User talk:Kim Dent-Brown/Archive 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9

Contents

quoted you

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#So_what_happens_with_disputed_closes NE Ent 17:33, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

No problems! Thanks for letting me know. Was a little anxious until I saw the quote then I realised it had been one of my sensible moments.... Will watch discussion with interest! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 09:45, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Crickets chirping

Hi, Kim Dent-Brown. Regarding this discussion, I noticed that you requested at least one participant to stand down and "leave the AN/I field free . . . for other editors to respond". I think that was a very reasonable request, but it needs following up. It's now more than 48 hours later—an eternity in ANI time—and the only other editors who have responded have made unconstructive comments, some of them reckless and hurtful. I have to say that in all my years of editing Wikipedia, this is one of the worst situations I have ever seen. It's already doing damage to editor morale, and the longer it stays open, the more damage it's liable to do. If no admin is going to take the time to wade through the wall of text and make a reasoned, evidence-based finding of fact soon, then may I suggest the thread should simply be closed? I dread an Arbcom case, but at least the clerks there would, I hope, rein in the worst of the worst. Rivertorch (talk) 05:53, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree it's going nowhere and the likeliest outcome is a closure with no decision. But I have declared a preferred option so I can't close. Another editor has filed a request for closure so hopefully someone will be long soon... Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 08:24, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Right, I wasn't suggesting you close it personally. I don't disagree with your prediction, but I rather hope that the closer will be able to filter out the noise and find the substance. A no-decision closure will just be delaying the inevitable. Rivertorch (talk) 08:32, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Help needed on Germanic Neopaganism

The page is stuck at the same point it was months ago, and user "ThorLives" has done nothing else than continuing the removal of any source or sentence which does not fit his point of view. This situation must finish, and the article has to be rewritten. Reliable sources have been found and listed in the talkpage. Please take a look. --Bhlegkorbh (talk) 21:04, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

talk page delete

I'm thinking you deleted the wrong talk page for North8000? That is, you deleted the archive version not the redirect? NE Ent 11:06, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Oh bugger. I deleted the talk page which the interface invited me to delete I deleted the project page you had CSD'd. I'll go back and check what I did and see if I can sort it out....Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 11:37, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Undelete Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchiveNorth8000 Discussion, I think. NE Ent 11:41, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Done, thanks for the redlink which is now blue! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 11:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Bats

Those two are completely (and skirting personal attacks here) obsessed. They have a long-running and extensive (even by internet feuding standards) disagreement off-wiki. I would prefer the letter of policy is adhered to because I have no doubt one or the other will use the proffered rope, and at that point there will not even be the appearence of impropriety to prevent an extended vacation from WP (or at the minimum, WP-Bat-related issues). I have no issues at all with the blocks you placed. Only in death does duty end (talk) 14:10, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

No problem. You're quite right in suggesting we stick to the letter of policy here. This does appear to be, as you say, an extraordinary feud and not one to be pursued on Wikipedia! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 14:15, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

A very beautiful Nectarine Pie.jpg The support there with HiLo was much appreciated and hopefully taken in good spirit. I was always told to count to 10 before replying, but it doesn't actually work, if anything it just gave me time to think of something worse to say. Thanks again Jenova20 (email) 11:54, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Psychoanalysis

Hi Kim Dent-Brown, are you still interested in the evaluation paragraph? I saw your edits today. --WSC ® 19:03, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

So, you don't have to answer! I think your behavior is really impolite. --WSC ® 05:40, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
We're all volunteers here and no, I don't have to answer. This is not my job. Yes I am interested in the article - can we please discuss edits at the talk page so others can see and participate? I will reply when I can but please don't expect me to hold to a timetable. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 08:12, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

I didn't say its forbidden. I said its impolite. I've also limited time. Its no problem when you answer: it takes time to answer --WSC ® 15:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)j

FIY

Just to be on the safe side: Here's my last contrib to the discussion! [1] Please add a NPOV-Box while the discussion is ongoing. --WSC ® 11:02, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Replied on article talk page - please can we keep the discussion there? Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 11:34, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Hatting of section on closure

Kim: The purpose of that comment was not to argue with anyone but to highlight an infringement, which is highly relevant. You can't have someone showing contempt to everyone and saying that doesn't count. Unless you have some alternative mechanism for dealing with Hilo the comment should be highlighted in another section. Sports&politics is learning if she wants a comment hidden, all she needs to do is argue relentlessly and change the subject until an administrator removes the entire section on the basis of irrelevance. This has happened before. It sends the wrong message that relentless arguing is an effective political strategy for censorship of relevant material (it could happen here as well unfortunately). --Andromedean (talk) 06:44, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you

Stevie Kick.jpg Swift-kick-to-the-pants Barnstar
Thank you for giving me a kick in the pants to close down a festering boil of drama. Hasteur (talk) 12:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Userfy

Please can you userfy the Barry Cook (Martial Artist) article to userspace to resume correcting and repairing the article to go live. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hjc2012 (talkcontribs) 17:01, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, I have userfied the page to one of your subpages here. I've copied what looked like the most complete version just before it started to be criticised. It will need a lot of work before it's ready, please don't overlook the criticism, which remains valid. Much of what's here reads as very self-promotional and is poorly backed up by sources. The best bet is to trim it right back to what is supported by third party sources (ie not Cook's own site/s) and start from there. Good luck, please ask if you need further help. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 20:48, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I will follow your advice and may contact you again to ask for a review if that is ok. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hjc2012 (talkcontribs) 11:30, 13 December 2012 (UTC) Hello, can you please take a look at the change I have made, many new refs have also been added and some paragraphs cut, it seems a lot more streamlined now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hjc2012 (talkcontribs) 18:59, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Thank you, can you please reveiew my changes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hjc2012 (talkcontribs) 11:24, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Will do, I'll reply on the talk page so that others can join in and we have the discussion linked to the article. I'll be there soon! PS -remember to sign your talk page edits with ~~~~ which will make your signature appear. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 11:31, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

NOTE: Draft page and talk page deleted subsequently per editor request. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 13:09, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

sports and politics, london 2012 olympics

Here's what to do about s& P, based on many cases like this that i've seen:

  • 1. protect the article in question either for a period of about a month or indefinitly
  • 2. place an interaction ban on S&P and Andromedean
  • 3. alert S&P that her "It's not my fault it's your fault" attitude is not going to help her case as she has failed to listen when i said it both on an/i and on her talkpage.

done. 199.101.61.190 (talk) 10:21, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

This belongs at AN/I, not here. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 11:03, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

i've said that on an/i already and my posts are being ignored. it's a simple solution that nobody has looked at save IP 88 and myself. 199.101.61.190 (talk) 14:41, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Kim - just a courtesy check to make sure you saw my suggestion in the thread? It did receive support from several participants in the dispute.--v/r - TP 23:13, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
I think I did - the one about the 6 month cool-off with Andromedean to propose sourced changes after that? I thought it was a good idea but that the same effect would be gained by the solution I chose. 3 months, 6 months... I'm not sure the editors there will be able to reach consensus in 6 years! Thanks for your suggestion which was about he only concrete and feasible one anybody made in that whole damned thread, and it did influence my thinking when I closed. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 23:22, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Ok great thanks, just wanted to be sure.--v/r - TP 23:36, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for giving a more extensive closing notice than "no admin action required". 85.167.109.64 (talk) 23:03, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

Olive branch drawing.svg The Dispute Resolution Noticeboard Olive Branch
This is one of the most lengthy disputes I have ever participated in (as an uninvolved editor). Thank you for taking the time to deal with it in the manner you did. Full support for your assessment! Amadscientist (talk) 12:40, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Why thank you! Very unexpected and very kind of you, I love olives!! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 13:04, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

question

Another person in my building is trying to create a Wikipedia account and will probibly share my IP address, what can he or i do so we don't appear to be a soc of one another? 199.101.61.190 (talk) 23:33, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Either or both of you need to register for a Wikipedia account and even if you share an IP address, as long as you are logged in your contributions will be distinct. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 23:37, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

hmmm, i'll have to see, he like me isn't on wikipedia much due to schedule, i'm just on here more often because of the hollidays. I spoke with him about this and i'm going to look at possibly creating an account, but i don't want to try anything untill january, ok? i think he's going to start his around mid jan too. he's totally new to the project so i'll do my best to give him knowledge. 199.101.61.190 (talk) 00:21, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Before i forget, his name will be "Alien Arceus" 199.101.61.190 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:22, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

related question

Now i personaly see some issues on what is considered a soc because it looks like anyone editing under the same IP as a registered user can be labeled as a socpuppet. What if something like this example happened: Building: Radison Hotel, Winnipeg, Manitoba. A person checks into the hotel on December 10th. they get free wifi connection and are staying in room 1504. While at the hotel, they either log in to their wikipedia account or if they don't have one, are in the process of creating one. they make some questionable edits and let's say edit war with another user. This person is stayign in the hotel for 14 days. ON December 17, a totally unrelated person checks in for 10 days. they're to stay in room 2309. they see an article on Wikipedia and they decide it needs some touching up on it because they're an expert in that field i.e. astronomy. They make the edit. For the sake of this example, let's say the registered user in 1504's edit war is going on on Sir isic neuton, and let's also say that both users share the IP address (what ever the Radison Hotel in Downtown Winnipeg is) later, the editor in 2309 goes onto wikipedia to look up a theory of his, and gets a notice of a message on the IP talk page. he goes on and sees an acusation of socpuppetry, and wonders "What is this shit?" not knowing what a socpuppet or socpuppetry is at all. he looks at the link to socpuppetry and is like "WHAaaaaaaat?!" he has no idea that 8 floors below him is a registered user using the Radison's IP that was recently in an edit war on Isic neuton's article. What happens in a case like this? to me, i think that the pollicy itself needs clairification on what happens in such a case as i mentioned, but that's just me. for now though, what would happen, and what would be the right thing for admins to do? i'm just curious. 199.101.61.190 (talk) 00:55, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Our systems (software and human) are pretty good at spotting socking when it occurs, and distinguishing it from innocent IP-sharing. But to be safe, get yourself an account by following the link I gave above. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 01:06, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

account creation impossible

Apparently, a user known as "comet egypt" is using my e-mail address which i've had for 8 years as of december 28th. is there any way to fix this? i have a theory on how it happened, but either way i'd like that fixed if possible. 199.101.61.190 (talk) 09:06, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't understand the problem. There's no user with this or any similar name. I don't know much about the technicalities of account creation so I don't know why or how someone could be using your email address. All I can suggest is asking for help at the link given at WP:ACCOUNT. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 10:55, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

user: Comet Egypt was blocked in 2011 by Toddst1 and looks rather like a troll. 199.101.61.190 (talk) 19:04, 21 December 2012 (UTC) Also around the time of the account creation of this user, I had my data stolen from me by Anonymous, the hacking organization, and Comet Egypt may be a member, which is how they would have gotten my e-mail, i still think it's a troll who just entered a random e-mail then accessed my e-mail to confirm it. I've sinse changed my passowrd and change it every 6 months. can i ask for an investigation into this? i'll be awayaway for a short while and won't be able to respond today, but when i get back, i'll start looking in to this myself more. now it's off to the airport for me. 19:08, 21 December 2012 (UTC)199.101.61.190 (talk)

I'm sorry, this isn't something I have the knowledge or capabilities to deal with. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:42, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Christmas tree sxc hu.jpg Merry Christmas!
Wishing you a merry Christmas and a happy new year! Surturz (talk) 08:08, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wiccan Roots.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wiccan Roots.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 23:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I've removed it again. Relevancy and flavour are all well and good for a free image, but non-free images require a little more than that. Book covers are rarely going to be justified on articles about authors, unless the covers are themselves somehow significant. I'd have no objection to the use of the cover in an article about the book, if it's notable. (As an aside, your PhD thesis sounds fascinating. I have a friend who is looking at the psychological aspects of character creation, focussing on pen-and-paper role-playing games.) J Milburn (talk) 22:14, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
I understand your argument and won't replace the image. But that wasn't the reasoning you used in your original edit summary when you removed the image for the first time, hence my initial restoration. (PS: I'm a long-time role-playing gamer and I'm also intrigued by the links between our own character/personality and those we construct in fictional activities such as RPGs...) Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 08:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the trout

I deserved it. Rob gets on my tits. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I feel the same way sometimes with him and a few others I could name. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for removing the bogus AfD notice from my user subpage. As you may or may not be aware, I had to have my user page and my talk page semi'd because I am the target of User:Mangoeater1000 and his many sockpuppets. I appreciate your help with my barnstar page. Regards, 72Dino (talk) 16:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Of the three or four times I've started a thread at AN/I, I was in one case blocked, and in another case threatened with a block. Glad to be on the good side of karma this time. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 16:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Pas de problème - heureux que je pourrais être utile! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 16:20, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

ANI query

Hello, reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:PinkAmpersand#Discussion_at_WP:ANI led me to try to view the actual WP:ANI discussion but couldn't find it. I never tried browsing WP:ANI before. Thought you as an administrator might be able to explain. Thanks, David F (talk) 01:54, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

AN/I topic-ban discussion

Hi. I'm a bit disappointed that you just said "I'm done here" at this discussion, without waiting for a response. Could you at least read my reply to you, and see whether it changes your mind? Scolaire (talk) 19:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Would add that I haven't engaged in moves etc. since your intervention, unlike the other party, and now expect you to follow through with some action. Brocach (talk) 00:44, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry if my "I'm done here" seemed impatient or dismissive. It's a function of my disbelief that such a small matter can waste so many electrons and so much time. In fact your response hasn't changed my mind, in that I see no external consensus (or even participation...) from AN/I readers who were previously uninvolved. That means there can be no consensus for topic bans anywhere ad all that's left is individual admin action. I see no justification for any immediate block so I am left with threatening one for the next person who touches a category before a consensus is reached. You'll have seen that In posted the following on a number of people's talk pages:
I assume you are following the discussions at AN/I but in case you have lost it in the detail, I have asked all parties to desist, immediately, from any renaming or recategorising of articles linked to the GAA. This applies even to correcting an article that has been amended to the 'wrong' version. The AN/I thread has grown to astonishing length with very little interest from anyone except those already engaged in the dispute. Nevertheless I will block anyone who makes further changes to these categories before a true consensus is reached, ideally at WT:GAA but frankly any venue will do!
I'm hoping that will have the desired effect and I'd appreciate any diffs if folks from any side do in fact try and recategorise articles before consensus is reached. Brocach, if there has been any such activity since I made my statement at AN/I I'd appreciate a diff, preferably at AN/I rather than here. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 00:50, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
I am, frankly, deeply disappointed that after 30+ diffs linked above you cannot see the case for a block on a consistently disruptive editor. I hope that an admin who knows a bit about the subject matter will take an interest. In the meantime, I suppose that I might as well advise you of at least some of the changes made by Laurel Lodged since your statement at 16:36, 30 January 2013: try [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21]. Is that enough? If not, what would be? Brocach (talk) 01:22, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry if I was rude earlier. This pointless battle has taken me several feet beyond the end of my tether. I hope that WT:GAA will prove the right forum to garner a consensus. Brocach (talk) 00:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
No problem, and thanks for your apology. Very much appreciated and good luck with the consensus-raising! I will try and keep an eye on the process but I'm not going to get involved in the content of the discussions. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 00:22, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Blockable?

Would a repeat of this edit, in fact changing the title in the first sentence to correspond with the article title, constitute a blockable offence? The Banner talk 15:15, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

It's a borderline case but personally I'd consider both the diff above and the preceding one to be sufficient for me to block. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 15:19, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Then it was a good idea from me to check first. Face-smile.svg The Banner talk 16:06, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes indeedy, and thanks very much for doing so! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 16:10, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Just to be clear: you would consider an edit made by me, reverting to the long-established stable text and including an invitation to take the matter to the talk page, three days before your warning, as sufficient grounds for you to block? We're gonna need a bigger jar of honey. Brocach (talk) 22:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
In answer to your question - no. I was assuming that the diffs (from the past) were being used as hypothetical examples of what I would block for in the future. And yes, I would block any future edit like that even if it's one going back to the "right version". Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:51, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
You were right: it was a queation: can I do that safely, or do I get hammer. You answer was clear: I would get hammered. But talking about hammering: what about this? It that allowed? And are his biased questions on WT:GAA sensible and acceptable? The Banner talk 02:31, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
The Banner, this is not a very helpful question. The diff you give is to a proposal at a talk page! The one thing that has come out of the recent AN/I is that you folks must discuss policy and come to an agreement (which is what happens on a talk page) and not unilaterally edit articles before a consensus (which is not what this diff demonstrates.) I have no particular reason to defend Brocach, who was quite rude to me earlier in this debate but has since apologised. But on this occasion I have to say he has done nothing wrong. I don't find the questions at WT:GAA either biased or unacceptable; if you would prefer different questions to be answered you can go there and ask them. What I do find disturbing is that you can undermine your own position by using language such as hammering... biased... without apparently realising what you are doing. Even if you have lost all faith in Brocach (or anyone else) treat them with the utmost respect and let yourself be seen as someone who always assumes the best. It will make your case a much stronger one if you are not seen as strident, partisan and impulsive - which is how you are coming across right now. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 08:15, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Derry GAA

The discussion I initiated in regards to Derry GAA that you said was now moved to a new discussion that takes in the entire issue affecting the entire organisation and its articles, categories etc. on Wikipedia - though related, was a separate issue that was about the Ireland Manual of Style and the current violation of it by a couple of editors who inserted without discussion or consensus a controversial addition that several editors do not agree with, yet is being used by the editors who added it to vindicate their opposition to my proposals.

It was a separate issue that should not have been made part of the overall issue as far as I am concerned. Though now it will have to discussed along with it I guess, as after all it is related to it. Mabuska (talk) 12:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I understand the problem and quite see your point. But I do think they are related to the extent that the result of one discussion is going to affect the other and so it's probably better (although more complex) to look at both together. A moot point as this is happening anyway - but thanks for understanding! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 12:46, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Jo the marten

Hello, as you can see i finally got an account. On the page Rick Moranis i put in that he did voiceover rolls in Sidekick (according to the credits of the actual tv series) and the user Jo the Marten insists on removing it. i've left messages on his talkpage saying that if it is not in the appropriate section, then by all means put it in the appropriate section, but do not delete it totally, as Rick Moranis does for sure voice characters on sidekick including Golly Gee kid. Previously, the article stated that I did this voice, which is incorrect. the only character i've voiced on that show was Alan Amazing, and i've actually seen Rick Moranis in the studio having passed him on the way out from his recording of his lines on the same day. Anyway enough about that, is there anything i can do to get Jo the Marten to sease and desist his reversions? note that though IMDB may not acknowledge it, YTV's airings of the series do acknowledge it. IMDB is not really the best of sources and should not be regarded too highly, as it more times than not is either incorrect or missing a whole crapload of information. SO again, what can i do about Jo the Marten's insistance on his deleting the mention of Rick's voice work in sidekick on his article? Alien Arceus 21:21, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello, the best thing as always in these cases is to find a reliable source for the information you want to insert. Knowing something to be the case from your own personal experience is not, I'm afraid, going to be enough! Have you discussed this on the article talk page? Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
I would but nobody ever looks at the posts i do put on talkpages, and also you won't find it at IMDB, which basicly has more incorrect info than not especially on animated series save a few very very very popular ones.
Alien Arceus 00:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
I've come to defend myself, though I think this has gone on for far too long. I consider myself quite knowledgeable of Mr. Rick Moranis. I have a collection of his films, I've read/listened to countless interviews, I know his voice, and no one in Sidekick sounds like him. I've even taken the liberty of taking a screenshot of the end credits for one of the episodes as proof that clearly shows Rick does not voice Golly Gee Kid, yet Alien Arceus is still trying to fight with me. As for the other characters, it looks like Sammy was voiced by Darren Frost. Yes, this particular information is from IMDB, but it's better than no source at all. I was not able to find this particular episode anywhere. Jo The Marten (talk) 03:50, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

false aligations on my identity

For the record, my name is Ron Petterson, and I am a voice actor who works at several companies including Nelvana ltd. Joe the Marten, the same user whom i mentioned previously is accusing me of being Christian Woods, who is a bulbapedia user who lives down the hall from where i live (he's in rm. 203 and i'm in rm. 208.) Jo has determined that i am Christian Woods based on spelling, IP address and our similar liking of the animated series of Pokemon. I've spelt it out on his talkpage but i'm getting the suspicious feeling that he is not inclined to believe me one bit. I need help with this guy, before i go absolutely nuts with him. I can tell this is one of those people. Alien Arceus 02:56, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to have to look into this, i'm going to have another chat wwith those people at IMDB, i've told them before to try to be more acurate but they don't listen, they never listen. also I watched the episode today and used my VCR to record the episode and saw "rick moranis" in the credits of that ep. Alien Arceus 04:18, 1 February 2013 (UTC) Alien Arceus 04:18, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Alien arceus, I'm afraid I'm not going to be able to help much here and you're not doing your cause much good either. It doesn't help to rake up allegations and rebuttals about whose real life identity is whose. Here on WP unless you explicitly use your real world name and identity (as I do) you could be anyone, nobody can prove or disprove who you are so just stop worrying about whether someone knows your real identity or not. Now on the matter of the information you want to insert, your personal knowledge of the voice actor cannot be used as a source. You must find a source (and no, IMDB is not sufficient) to back up your assertion. The actual end credits from a show would not usually be sufficient on their own but would at least be a start. However Jo has caught a screenshot (linked above) to show conclusively that Rick Moranis is not mentioned in the episode you discuss. So at present we have no evidence that Moranis is involved except for your personal testimony which is simply not admissable. Sorry. And don't bother asking IMDB to tighten up their act - they are who they are, a user-generated site with the inevitable lack of certainty that involves, which is why we don't use them as a reliable source here on WP. Sorry I can't help. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 19:48, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Well here's what i can do. the episode is airing again on YTV this coming Wednesday, and i'll double-check the credits there. i'll keep on looking for it untill i've watched all episodes. meanwhile, i've got other stuff to do. thanks for your time, and have a great and awesome day. Alien Arceus 00:13, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

GAA Discussion

Hi I was wondering would it be possible to have an additional proposal added at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gaelic games Something along the lines of "When referring to inter county and club teams refer to the team minus the GAA" for instance

He played hurling with his local club Athenry and was a member of the Galway senior inter-county team in the 1970s and 1980s.

from P.J. Molloy as this has been rather contiversal. Finnegas (talk) 14:22, 2 February 2013 (UTC)


By all means go ahead and make the proposal if you can frame it clearly. But the discussion's been going a while now and it may be hard to get people who have already voted to give an opinion on a new question - it's up to you! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 20:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

There have only been 18 edits to P.J. Molloy in its entire history; three in the last twelve months. The talk page is empty. Where and what is the controversy? If you mean that, having failed to get "X" renamed to "X GAA" for counties, somebody would try to do it en masse for clubs, they would be very foolish to go down that route. I think it would be inadvisable to anticipate such a thing by putting an extra proposal in the current poll. Scolaire (talk) 22:28, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I'd prefer not to add to the multiplicity of polls under way. Finnegas has a point in that a certain editor who favours the +GAA formula has made changes of exactly that kind; but if the outcomes of the current polls indicate a consensus for common names in titles and categories, that will be enough to ensure that +GAA edits in texts are also reverted. Brocach (talk) 22:33, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

GAA

I refuse to start canvassing, but people start to show up I have never seen before. The Banner talk 14:20, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, your comment is a bit unclear - I'm not sure who you are referring to. If you're going to post here, it would be better if you were explicit otherwise I just have to guess. If you mean User:HighKing he is hardly a stranger to these discussions, surely you've seen him around? If not him then I'm not sure who you mean. New people voting doesn't bother me. It didn't bother you when User:The C of E turned up and voted in your direction - you can't really complain if every new vote doesn't go your way. If I've misunderstood your post above please correct me. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 15:06, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Oops, forget it. Just a bad mood edit. The Banner talk 20:36, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
But if you believe that others are canvassing, please share the evidence, at the proper place. Brocach (talk) 21:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I have no reason to believe that anyone is canvassing. The discussion and voting seems to be on the level to me and has been thankfully civil thus far. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 23:09, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar awarded!

Socratic Barnstar Hires.png The Socratic Barnstar
To honor Kim Dent-Brown for the most heartfelt, incisive, brilliantly considered and wise plea for reason that I have ever seen on a Wikipedia talk page. While it remains to be seen if the blocked user will comprehend you and act on your words, I salute you for making a such a valiant attempt. I feel enriched by your writing! My best to you always. Jusdafax 02:10, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Block of Carpetmuncherrug

I noticed that you blocked Carpetmuncherrug (talk · contribs) for his or her username, but also disabled account creation. That seems counterintuitive, as the user cannot wait for the block to expire, cannot create a new account, and is forced to request an unblock to request a name change. I'm not familiar with any policy specifically governing this, but it seemed unusual, so I thought I'd ask you what your intent was, or whether it was even intentional. Thanks. —Rutebega (talk) 01:50, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up - that was a mistake and I've enabled account creation. Well spotted! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 07:06, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Derry

A thank you, a caveat and a request.
First of all, thank you for your masterful handling of the GAA dispute both at AN/I and at WikiProject GAA, and thank you for your uber-polite notes to me whenever I crossed the line. If more admins were like you, I think all the disputes on Wikipedia would be resolved in a matter of weeks.
As regards Derry, while what you said makes perfect sense, and referring back to IMOS for further comment was, on the face of it, the obvious thing to do, I think you are being a bit optimistic to think that more people will join the discussion on IMOS. You are concerned that "only" 17 editors voted at WP:GAA. To me, 17 voters was miraculous! A previous discussion on IMOS, two months ago, had only six participants. Two of those, Dmcq and RA, did not participate in the most recent poll, but RA has appeared on WP only very infrequently since December. Another discussion, last month on WikiProject Ireland (which at least in principle should have more people active on it than IMOS) had only eight, all of whom participated in both the earlier IMOS and the later GAA polls. I would worry that anybody who has avoided the previous discussions will be annoyed rather than encouraged by seeing the question asked yet again.
Finally, is there any chance you could close the second discussion I referred to? It's old, and it has effectively been superceded by the most recent discussion, but as long as it remains open it may be periodically resurrected. The proposal to add "GAA" to club navbox titles is a separate one to the ones we have been discussing, but I think it would be wise to shelve that until all the other questions have finally been put to bed, and then propose it again when the environment is more stable.
Again, thank you for all your help so far. Scolaire (talk) 10:51, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Scolaire, I'm glad you've found my intervention helpful! It does seem as though folks in this discussion generally have also helped by being responsive to my (hopefully gentle) steering - an admin can only do so much and it requires the consent and co-operation of the parties involved for peace (or at least a truce) to break out!
I accept what you say about the IMoS page and the likelihood of much further discussion. However the discussion on proposal #6 really is at least as much the IMos purview as it is WikiProject Gaelic Games so I do think we need to run it by there as a matter of form. If we don't get much new comment so be it, and I'll close it myself and judge the consensus if there's nobody more active there to do it.
As you suggested I have closed the old discussion - we really need all these discussions happening only in one place at a time! All the best, Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 13:56, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for closing that discussion. I'm glad you've said you will close the IMOS discussion if it doesn't develop. Once things don't drag on indefinitely I am happy. Scolaire (talk) 18:07, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Not that I am happy with the results of the vote...

No more discussion here please - anything new can be taken to WT:IMOS. I'm happy to have specific requests for admin action on this page but general discussion doesn't belong. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 14:27, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

... but I will respect them. I have some doubts other will respect them, but only time can tell that.

In the mean time I am deeply concerned by an action of Brocach. I did not look any further, but I noticed a change at Paudie Butler that is not conform the vote and is in fact a plain provocation of Laurel Lodged. Unless you want to provoke, there is no need to change [[Drom, North Tipperary]], [[Republic of Ireland|Ireland]] into [[Drom, North Tipperary|Drom]], [[County Tipperary]], [[Republic of Ireland|Ireland]]. He should know by now that LL is extra sensitive for everything related to Tipperary. The Banner talk 19:13, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't be happy with your revert, either. It takes two to edit-war. Scolaire (talk) 19:26, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
If you don't mind me butting in here, I have explained at my talk page, for The Banner's benefit, my edit at Paudie Butler. It is absolutely not intended as a provocation but as an implementation of the WT:GAA consensus concerning identifying sportspeople with the traditional rather than the administrative county (which is in any case about to be abolished). Brocach (talk) 19:53, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
This about his place of birth. And Drom is part of Tipperary (North Riding)/North Tipperary since 1898. Unless I am wrong, the question was about the category "Sportspeople from Foo". The Banner talk 21:18, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
(As already posted on my talk page) Drom has always been in County Tipperary; it was also in the administrative county of "Tipperary (North Riding)" when Butler was born, and is now also in the administrative county of "North Tipperary", but it is still in County Tiperary, and will be in only that county after the current reform is completed. The clear consensus is that sportspeople should be identified with the 32 counties, not the ephemeral modern units, and that must especially apply when the unit in question did not exist at the time of the birth. Brocach (talk) 21:31, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Brocach (and others) when I closed the discussion at WT:GAA I did explicitly ask people NOT to start implementing the new styles until we had run it by folks at IMoS. I will find the diff and post it shortly. I think I did in fact say that I'd regard jumping the gun on this as a blockworthy offence but I'll just check. In any case the talk page for the article is the best pace to discuss this, or WT:GAA if it's a more general discussion. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:17, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Yes, this closing edit does ask people not to start recategorising until IMoS has had its say. There is absolutely no urgency about this. Please desist from any recategorising, renaming or other implementation of the decisions we took at WT:GAA until the IMoS discussion is closed. I will regard people hastily implementing this as potentially disruptive and therefore blockable and I'll repeat this warning at WT:GAA. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:32, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I have just seen this, having come here after noticing that you reverted one of my (I thought uncontroversial) refers to a "Tipperary GAA hurler" - and will stop for now. Sorry, I hadn't noticed the request to hold off until the discussion at IMoS. Brocach (talk) 00:13, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

No problem, I think it is indeed uncontroversial and I don't doubt that the IMoS discussion will simply confirm what we agreed. I just think it's better for the sake of making the agreement stick that we get everyone lned uo before we implement it. Thanks again!. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 07:29, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm glad a block wasn't applied. The entire issues appears on the brink of resolution, so can everyone just hold back on any implementations for the short time required. RashersTierney (talk) 10:49, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Kim, you would be better asking those that 'oppose' to explain why they think using 'Derry' for GAA County is not confusing and misleading...then when no response arrives or that of a flimsy,weak argument and here are some used before consensus hasnt changed from before, same reason as <insert user>, Nothing new here. This seems to be the last full blown convo on the topic here [22]. Some for compelling arguments for the current convention to change, along with same old flimsy arguments against.Factocop (talk) 12:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
You can just sit and wait for it till some Northern Irish guy starts changing in into Londonderry and the whole shebang starts again. With as most likely compromise "Derry GAA" to make clear that is not referring to county Londonderry or the city... The Banner talk 14:17, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Please don't continue this discussion here. WT:IMOS is the place. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 14:25, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Drom

Excuses me, but I call this provocative, vindictive and a personal quarrel: Article move to remove North Tipperary. With tricks like this, we never get the necessary rest back. The Banner talk 13:19, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

The Banner should have done a little more checking before complaining. See my reply to the Banner's comment on Brocach's talk page.
Also ... if The Banner wants a rest from disputes, it would be a good idea not to use inflammatory language such as "provocative, vindictive and a personal quarrel". --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

GAA hurlers back from the dead

Although you will recall that the WT:GAA and IMoS discussions concluded inter alia "Titles of categories of people who have played on inter-county GAA teams should not have "GAA" inserted after the county name, i.e. "X hurlers", not "X GAA hurlers"; "X Gaelic footballers", not "X GAA Gaelic footballers", it is not possible to implement this consensus because two related discussions have not yet been closed; they are here and here. This means that the odd-one-out Category:Tipperary GAA hurlers remains in existence. Perhaps you would, once more, do the decent thing? Thanks. Brocach (talk) 14:29, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

I spotted this after leaving a request at WP:AN/RFC.
I will trust Kim's judgement on whether to close the discussions himself, or leave it to another admin. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:41, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the alert on these, I have closed them. If there is further mop and bucket work needed to implement the consensus we achieved, please let me know. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 15:17, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, for that and the rest. Brocach (talk) 15:23, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
And for that. As we say in these parts, "please God that's an end of it." Brocach (talk) 23:22, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Another GAA-related CfD

Hi, Kim. I'm sure you're sick of GAA-related discussions by now, but there is still a discussion open at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 February 1#Hurling clubs and I thought that, seeing as you closed a number of discussions recently, you might be willing to close this one as well. Scolaire (talk) 22:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Done, not a problem. Let me know if there's anything else! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:55, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Great stuff! Thanks. Scolaire (talk) 09:16, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Block request

Nothing serious. I have found an old, unused alternative account of mine User:The Banner Turbo, coming from my former username Night of the Big Wind. I have lost the login details, so I can't use it anyway. To prevent hacking or misusing, I like to have this one taken out of action (i.e. blocked). Is that possible? And is courtesy blanking also possible? Thanks in advance! The Banner talk 10:06, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for the clarification about the username and sorry I didn't reply sooner, I was checking out the position on blanking, blocking etc of defunct accounts. I think to play safe it is best if I decline to block the old account or delete its user page or talk page. WP:RTV defines what is possible in courtesy blanking but this only applies to people who are not going to edit WP ever again. In addition, as I can see nothing exceptional in what happened on the Turbo account there's no reason to blank it; doing so would opnly have the effect of hiding a few edits from non-admins and I can't see the point in that. As to blocking, if you've lost the password I don't believe there's any likelihood of blanking or hacking (I've never heard of it happening) but I've put it on my watchlist in case anything crops up. This isn't an area of policy I'm experienced in so you might find another admin who feels able to help you out - sorry that I can't. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 08:55, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Okay, clear. Then I just leave it this way. The Banner talk 09:45, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Article at AfD

Sorry Why Do You Want To Delete Social anxiety disorder(Book) ? What Is Your Reason ? 178.61.35.103 (talk) 08:47, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm not writing about my family member because they are important to me , if did that i would write about all of my family members , but i'm only writing about the important people and notable people in my family members in the world or a country, Like Racha is a know classical piano player , Yahya arodaki was a known economist in syria , and made tasks for syria , And I Only wrote about a book who the creator of him is one of my family members , This doesn't mean I writing about my family members because they are important to me.GhiathArodaki (talk) 21:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to reply on your talk page so we keep the discussion in one place. Please continue the discussion there. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:20, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Old favourites

Irish sports-related shenanigans, page 94. I really hesitated to ask you to address this mop/bucket work but no admin has shown any interest in my request at CFD to spend some time on what I think is a straightforward, necessary, non-controversial but tedious and admin-only series of moves needed to implement the recent WT:GAA consensus re naming of articles about GAA competitions etc.. The full list of required moves (90+, thanks a lot LL) is here.

On a slightly different front, BHG is resisting your view that the WT:GAA and subsequent WT:IMOS debates settled the question of whether Irish sportspeople should be categorised by 32 counties or by modern admin counties. As you might just remember, I was initially dubious about broadening out the discussion at WT:GAA to take in that broader issue, but the referral on to WT:IMOS exposed it to wider debate. However, a proposal (not by me) to delete the redundant and empty North/South Tipperary categories has been opposed by BHG. Just letting you know, in case you want to comment re the validity of consensus, or suggest some way forward. Brocach (talk) 23:06, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

OK, as I signed up for this I'll see what I can do about these 90+ problems we are left with! Categories and renaming are not my strong point so I'll have to do some homework first. BHG is an admin too and can do the necessary (actually she's probably better than me as this is more her field.) As far as your second point, I'm not going to get involved in the discussions. If you and she have a disagreement about what the consensus at GAA means, you'll need to thrash it out on an appropriate talk page. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:32, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, have engaged both on the relevant pages and at BHG's talk page so hopefully this will resolve itself. Brocach (talk) 01:38, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
This is being discussed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 February 14#Tipperary_sportspeople, and i see no point in duplicating that discussion either here or on my talk page. Per WP:MULTI, discussions should be centralised, and the open CFD seems like the best place to centralise this one.
I'll just note here that Brocach's reference to the "redundant and empty North/South Tipperary categories" is wilfully misleading. Whether the categories are redundant is a matter for debate, but the only reason they were empty is that Broach and Finnegas depopulated them out of process. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Social anxiety disorder(Book)

Hello , The User Faris EL-Gwely's vote is only to make me nervous, after we made a talk about another thing for wikipedia arabic , should it be removed or keep it ? Thanks , Best Regards GhiathArodaki (talk) 07:38, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much , I've got bored from his reactions , And he always tries to make me nervous, I wanted to stop that from the first but he didn't,He threatened me, Again Thank you very much, Best Regards GhiathArodaki (talk) 08:13, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


  • Hello! First I want to know me, I'm Admin & Bureaucratic in Arabic Wikipedia. I told this user to stop play in my page talk, he is very angry because we (admins in Arabic Wikipedia) was blocked him 2 weeks and then forever because he sabotage more articles in Arabic Wikipedia (see his contributions in Arabic Wikipedia and English Wikipedia too) according to his personal whim, so I put my opinion to remove his article without references according previous opinion and so he send me more personal attacks, and I asked him to stop but he didn't, You can see my talkPage filled with dirty curses in Standard Arabic (you can use Google translate to understand!). PLEASE make necessary because such a user distorts the image of Wikipedia. Greetings! --Faris El-Gwely (talk) 09:48, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

i don't say dirty curses so stop lying , they didn't blocked me forever but i told them to do , i don't play in your page i'm telling you a bad thing you made for a country and you don't want to listen ,I'm not angry because you blocked me , and i don't care , because I'm not killing my self to use arabic wikipedia, and i'm not a writer , i'm an artist, i'm making new articles in wikipedia , but you always say not notable , do what ever you want .GhiathArodaki (talk) 10:07, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Renaming of per-county GAA club navigational boxes

See Template talk:Dublin_clubs#Requested_move, where I have opened a requested moves discussion on the 35 navigational box templates in Category:Gaelic Athletic Association club navigational boxes.

These templates all fall within the scope of WikiProject Ireland and WikiProject Gaelic games, and some of them fall within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland. I have therefore placed the same notification on each project's talk page ... and am posting the same notification to you, because this related to the discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gaelic games#Article_and_category_naming_conventions, which you closed. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:08, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Reblocking Noodleki

Hi, Kim. I've reblocked Noodleki, who you unblocked in October 2012. Please see ANI thread. What do you think? The situation looks pretty clear to me, but it would be great if you could review. Bishonen | talk 22:32, 20 February 2013 (UTC).

Promotor Veritatis

Thanks for your input. I am not sure that adding further advice to PV's user page so long after the event is likely to make much difference; it could be interpreted as rather condescending, coming on top of User:Ritchie333's straight-talking comments. As you will have noticed, I had already made several attempts to help this contributor before he started sounding off and making threats about bringing the project into disrepute - and of course this last matter is the only reason I raised the issue on the Admin Noticeboard. You see, it is not the fact that he was rude to me and other people - after all these years on wikipedia, there is hardly anything he could say to me that is worse than what has been said before! It is the fact that he clearly had it in mind to harm the project; I was very concerned that he might find a way to twist other people's actions and comments in the eyes of the outside world, and I wanted to be sure that other administrators' opinions were in line with my own. PV's attitude was that other people are at fault because he didn't understand the rules, which is why I made such an effort with him. When his comments started to get out of hand, I sought other admins' opinions and informed him on his talk page as a neutral way of making him understand that he can't just go round like a bull in a china shop blaming everyone else for his own shortcomings. It clearly had the intended effect because, 2 minutes after I raised it, he amended his talk page comments to try to make it look like he'd never said any such thing. Thanks for trying to help anyway. Deb (talk) 19:27, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Clarification

Hi can you please clarify whether proposal 1 in this discussion you closed should be implemented? It has 5 supports, 1 oppose, and 1 abstain. Whilst the other proprosals were covered in the other GAA discussion, proposal 1 was a different matter. Mabuska (talk) 22:18, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

You are good

Seriously....I need to watch you very carefully. I think I may have posted this before. You are one to immulate.--Amadscientist (talk) 23:22, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Wow... don't know what I did (unless it was blowing my stack at AN/I just now) but thanks anyway! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 23:42, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
The opposit. You were able to get your point across on an AN/I in a very polite and neutral manner that the OP responded to positvely. Good job. I need to pay more attention to this sort of reply.--Amadscientist (talk) 00:45, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Kim - that one above was just fine :-) You'll want to go back and revisit the Calton thread though (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Unblocking Calton

Hi Kim

The consensus of the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Repeated_use_of_derogatory_racial_epithets_in_edit_summaries_by_User:Calton is that your unblocking of Calton (talk · contribs) was a little premature, particularly since you may not have been aware that Calton was warned aout this same racial slur back in 2005, so I have reinstated the block. Hope that's OK with you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:32, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I can see from what you wrote that your were giving the editor the benifit of the doubt and clearly Wikipedia and Arb com have no problem with such language and attitude, but I guess the one mistake was that you may have forgotten that the editor needed to admit what they did was wrong. Now...I don't know if you also didn't feel the phrase was racist and frankly I can't say for sure if it was or not. Just alone the term simply refers to a character from an old Our Gang serial. Something the younger crowd don't seem to understand, but then i don't know the context in which it was used. Is this really something from 2005? Goodness....people can hold a grudge here can't they? LOL!--Amadscientist (talk) 12:26, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
This was not a one-off, nor was it simply something that happened in 2005. See the many uses of this term in Calton's edit summaries. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
Amadscientist please take your time to read up on a case before commenting. --Saddhiyama (talk) 22:17, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
I've replied at AN/I. Can we keep the discussion there please? Thanks! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:19, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Complaint

Hi Kim, I want to tell you again about User:GhiathArodaki, he still send me messages in Arabic in my talkpage, and he still threaten me because I permanently him forever (again!) yesterday from editing Arabic Wikipedia, please act because it bothers me! Thanks. Faris El-Gwely (talk) 17:28, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I was just thanking him because he blocked me, and telling him to not lie , I'm doing that for him , not for me, So what i shall do if he is a man who start a punish then go crying to people lying , I See Wikipedia english is a better place than arabic one , and I'm not "threaten you", Yeah permanently because you want to block me from the first time the problem happened because you know you are a lying and you want me to get off the way,Your poor because that didn't happened,an in wikipedia arabic, knew about your lying and what did you do, actually mr.kim , i talked to him in a very good way first because i thought him a good kind man, he drew egypt flag on africa and middle east maps , I'm syrian, and i didn't accept to an another flag country to be drawn on my map country, so i went to him, asking why did you do this?, do you accept if i draw syria flag on egypt map ?

then he answered me in a very bad way, calling what he did "freedom", so that word that makes nowdays every body nervous, democratic and freedom , if he talked in a bad way to me , that is freedom , but if i answered him in the same way because he did that to me , as i'm defending myself , that called anti-freedom , every thing is in my talk page you can go and translate, and plus , he deleted what happened , because he know that he is lying, and also he know what he did , Mr.Kim ,He is the one who bothers me not i'm , actually i'm not doing all that for "blocking" me in wikipedia arabic, i don't care!, even i don't want to use this wiki , you can read what happened in my talk page, and see who is the wrong me or him, and the big wrong is on him .GhiathArodaki (talk) 05:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

DS unblocked

Yo, Kim, just letting you know I've unblocked DS per your (partial) approval at ANI. While it was definitely a bad idea, I don't think DS's language was immediately block-worthy; I've advised him to tone it down, not as an unblock condition, just as advice. Anyway, I don't think your block was super-terrible or anything; just not quite right, perhaps. Cheers! Writ Keeper (t + c) 16:14, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Kim Dent-Brown. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Message added 14:38, 10 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You have response from Monty845. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 14:38, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I know you won't bother to reply perhaps but assuming good. Kindly reply Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 16:44, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Export hell seidel steiner.png A beer for giving me my fourth worst block to date. Face-smile.svg No hard feelings, cheers. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:43, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Re your most recent comment at ANI, your absolutely correct with this statement "You seem to find it extremely hard to interact with anyone who does not agree with you in a collegial and constructive way". I do get very annoyed very quickly when I know I am correct regarding an issue and others just seem to want to make everything hard work, I simply have little patience for nationalists and POV pushers. You are also correct in that I swear far to much, so as a show of good faith henceforth I shall keep the cussing to my talk page. Should you see me cussing outside of it feel free to block me for having broken my word. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:33, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

DS - many apologies that I've only just seen this - I've been AFK and would like to have replied more promptly. Thank you for this very straightforward and welcome post, I really appreciate it. I accept and believe your promise, and I'll hold you to it - but I don't believe I shall have to. I'm certain that if you say this, you mean it and that's very big-hearted of you.
Can I suggest that you repost this comment of yours, or a diff to it, at AN/I? Quite honestly I think you would kill the discussion stone dead with this. I would certainly recommend closing the AN/I as concluded if you did so. I won't link it myself as you've chosen to come here rather than AN/I and I don't want to speak for you. Thanks and best of luck, Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 21:13, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Haha, I was also afk for a while, been watching Walking Dead. I cross posted my comment as you suggested. Thank you. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:41, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Contemporary Paganism#Moved without discussion

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Contemporary Paganism#Moved without discussion. Your input would be very much appreciated. —Sowlos 23:27, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Motion for applause

requested

  • SupportChed :  ?  00:45, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

The AN/I

The AN/I section we were involved in closed mid message for me (see page). My last copy edit (to correct my incomplete sentence and to add my signature) didn't even show. When you guys pull the plug, you pull it! As it turns out with the closure being so premature that my suggestion was not even considered, I'm left uninspired by the process -- despite how my last message may read. But still thank you for your efforts. We may or may not be back at this again, Crtew (talk) 00:46, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the motion for applause that points to my message (see above) was supposed to mean. Crtew (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Peace Barnstar Hires.png The Barnstar of Diplomacy
For your effort and resolution within Darkness Shine's AN/I Eduemoni↑talk↓ 01:52, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

WRT User:Hahc21

I trust that you haven't seen Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive245#Request_to_lift_restriction? And there's no block template on the user talk page? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 12:12, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

You got there before me. Indeed I hadn't seen that link, but then found it, and have unblocked with a note of apology while you were posting this! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 12:15, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I refreshed my watchlist at the right (or wrong!) time. :-) Thanks for the quick reversal. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 12:16, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
...although, putting a note on his talk page too might be nice, considering that you did sully his previously clean block log and all ... but YMMV. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 12:29, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Once again our intentions have crossed - I was drafting this while you were posting the above. I've apologised, but also warned HAHc21 to steer clear of future NACs. I just think they are an unnecessary trap for him/her. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 12:37, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Ach, okay. I read "with a note of apology" and assumed you meant the comment at ANI. My apologies. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 12:41, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Criticism revert

Hey sorry for the earlier mistake, my addition of criticism to the Psychoanalysis article has been reverted can you take a look at it? CartoonDiablo (talk) 21:10, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Review an edit for deletion please

Hi Kim Dent-Brown. I'm bringing a request to you just because you're the first admin I found editing at the moment. Could you look at this edit on Talk:Ezhava and see if maybe it warrants deletion? I'm WP:INVOLVED so I can't make the call myself. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:15, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Will do, back in a second. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 13:17, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
It's borderline, but promising to 'shed blood' tips it over the edge for me. Kudos to you for even entering the hell that is WP articles on caste! You and Sitush have my sympathy... Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 13:23, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! Qwyrxian (talk) 13:30, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

TY

thank you.Ched :  ?  14:10, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem! Glad the OP withdrew before things got more complicated. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 14:38, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
I agree. I can even understand wanting to voice a concern or different point of view - but there are just going to be times where folks need to accept the "agree to disagree" concept. — Ched :  ?  14:42, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

File:FFS Curie.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:FFS Curie.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t c) 15:30, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Vandal

Could you please block this vandal? Thanks--Scaldjosh (talk) 19:09, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the report. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 19:14, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Another one here--Scaldjosh (talk) 21:42, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but they haven't edited after their final warning. And to be honest it's better to report these at WP:AIV rather than here - if I'm not online a report here could wait for ages before it's acted on. But thank you! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 21:58, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/89.240.64.208 --Scaldjosh (talk) 02:51, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Ajativada

Looks like you've been making friends too. Greetings, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:09, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Terrific stuff - apparently I'm a Buddhist. Or a Muslim. Who knew? Ta for the link! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 21:36, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

E-mail

I sent to you the text of some reference articles I found on wicca. John Carter (talk) 15:22, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited HMS Upshot (P82), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paxman (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) 19:56, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Slavic Neopaganism

I used reliable sources next time. Please check it before you delete it. Regards

GA reassesment of Wicca

Wicca, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article.

Slightly botched RfC

I spotted you were an Admin on the Psychoanalysis page.

I started a significant guideline discussion here. All went well but I wanted more help/consensus so I issued an RfC. Unfortunately it's not clear from the RfC that this is a significant guideline discussion, and no comments have been submitted in 24 hours.

We'd appreciate some advice on how to progress and maybe you can fix this mistake somehow?

I also suggested improving the description on the RfC page here.

Regards, WykiP (talk) 02:45, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

FYI

Aoclery next sockpuppet investigation. Greetings, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:33, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Darkness Shines

DS just left a message on my talk page [23] after you had specifically warned him not to or it would be grounds for being blocked. Crtew (talk) 20:52, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

There are exemptions when an editor asks you not to post on their talk page, informing them of violating 3RR is one, notification of an ANEW report would be another. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:56, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Disruptive edits

Dear Kim Dent-Brown, I saw that you have blocked User:Hnbaofeng. Another user, User:Fair99999 is now posting the same material (together with identical edit summaries). As I don't know too much about protocol in this case, I should kindly ask you to take a look. Sincerely, (talk) 08:19, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up- I think this is such an obvious case of socking I have indeffed them. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 08:29, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Disruptive Edits

Dear Kim Dent Brown,

Myself and User:Makedonia have recently been vandalized by User:Bronx24 by changing our homepage. Could you please revert these our vandalized pages to what they were?

Thank You, Macedonia (talk) 08:04, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

You don't need admin powers to do that - you can do so yourself quite legitimately and I see you have done so to your own page. I've reverted the other change and I'll keep an eye on this, thanks for the warning. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 09:55, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for closing that. It was a pointless waste of everyones time from the beginning. Kumioko (talk) 21:23, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure. Please don't post any more at his talk page, as requested. You could seriously look at your methods of argumentation too - if you really think that was the way to make friends and influence third party observers, you couldn't be more wrong. You made his case very well for him. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 21:28, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Yeah I admit I am a bit abrasive and blunt these days. I used to be much more politically correct and careful about how and what I said and I just got shit on so I gave up. The truth is I'm so tired of the admins (generally speaking) only looking at the last comment and not the whole picture. I'm also getting pretty tired of how some of the supposedly trusted users treat others and are allowed to get away with it while us lowly editors aren't allowed to be admins because we can't be trusted. I have really gotten a sour taste with the whole place. Its truly not enjoyable and frankly I don't even know why I stick around anymore. I guess I keep hoping things will turn around. Probably not though. Anyway, thanks again. Take care. Kumioko (talk) 21:31, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Ta ...

... for this. Too many patellas being hit with dinky hammers. - Sitush (talk) 15:00, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Sitush, that was horrible to watch and I just hope they don't find another venue to continue the fun and games. Irony is, I have huge respect for both of them for the good work they do elsewhere! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 15:06, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict) from me as well. I was debating about what to say and how to say it without adding fuel to the fire, fortunately you saved me from my quandaries — Ched :  ?  15:07, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

LL and Irish counties

LL seems to have got the answer s/he came for (though it was not the one I provided.) This matter should not be re-opened here - if it needs re-evaluating at all, one user's talk page is not the place to do it. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 14:48, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi, Can I ask what was the main argument(s) that clinched the decision? Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:42, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

There was no single, stand-out clincher. What was decisive was the near-unanimous consensus against you and your inability or unwillingness to accommodate it. As it is you have been restricted from a tiny, tiny section of the encyclopaedia's contents and you have the whole of the rest of the place to work on. I quite understand that you would prefer not to have been topic banned and feel you are still in the right. But I do think that damping this argument down for 6 months will be to the net benefit of Wikipedia. Don't see it as a defeat - treat it as a sabbatical and a chance to work on some new areas of interest. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 19:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
The advantages of damping down a discussion are neither here nor there. Your role, as I see it, was to adjudicate on the merits of the case as proposed. If I'm interpreting your comments correctly, then one of two things is true; either the proposer's arguments were without merit (but you took it upon yourself to act in the greater good of wiki regardless) or the merits of the argument did not matter as only votes matter. In the former case, the correct course of action ought to have been to have dismissed the case and referred the substantive point to binding arbitration at another forum. In the latter case, you reduce ANI to who can drum up the biggest, noisiest claque to shout down inconvenient facts. Either one of these is scenarios is manifestly unjust. Is there a higher court of appeal for this decision? BTW, as the argument is still unresolved ("Common" vs "Modern"), then this decision only kicks the can down the road: the dread day will come when a decision on it must be made. Your (in)action has just bought you 6 months truce. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:08, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) The community is the highest "court of appeal" - this was a community-imposed situation, and your own "defense" was one of the nails in the coffin. Please stop talking all legalese - this is not a court of law - it's a privately-owned website, and the community determined that you were not following the rules and therefore had to place restrictions. Indeed, the application of restrictions was obvious a half-day in - it was merely the wording that required final confirmation (✉→BWilkins←✎) 09:23, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Pretty much what Bwilkins said. I'm afraid the situation HAS been managed and decisions made to everyone's satisfaction - except yours of course. In six months time either you'll have given up the Quixotic notion that brought us here (in which case the quiet will continue) or you'll pick it up again which I predict will only lead to the same outcome, except more swiftly and for longer. Your interpretation of my comments above is wrong. I didn't say that none of your opposers' arguments had merit; I said that they all had and I couldn't single any one out as primary. Now please let this drop. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 10:11, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
So privately-owned websites are above natural justice? That's good to know. "that you were not following the rules", except that they never commented on all the rules, just the ones that suited their case. And that's the nub of it. Fiat justicia, ruat caelum Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:37, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
According to Format of decisions "Decisions are written in clear concise standard English and usually: (i) outline the salient principles, (ii) make findings of fact, (iii) set out remedies and rulings, and (iv) specify any enforcement arrangements. Where the meaning of any provision is unclear to any arbitrator, the parties, or other interested editors, it will be clarified upon request.". You may take it that my first request here fell into that category. I have failed to receive "...clear concise standard English (that) outline the salient principles, (ii) make findings of fact". Please remedy this. Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:47, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
(1) Wikipedia works by consensus to develop its articles. (2) The community judged that you consistently edited in a non-consensual way, editing county titles against consensus. (3) The remedy is that you are banned from making changes to Irish county titles for 6 months. (4) Enforcement will comprise blocking should you edit in this way during the banned period. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 07:48, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
...and just like nobody likes a lawyer, wikilawyers are even less liked :-) (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:56, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
So the answer is the second option: "the merits of the argument did not matter as only votes matter". Why didn't you just say that the first time I asked. It's taken a lot of words to squeeze out a simple admission. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:34, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
How ridiculous Laurel.  !Vote counts don't matter - it's the policy-based argument. There was NO other consensus reading possible in your case - and your own statements shot you down further. As an uninvolved admin, I'm finding your ridiculous badgering here - and accusations that the admin didn't do his job properly - are becoming tiresome and uncivil. Perhaps you'd like a block and a further extension of your topic ban, they could be easily arranged (and of course are 100% policy-based as well) (✉→BWilkins←✎) 23:39, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
LL, I hope my intervention here won't fan any flames but please allow me to explain that, in writing the wording for the restriction, I was deliberate in making sure that no restriction would be placed on you proposing or discussing improvements to the encyclopaedia. The restriction enables you to propose and get consensus for changes. Just leave it to someone else to do the practical changing once consensus has been reached. --RA (talk) 22:05, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

IP request/attack content

I hope you don't mind, but I removed the offending material (just did a large revert of the talk page requests they mass posted). Dusti*poke* 05:24, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

File:NZ fern.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

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 you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 16:02, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Shane Todd Death page

I'm confused about the source citation and why it violates wiki policy. The source is a Doctor who is respected and skilled in the art. Is it because the location of where the report is published that is the problem? I am aware it is also published elsewhere but cannot find it at present but believe it to be on a public news site. I just did'nt get what the complaining editor (Zhanzhao) was on about by saying that the reliable source needs to be on some news outlet site. As far as I was aware, this was not wikipedia policy. Can you assist with my understanding on this subject. Appreciate your input. I'm a noob by the way.Theinsidefacts (talk) 16:23, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello there, the policy your document violates is this one. Your document seems to be a self-published source and the fact that its author may be a doctor or other reliable author cannot be independently verified. He or she may be what you say - the problem is that unless this can be verified by an impartial external agency such as a news organisation or academic journal, the document cannot be relied on. So as it stands the document cannot be used. If it is published and described by a reliable, independent third party then it may be acceptable - but it would be wise for you to check this on the talk page of the article first. Please do read the page on reliable sources fully and carefully; it will answer all your questions about why your source is not acceptable as it stands. And do ask here for more help, by all means. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 16:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Regarding...

...this,[24] I don't recall being totally banned from the article talk page. I don't intend to edit it anytime soon, if ever, but I think the Margarine guy has overstepped a bit. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:12, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

I think it's entirely reasonable. You weren't banned, so you have the right to edit there if you wish. However you were behaving poorly and DrFleischmann (or anyone) has the right to re-raise the matter at AN/I should things flare up again. However as they are not going to that won't be an issue, will it? By the way, I had to Google "Fleischmann" and "margarine" to work out why it's cute to call him Yeast and Margarine. People outside the USA won't get it, although it is immediately obvious you're being disrespectful and needly. It would be good if you just called people by their chosen editing names. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 06:53, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Hey, you learned something new. That can't be a bad thing. In response to his "I reserve the right...", I must counter that I reserve the right to say "Told ya so" if and when the US and Russia work out a deal to send this "hero" back home to face justice. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:28, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Regarding going to the dogs

If you find your trouts don't get respected,[25] try something stronger like my stockfish-rack whacking template or the Shakespeare insultspout in case of personal attacks. HTH, darwinbish BITE 10:56, 29 July 2013 (UTC).

Thanks a million, your Bishfulness! Whether or not these will have a better effect is neither here nor there - they made me smile! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 11:01, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
LOL at "bishfulness". A bit like bashfulness, I suppose! Bishonen | talk 13:49, 29 July 2013 (UTC).

Off line harassment

Matter now in the hands of an Arbitrator - thank you Salvio! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 21:29, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I am simply not sure what to do as they are not stooping the harassment - I woke up to multiple taunting emails. How do I go about finding out the ones that are harassing me. Moxy (talk) 15:33, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Now that is definitely not OK. If you would like, please forward the emails to me at kim@dent-brown.co.uk and I'll investigate. If you don't want to do this please keep in touch (via email if you don't want people to be able to follow your complaints via Wikipedia) and I will try to think of any other ways I might help. Most of all. please don't respond in kind and best of all don't respond at all. If you are being bullied it gives your persecutors more pleasure, the more you are seen to be affected by their actions. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 16:28, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Ok let me think about this - I have blocked the 2 emails for now. I am concerned that any action will lead to more trouble coming my way for these editors. I think I may want my edit history of my talk page hidden from public view (I mean the times I gave out my email). The people must have spent hours looking through my talk page history to find it. I plan not to come across these editors again I hope. -- Moxy (talk) 17:04, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
If you have enabled emails (via your preferences link at the very top of your screen)other editors can email you even if your address has not been published explicitly as I just did mine. You can see an 'email this user' link at the left of your screen which enables you to email others, just as they can email you. You can turn the email availability off if you wish. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 18:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
  • I saw this thread from Moxy because I was actually stopping by to thank you for closing the ANI thread. If Moxy has any email that he even remotely suspects is from me, he has my full permission and waving of copyright to publish it in full on Wikipedia. I can safely say this because I have never emailed him in any form or in any way.  Giano  18:57, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks Giano, both for stopping by and for making that offer. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 18:59, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
I actually dont believe it is Giano - as both email refer to him in the third person. They are simply threatening me to stay away for infoboexs and the WP:projects related to them - this is again not related to Giano per-say as our latest dispute is over images not a box - I dont edit infoboxes so it is even more puzzling.-- Moxy (talk) 20:22, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Well you have cast aspersions Moxy, so just pretend that you think they are from me and publish them here anyway - or forward them in full to the Arbcom who will be instantly able to identify the sender. That way you won't be troubled again.  Giano  20:26, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
I've just noticed this. I can make the same offer as Giano: "If Moxy has any email that he even remotely suspects is from me, he has my full permission and waving of copyright to publish it in full on Wikipedia. I can safely say this because I have never emailed him in any form or in any way." --Folantin (talk) 20:35, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
I have raised the matter here [26]. In my experience, bullies and liars, like Vampires, hate exposure to sunlight and will avoid it at any cost.  Giano  20:49, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up, Giano. I have just asked Moxy to forward those e-mails to me or to ArbCom. Hopefully, we'll be able to determine who sent them. Salvio Let's talk about it! 20:57, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
My pleasure. I look forward to reading the results of your investigations.  Giano  21:19, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Possible topic ban violation from an ANI discussion you closed?

Hi Kim, you closed this discussion (it's actually still on the WP:HAPPYPLACE main page, hasn't even been archived yet) with a WP:MEDICINE topic ban for user Drgao. I wanted to draw your attention to this discussion that editor has initiated since then and ask whether it's a problem? Based on your explanation of the topic ban to Drgao here it would seem like it is. Thanks... Zad68 01:29, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Zad, I agree it was a pretty clear violation but I'm giving Drgao the benefit of the doubt in assuming it was done through ignorance. I've blocked for the time being, pending Drgao indicating that s/he understands what a topic ban actually means. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 08:09, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Appreciate it, that seems like the right action. I've seen other topic bans and this seems to be a pretty normal part of the cycle. Zad68 12:36, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

File:NZ fern.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

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 you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 16:03, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Request

I presented a proposal around the time you closed the Soham case. I self-reverted it as it was redundant. Would you please look at it esp. point number one. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 21:48, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

YK, sorry we edit clashed and thank you for your attempts to keep Soham on the straight and narrow - they were very helpful and I hope s/he will pay attention to you. I have no view on whether or not Soham is pro- or anti- the subject of that article, but I don't agree with you that he was editing usefully, and nor did the great majority of other editors who posted an opinion. You don't have to be biased to be disruptive. I hope Soham will find other areas to edit in, and do so more constructively. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 21:57, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your considered reply. Wikipedia is a perpetual learning experience, esp. the "You don't have to be biased to be disruptive..." part. I just hope Soham doesn't score any more own goals by getting all worked up about this very narrow ban. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 22:03, 9 August 2013 (UTC)