User talk:FeralOink

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Please leave messages for me in a new section, at the end of the page. Thank you!

World of Wikipedia

Please comment on Talk:Tensor[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tensor. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

You might have a look here[edit]

…at a bloke in trouble… [1]. (talk) 04:08, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you![edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

  • Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
  • Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
  • Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
  • Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
  • Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
  • Research coordinators: run reference services

Sign up now

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)


Best user name ever barnstar! :) - Wikidemon (talk) 05:20, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail![edit]

Hello, FeralOink. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Invitation To Participate In Usability Study.
Message added 17:32, 19 November 2015 (UTC). 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.

—M@sssly 17:32, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Accidental revert[edit]

My apologies for accidentally reverting you. — JJMC89(T·C) 04:53, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

You are entirely forgiven, JJMC89! No harm done. I would be remiss in not forgiving you, as we are fellow mathematical statisticians ;o) Don't be a stranger! --FeralOink (talk) 04:15, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Port Authority[edit]

Re this edit summary: an anonymous IP editor put that mess about the Port Authority into the template {{Common logical symbols}} for some reason. It had nothing to do with your edit, but your edit summary helped me discover the problem, so thanks. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:53, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Oh wow, you are THAT David Eppstein, the famous mathematician! I wrote about you on Quora, see here: Ellie Kesselman's answer to Who are some of the active Wikipedians who are famous enough to have their own entry on Wikipedia? I am Ellie Kesselman ;o) You actually appeared twice, but someone collapsed the earlier answer. I also read your blog on LiveJournal. I like your periodic arXiv highlight entries. In my Quora answer, I used a photograph of you that I found in the collapsed answer, but I don't know if it is a copyvio. If you would like to provide another BIGGER photo, that would be great. My answer, i.e. YOU, is the only correct one, other than Jimmy Wales. All the rest are just frequent editors. You are actually notable outside of Wikipedia!
As for that template spam, it looks a lot better now! The reason why I noticed it was because I was trying to remove all the white space in the Triple Bar article, just prior to the references. I still see that there, even after your edit. It isn't a big deal of course, but it is a little odd. Any ideas, or should we just leave it alone? Thank you for stopping by!!! --FeralOink (talk) 02:24, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Request for assistance on AfC submission by RevengeOfTheRobots[edit]

Im trying to submit an article and it's been rejected two times. The first time I understand. However the second one seems more like a bias opinion with nothing really concrete. For example the line when stated like an advertisement. There's no real clarity to what that means or how that conclusion was came about. Lastly, when it was said not just articles created by the creator. Well obviously I did not create the articles that are referenced in the content. Im wondering how this person came to the notion that I wrote the content that this article is linking back to you? Def need some assistance.

This is for the Online Kratom article RevengeOfTheRobots (talk) 04:23, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure![edit]

TWA guide left bottom.png
Hi FeralOink! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 00:17, Monday, February 15, 2016 (UTC)

Get Help
About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

request for comment for BLP article[edit]

Hi there. I noticed you're a member of the biography wikiproject. Could you please weigh in at this RfC regarding the anthropologist/linguist Georgiy Starostin and whether his hobby as a music blogger should be included in the article? Some editors have argued for including it in the lead, others for mentioning it briefly somewhere in the article body, and others for excluding it altogether. Dan56 (talk) 12:22, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Altegrity Risk International, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page USIS (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) 09:13, 5 June 2016 (UTC)


Some of your changes to the Quora article appear to have been reverted by the page creator; please check to make sure. I thought most of your edits were sound. (talk) 06:22, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Baltic Dry Index - reference to Macrobond removed[edit]


in your edit from 2015 you've removed a mention of data vendor Macrobond, while left other Bloomberg and Thomson Reuters. can i ask you to reconsider / revert that edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pqd (talkcontribs) 10:48, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

thanks for the prompt reply! i believe that Thomson Reuters also does not provide free access to the BDI historical data, yet it was listed there. that's why i decided to add reference to Macrobond and was surprised with it being removed, while other reference kept intact.Pqd (talk) 07:11, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Re: MyWOT talk page[edit]

I undid my contribution to the talk page, because a WOT moderator seemed to have evidence of this "TOW Software" being WOT, and I found some evidence on Google too.

As for the claim in July TOW went out of business, the only thing I noticed on WOT was they moved the servers from the Finnish ISP Nebula OY to the Amazon cloud, triggering weird bugs, as well as poor performance for a while. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BFeely (talkcontribs) 12:25, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

United States presidential election, 2016[edit]

No offense. But why won't you folks let me bring that article in line (as much as possible) with the others? United States presidential election, 2012 & the others before it, have Elected President. PS - Will I have to change all 57 other infoboxes to President-elect, so to make them all consistent? GoodDay (talk) 21:33, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi GoodDay. As of now, Obama and previous presidents were elected presidents, since the electoral college is completed for those elections. At the moment, Trump has the official status of president-elect. Also, I don't want people to keep editing the article, implying that the election results are uncertain in any way. Trump IS the elected president of the United States. Some of the other editors were writing that Trump was "projected" to win! That makes it seem like the election isn't over yet, or that there remains some uncertainty of the status of the outcome.
By the way, I am not happy with the person who keeps on reverting your changes to the electoral college count of 306 and lowers it to 200-something. I am going to comment on the talk page about that. You are correct. That other user is not, and has reverted at least 3 times today on the electoral college vote count for Trump.--FeralOink (talk) 21:43, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
He's going to continue to be President-elect after the Electoral College votes, as well. I put Projected Elected President as a compromise & also because the Electoral Votes are listed a projected. IMHO, the bottom of the infobox should be Elected President per the numerious sources. GoodDay (talk) 21:46, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
GoodDay, tell me what you mean by the other 57 infoboxes please? I'm sorry, but I just noticed that you added that now. Do mean for the US presidential election 2016 article, or for the other articles on presidential elections? Those other election infoboxes should stay the same. Only this article will change. Unless I have misunderstood you. Thank you.--FeralOink (talk) 21:49, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The 57 others: United States presidential election, 1788 to United States presidential election, 2012 which use Elected President. The 2016 article should do the same per vast number of sources. GoodDay (talk) 21:51, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Correct, GoodDay, those 57 others ARE "Elected Presidents". They should remain as they are. Obama and previous presidents were elected presidents, since the electoral college is completed for those elections. Trump is the president-elect until he assumes office on January 17, 2016. You are correct that he is not the president even after the electoral college vote. But he IS the president-elect now, and all those other past presidents are correctly noted as "Elected President".--FeralOink (talk) 21:56, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Thus the reason I put Projected Elected President. It's projected that the Electoral college will elect Donald Trump president. As for the title President-elect, Trump will continue to use that title up until he takes office on January 20, 2017. GoodDay (talk) 22:03, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svg This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Please note that United States presidential election, 2016 and several related articles are under a 1RR (see the talk page for more information). Ks0stm (TCGE) 03:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review needs your help[edit]

Hi FeralOink,

As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).

Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.

Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.

It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.

(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, FeralOink. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Devsisters resubmitted[edit]

Hi, FeralOink! As per your request, I've replaced most of the Twitter and Facebook citings with other sources, with one exception: The discontinuation of the game OvenBreak 2, which was only announced on the official Facebook page. The draft text says "Discontinuation of service announced" instead of "servide discontinued", so the self-source reference might be acceptable for that? If not, "citation needed" or simply removing that piece of information appear to be the only alternatives. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:23, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:R Lang & Associates[edit]

NPOV linked references added. All references verified. Eli blu (talk) 05:41, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected[edit]

AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)