silly message. So my edits are justified. Another user gave them a second warning, I suggest for you to stop scrutinising everything I do and stop pretending you have more power than me on here as you aren't anything special Like an admin at the end of the day. Stop talking about me I really don't care. File a reort or STFU for once.TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 07:25, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
I am willing to turn over a new leaf with you and I think you could teach me a bit. I was just very confused what was going on as a new user and my instinct was to fight back and defend myself, sorry. You may contact me via my talk page. Thanks TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 21:10, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Hurray!
Fuller response comes sometime fairly soon. EggCentric 22:28, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Egg Centric. You have new messages at TheIrishWarden's talk page. Message added 19:00, 16 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Oh well, I tried. EggCentric 19:30, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
I respect that you tried but I think for the moment it will be best that we go our own ways. Although that doesn't mean I won't co-operate with you in the near future. I will hope to see you around and talk to you in a the near future when I become more established on here. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 20:45, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Best of luck. Just remember it's an encyclopedia, no more, no less. EggCentric 20:47, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
I FEEL YOU SHOULD BE CONGRATULATED
You have taken enormous trouble to educate and sympathise with the above – long before the "gay" incident, I see from your postings here and there – and I was infuriated tonight when I noticed the immediate removal of your careful and well-written advice this evening:
(cur | prev) 18:55, July 16, 2012 Egg Centric (talk | contribs) . . (16,748 bytes) (+307) . . (→Truth?: new section) (undo)...............
(cur | prev) 18:53, July 16, 2012 TheIrishWarden (talk | contribs) . . (16,441 bytes) (-2,886) . . (I get it but some of it is not true) (undo)
(cur | prev) 18:46, July 16, 2012 Egg Centric (talk | contribs) . . (19,327 bytes) (+2,886) . . (→Advice: new section) (undo)
I did not know of you before the "gay" issue, and as far as I am concerned, the only good thing to have come out of the ensuing days, as far as this matter is concerned, is that I do now. You are clearly one of the (all too few) 'good guys' that inhabit this Wikipedian "community" that some of us take seriously. Indeed, as is User:83.119.142.202 who has behaved in an exemplary way from start to finish.
Couldn't agree more. I am sure we will keep in touch with each other. All the best, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 14:38, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
You seem like a good chap
With sensible opinions on "TheIrishWarden" (who has no place on wikipedia). Would you care to pass on the following message:
"I IZ GONNA GET YOU YOU HORRID LITTLE SHIT"
Many thanks! 94.1.62.19 (talk) 22:19, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
With all your respect I believe we have made up and to pass something on like that wouldn't be nice. Thanks TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 07:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
You couldn't be more wrong you little shit. 94.1.62.19 (talk) 07:07, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
you've got mail
Hello, Egg Centric. 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.
Hello, Egg Centric. You have new messages at Gareth Griffith-Jones's talk page. Message added 10:49, 19 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Although a few days ago I said I didn't want to talk to you. I believe that I was wrong so lets talk again. Thank you for making me realise that CUTKD was a bit of a bandit and I was an imbecile following him, I am sorry to you for anything I may have said bad about you. Thanks and I hope to learn from you. Thєíríshwαrdєn - írísh αnd prσud (talk) 11:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
SPI-CUTKD
I've just seen that the IP's that attack mostly me operate in the exact same time periods as CUTKD (at 7am-8am and 5pm -11pm BST) this suggests that they operate them. There was an attack this morning (BST) at 7am so I'd say it will be likely that there will be one at 5pm-11pm (BST) if there is we know it is them who are operating these nasty IP's. I've put this in on the SPI already. Thєíríshwαrdєn - írísh αnd prσud (talk) 14:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
A lot of the evidence requires OUTing. Is that an issue? EggCentric 16:32, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
I have filed a new case under Hamish Ross under the link given by the user at the beginning of this talk. Thєíríshwαrdєn - írísh αnd prσud (talk) 16:37, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
It can't really be used as proof as anyone can claim to be a sock of anyone else. It is certainly enough to block that IP though. With respect to your captain question, you'll have to use your imagination as I can't go into more detail on-wiki lest I violate outing policies. Hint: google CUTKD. EggCentric 17:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Well one thing we do know is that all the IP's are connected as the IP who made as comment about an hour ago expected a block which suggests they know what happens when I get harassment messages! Thєíríshwαrdєn - írísh αnd prσud (talk) 17:41, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
CUTKD
CUTKD has been blocked indefinitly for sock puppetry. So that was the person who was attacking me. Are you pleased with the result and why did you remove your comment? thanks Thєíríshwαrdєn - írísh αnd prσud (talk) 20:43, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Pleased would be the wrong word. I would just say that the right thing has been done. I removed the comment because I was asked to off wiki by the person concerned - they felt it was outing them to too many random people. EggCentric 20:50, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Oh right well I understand and weeks like I betrayed them but I believe it was the best path. I just hope the harassment messages will now stop. Regards, Thєíríshwαrdєn - írísh αnd prσud 08:09, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
I filled in my signature and added a brief comment about my vendettas and such, you know, so if it fails I at least get them to feel the terror for a week or however long it is. May as well get some fun out of it eh ? Penyulap ☏ 14:16, 24 Jul 2012 (UTC)
Very much so. I've no doubt you'll get a few opposes from automatons but I do hope some independent thinkers will stuff enough supports your way. It's up and running now, anyhoo. EggCentric 17:33, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Could there be a more classic example created, Today has been a surreal dream, mostly because of the interaction with my friend Eddaido, the currents of that conversation seemed so perfectly fundamental, it was flawless. There is a thing, a copy of an original which does not exist, this is the concept behind the movie makers of the matrix series, they had everyone read the book about it before working on the story, I'll have to find it for you. But basically all that you see on TV advertising, all the smiles that are fake and all the perfect hair and perfect everything, it's a copy of something that doesn't exist. Today was surreal because it was the original. Helping my friend, and then the unanimous example of people so easily fooled by refusing to read, by refusing to read, because they refuse to read. People can look at that, and say, there it is. There is the original, there is why wikipedia has failed, because the mob is so easily and completely and comprehensively fooled. How does it feel to be a part of history Egg Centric ? Did you feel it coming today ? could you feel yourself carried along the path ?
With pure heart and pure action and pure intention, the perfect example has been created. Now we can say, we are artists and teachers. Penyulap ☏ 19:01, 24 Jul 2012 (UTC)
I just had a long chat with someone and I'm fully Centric now, :) are you ok, or still shell-shocked ? Penyulap ☏ 20:09, 24 Jul 2012 (UTC)
The ether swallowed my reply to this, it would seem. If there was any teaching, it was by everyone else, although I fear that they didn't teach us anything we already didn't know. I am rather disappointed in some people's lack of reading skills, of comprehension, of imagination - and then they call you the autistic? Doesn't make sense to me. EggCentric 20:13, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
This is the beautiful thing, that one can be truly exceptional, truly a genius amongst men, the epitome of the collective intellect by simply opening your eyes,... Again I expose the hidden for all to see. Ask what kind of people gather in the different places around the project. It's a circus and Twinkle is the wack-a-mole game for all comers, smack the newbie, smack them hard, smack them quick. The Roman arena of the ANI, the pomp of Arbcom, and who is drawn to the RfA, who is electing, by numerics the admins ? Who pays attention to who is who and who is not. How closely are they examining who they trust and who they don't. I wonder who would I trust. Well, I know my offer was genuine and proper, and you are not the first to suggest I become an admin, not by far. I do believe you three that I recall have put in the thoughtful consideration required. My intentions were genuine. In the end there are how many, 200 active, so one more good one won't change the equation here I guess. Penyulap ☏ 21:17, 24 Jul 2012 (UTC)
read this proposal, and then skip down to the end of section. Then tell me if it was worth it. Penyulap ☏ 15:49, 25 Jul 2012 (UTC)
non, rein de rein, non... EggCentric 19:41, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, it got pretty old pretty fast for me, to be honest. Penyulap ☏ 20:01, 26 Jul 2012 (UTC)
hey, would you like something to cheer you up ? Dr. Blofeld seems way to happy of late, we should get some of that action eh ? Penyulap ☏ 20:03, 26 Jul 2012 (UTC)
Dispute Resolution IRC office hours.
Hello there. As you expressed interest in hearing updates to my research in the dispute resolution survey that was done a few months ago, I just wanted to let you know that I am hosting an IRC office hours session this coming Saturday, 28th July at 19:00 UTC (approximately 12 hours from now). This will be located in the #wikimedia-officeconnect IRC channel - if you have not participated in an IRC discussion before you can connect to IRC here.
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. Lucasoutloud (talk) 23:09, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
On unblocking Penyulap
Hi, Egg Centric. You say "No active admin would dare to remove a block by Coren". I really don't think most admins are as feeble or as intimidated by former arbs/well-known users as that. Or, well, at least I think a substantial minority aren't. When I saw your comment, I thought briefly of resuming my tools and unblocking Penyulap, just to prove you wrong; only, I think Pesky has the best grip on the matter, and she doesn't seem to be recommending an unblock right now. But if I did, I should think the people who are horrified by insubordination would be too busy holding my block of a sitting arb and my RFAR of Jimbo, both in 2009, against me to worry about a revert of a mere block by Coren. (Hello, Coren, surely you're not watching this page?) Actually, I believe anything like that is forgotten within a year at most, except by those most nearly involved. Sadly, as I'm quite proud of both actions. :-) Bishonen | talk 14:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC).
Thank you for participating in my RfA. I appreciate your sentiments, although... I dare say I'd get quite a degree of amusement were the main page to resemble a desk in the back of a Jr. High classroom (if you know what I mean). ;)
You need to learn this: ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ and these: 12345678910. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.9.254.228 (talk) 09:14, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you
You actually convinced me that the Disappearance of Tia Sharp was infact notable. By consistent coverage by media and sourcing. I had started to question if it was infact notable. Thank you.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:26, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
If you want to and get to it before me you are welcome to do updates on the article if you feel like it.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:18, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Busy but you never know EggCentric 23:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Very strange reasoning for deletion by one user at the AfD. I am quite offended almost by it. Anyway im moving on.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:08, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Tia Sharp article title
I believe you recently moved the article Disappearance of Tia Sharp to the title "Murder of Tia Sharp". Please don't do this: the body found has not yet been identified as hers, and the exact nature of her presumed death has not yet been determined by the legal process. If the body is identified as hers, I think a move to Death of Tia Sharp would currently be most appropriate once the AfD process has finished. -- The Anome (talk) 16:55, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I know. I also moved to Death of Tia Sharp. I think it would be appropriate now - there's no reason to wait for either AfD or formal identification when reliable sources are syaing it's the body. There's also a possibility of alleged murder of tia sharp... EggCentric 17:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I'd wait until the AfD to finish; formal official identification of the body will almost certainly have been announced by then. Having said which, if we take reliable sources' word for it, and are going to move it before the AfD finishes, Death of Tia Sharp would be the best alternative title. -- The Anome (talk) 17:19, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
RS are saying that it's murder too. The Police have arrested their suspect and charged him with this, the BBC have reported it in those terms. These are not sources reliable enough to prove it in court (a jury is needed for that) and he is still only an alleged murderer, as it would be libellous to describe a person as other than this, before their conviction. As a hypothetical "crime" is not itself a legal entity capable of being libelled though, it is not libellous to describe the act as murder (even if it's eventually proven otherwise in court). Andy Dingley (talk) 17:24, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Just so you know, because of socking, I have protected your userpage for 6 hours. If you do not wish this, feel free to ask at WP:RFPP to have it removed. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 21:54, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
erm, I have no problem at all in principle with this but what has actually happened? EggCentric 22:58, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Please contact me about a page edit i need help with : privatemgmt@aol.com
i will provide a phone # where we can talk... very important Thx Mike Dubaidevils (talk) 09:56, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Credo Reference
I'm sorry to report that there were not enough accounts available for you to have one. I have you on our list though and if more become available we will notify you promptly.
We're continually working to bring resources like Credo to Wikipedia editors, and this will very hopefully not be your last opportunity to sign up for one. If you haven't already, please check out WP:HighBeam and WP:Questia, where accounts are still available. Cheers, Ocaasi 19:12, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Peny
Egg, howdy. Peny wasn't causing any disruption, and he makes contributions to WP in various ways, various means. What's the deal w/ SPI, and is there discussion about this? (Why doesn't an Admin reverse Elen's block; it doesn't seem objectively rendered to me, looks like Peny inadvertently upset her with personal questions. [What was she doing at the page, anyway?] Peny is great to read; his thoughts are valid but thinks in a way I've never seen before; he's fascinating, really, and unlike many editors and admins, has some vision re how Wikipedia can be top notch, to what is nearly also an ideal. I think what WP needs more is some vision.) What the H is going on? I don't understand. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 19:32, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
It's possible to theorise all day about this, but what it comes down to is it's very common for the mediocre to feel threatened by that which they cannot understand, and thus to try to stamp it out before it takes them outside of their comfort zone. I'd like to think they'll regret it in the future but it seems unikely. Don't worry, in the end they always lose. EggCentric 16:20, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is approved!
Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.
The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code you were emailed. If you did not receive a code, email wikiocaasi@yahoo.com your Wikipedia username.
If you need assistance, email 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. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
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.
Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow
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
Hi Egg Centric! I just closed this AfD, and I noticed that you used the word "vanity" in your nomination there. This is something we like to avoid, and if you look at the instructions in WP:AFDFORMAT it specifically says not to use it, and links to this post by Jimbo which explains things pretty well. Would you be willing to strike the word? Or even replacing it would be ok I think - this would be a good situation to apply WP:IAR. Best — Mr. Stradivarius(have a chat) 07:36, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Done. I did think the term was vanity page but apparently not then! Although to be fair at least in this case we know that she was the main author as opposed to the vanity pages Jimbo was disliking the term for, I think. EggCentric 17:21, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!
Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code. Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
Create your account by entering the requested information. (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID. (The account is now active for 1 year).
If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia).
A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
Of course all Heroin is in general synthetic (or rather half-synthetic) and it is also injectable, just like Krokodil or Draino is injectable. I still find it necessary for a normal audience to point out this heroin is pharmaceutical-grade and fit for injection by a doctor's standard. This is responsible for the health improvement of subjects, while having a secure supply is mainly responsible for their social improvement. Your statement about Heroin being pretty harmless in generall isn't all wrong, but this article is meant to be encyclopedic. And hearing that heroin can be benefical in some circumstances is enough to digest for somebody who has been taught by years of TV that heroin makes you immediately addicted and damages your organs and brain beyond repair within weeks. Kinds regards,
--Hisredrighthand (talk) 00:01, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
I realise you were trying to be helpful, but this edit wasn't a good idea:[6] By adding a message to the page asking readers not to include certain allegations, you only draw further attention to them. In fact, that edit itself violated Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy, by introducing highly contentious, if not libellous, claims to the biography of a living person. Next time there's a negative rumour going around about a living person, just watch the article and revert anyone who adds it, and ask for it to be protected if necessary; don't add a pre-emptive warning that defeats itself by mentioning the very allegations you're trying to keep out. Thanks for reading. Robofish (talk) 22:13, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Lionratz. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Mr. Brain because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks!
I'm leaving you this note to let you know that I've revision-deleted your edits to the McAlpine article regarding allegations against him. Even if accusations against a person appear to be legitimate, WP:BLPCRIME suggests not including them until a conviction is made. There has not yet been a conviction against McAlpine, and furthermore, the allegations appear to be unsubstatiated. Therefore, I have removed them from the article to avoid violation of the BLP policy. – GorillaWarfare(talk) 23:06, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Egg Centric, you asked for a 10-day reminder about the Liverpool meetup on 24 November. Well, it's a couple of days late, but here it is! Hope to see you there, Bazonka (talk) 18:19, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
JSTOR will provide you access via an email invitation, so to get your account, please email me (swallingwikimedia.org) with...
the subject line "JSTOR"
your English Wikipedia username
your preferred email address for a JSTOR account
The above information will be given to JSTOR to provide you with your account, but will otherwise remain private. Please do so ASAP or drop me a message to say you don't want/need an account any longer. We're waiting to deliver access to everyone until we have the 100 recipients collected, so the sooner you reply the quicker everyone can start using JSTOR.
A few months ago, you participated in a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Did you know about Gibraltar-related DYKs on the Main Page. I am proposing that the temporary restrictions on such DYKs, which were imposed in September 2012, should be lifted and have set out a case for doing so at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs. If you have a view on this, please comment at that page. Prioryman (talk) 21:59, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion,
a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
Done - It should visit within 24 hours to archive this page. I'll come back around to make sure everything went well.
wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
wikimedia.org.
Egg Centric 01:19, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Lionratz. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Mr. Brain because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks!
Template:Ellipsis has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. AussieLegend (✉) 00:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)