Revision as of 11:26, 26 July 2012

If you're writing me a comment about an RfAr request or case that I'm acting as a clerk on, click here. I do move comments around when I see fit.

Archive info:
/Archive1 Start - Jun 30, 2005
/Archive2 July 1 2005 - July 23 2006
/Archive3 July 24 2006 - Feb 25 2007
/Archive4 March 2007
/Archive5 April - July 2007
/Archive6 August - September 2007
/Archive7 October - November 2007
/Archive8 December 2007 - May 2008
/Archive9 ? - December 2008
/Archive10 -
RfAr related:

March 2007 April/May 2007 June/July 2007 August/September 2007 October 2007 - February 2008 March 2008 - ?  ? - June 2011

WP:RfAr related

ArbCom dispute

From what I gather, it seems to revolve around the supposed unreliability of a source I used. ". Can you go to "http://book.jqcq.com/product/30157.html", affirm this book is actually a chinese history book, and then go to http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration and make a comment, to the effect whether it is a chinese history book or not(which from what I gather is the argument: it's not a chinese history book). This would help the dispute a lot. Thank you.

Teeninvestor (talk) 23:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Scientology

Since you clerked that case, is it really correct that the Final Decision section is empty? Regards SoWhy 20:05, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Abortion RFAR

Hi there, is it true that this case is now overdue for opening? Steven Zhang 04:22, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

• Likely, (and probably). I'll work on that when I wake up some time tomorrow. >.< - Penwhale | 04:35, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Adding Anthony Appleyard as a party

Looking at NYyankees51 evidence over the weekend I think Anthony Appleyard has behaved inappropriately in closing move requests. I asked on the main case talk page if he could be added as a party can you make sure the committee sees it? Cheers. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 07:34, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Abortion RFAR due for close

Hey Penwhale, my eyes may be playing tricks on me, but it appears by the vote that it's reached net 4 support to close, and the 24 hours has passed? Am I mistaken? Steven Zhang 03:12, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

• I was busy and requested help closing, but it seems everyone was not available this weekend... - Penwhale | 03:31, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
  • FWIW, I think that the mentions of the topic bans on the talk pages, such as here, might not be quite right. They were banned by ArbCom, not by an admin, no? I had a dig and found something on the Prem Rawat talk page back from 2009, when two users were topic banned by ArbCom, if that helps at all. Steven Zhang 05:20, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Abortion FYI

FYI: Paul August ☎ 15:46, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

... err : Paul August ☎ 16:47, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Abortion Close Issue: R10 vs R10.1

Hi Penwhale. I think that remedy 10.1 should have been superseded by 10. By my reading 10 was preferred by six arbs: PhilKnight, Jclemens, David Fuchs, Mailer diablo, Newyorkbrad and John Vandenberg, while 10.1 was only preferred by 4 arbs: Kirill Lokshin, Coren, Roger Davies and Elen of the Roads. Paul August ☎ 17:06, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

• This is one of the cases where I read 10 as "8-4" and 10.1 as "9-1" - 10.1 is a better compromise as the voice seems more uniform... - Penwhale | 04:24, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Abortion: Please formally warn a user of his topic ban

Hi Penwhale - I was hoping you could inform Geremia (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) that he was topic-banned under the abortion arb case, as no one seems to have put a notice on his talk page and I'm worried that this might preclude anyone from sanctioning him for the topic-ban and 1RR violations that he's currently up to. Thanks, –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 05:14, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Apparently inappropriate protection of Fae RFAr Proposed decision talk page

You protected this talk page a short time ago (while I was in the process of responding to comments there). It does not appear to be standard practice to cut off such talk page discussion at the close of a case, and I see no direction from ArbCom to do so. Protecting the page during active debate will not prevent the discussion from continuing, but only fragment it and provide ammunition to those already criticizing the process as insufficiently open and transparent. You should reverse yoiur action.

On a pedantic note, misspelling "attention" in a prominent heading urging users to pay attention in not exactly an auspicious note. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 20:54, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

• The reason for the full-protection is due to a few reasons:

1. The case clerk trainee Lord Roem is not a sysop, so he cannot do it himself;
2. The discussion threads there seems to be not related to the case itself (and ergo not the proper forum; see next point)
3. Once a case is closed, very little attention will be given to its related pages (save for the main case page itself).

• I'm assuming that you were going to respond to a thread discussing ArbCom. AC Noticeboard Talk might be a better forum, as there's currently ongoing discussion. (Or were you trying to reply to something else?) And you have my permission to shame the person that misspelled attention (in a nice way) - although I can't find the typo... - Penwhale | 21:09, 22 July 2012 (UTC) Addendum: Please feel free to shame me. orz - Penwhale | 21:26, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

"per instruction from ArbCom"?

Re : Is that instruction publicly available? I'd like to understand how ArbCom communicates (or fails to do so). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 00:06, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

• Instructions from ArbCom to its clerks are generally coordinated on the clerks-l mailing list. Because that list is private, all instructions on that list is not available publicly. Thus, unfortunately, it is not publicly available. - Penwhale | 00:45, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! So this falls under the "fails to communicate" case. May I ask if there is a mechanism that allows you to distinguish "ArbCom" from "one Arbiter" on that list? --Stephan Schulz (talk) 06:09, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

• Individual arbitrator post to the mailing list individually - and I'm not sure what you are trying to ask, so you need to be more specific. Although, pursuant to the relevant section at Banning Policy, the ban notice should have stayed. - Penwhale | 06:38, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I have, for quite some time, the concern that the arbitration process becomes less and less transparent to the average Misplaced Pages user, and that it is unclear who is responsible for which decisions and actions. I fear that ArbCom loses its real, consensus-based authority as a result, and thus tries to rely more and more on formal, procedural "authoritah", to the detriment of the project. You referring to "instructions from ArbCom" is such an example. The average (heck, even the experienced) user does not know who instructed you via which channel and in which form, and does not know if there is e.g. a deliberate (and deliberated) decision by ArbCom, or just an opinion by a single arbiter, or a general consensus on a mailing list that you have to interpret yourself. In particular, its not clear who is responsible for the decision. Misplaced Pages:Banning_policy#User_pages is a "should", not a must, and leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Moreover, policies leave room for WP:IAR in a way that ArbCom increasingly does not seem to accept with respect to its decisions. Thus, it is very relevant if you do an action with explicit ArbCom backing, or not. Sorry that you now are the target of (this version of) my standard rant - I'm concerned about the process, not you individually. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 10:10, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Stephan, I'm glad to confirm what Penwhale says. In terms of "how" the instruction was issued, I think you said it best "general consensus on a mailing list". Thanks and regards, Lord Roem (talk) 12:05, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

When an arbitration clerk takes an action in the execution of their official duties as clerk, they do so with the full authority of the Committee. Those actions are undone at the undoing user's peril. I find it extremely unlikely that it would ever occur, but should a clerk ever undertake an "official" action that does not have the backing of the Committee, we will be sure to revert it and respond appropriately. There are reasons why we do what we do, and we have been entrusted by the community to do them. If you don't like it, you're quite welcome to run for election next time yourself; I can assure you it is far more difficult than you seem to think. Hersfold 13:05, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Other stuff

Talk:List of YouTube personalities#RfC: The criteria for inclusion on List of YouTube personalities

Hi Penwhale. Because you participated in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of YouTube celebrities (4th nomination), your input is sought at Talk:List of YouTube personalities#RfC: The criteria for inclusion on List of YouTube personalities. There are disputes over who should be and who shouldn't be included in the list. Cunard (talk) 23:17, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

You're invited to the New York Wiknic!

This message is being sent to inform you of a Misplaced Pages picnic that is being held in your area next Saturday, June 25. From 1 to 8 PM or any time in between, join your fellow volunteers for a get together at Norman's Landscape (directions) in Manhattan's Central Park.

Take along your friends (newbies permitted), your family and other free culture enthusiasts! You may also want to pack a blanket, some water or perhaps even a frisbee.

If you can, share what you're bringing at the discussion page.

Also, please remember that this is the picnic that anyone can edit so bring enough food to share!

To subscribe to future events, follow the mailing list or add your username to the invitation list. BrownBot (talk) 19:18, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: 2011 Draft

Thank you for doing that 100% in line with wiki policies and guidelines, and the definition of that tag! --Lvhis (talk) 17:38, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Dome of the Rock

this edit reminded me of a report I want to file about Asad. May I? Chesdovi (talk) 18:40, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Prefer you seek other people's input, as I have no knowledge of the area at all whatsoever. - Penwhale | 02:44, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Great, as long as you have no problem with me filing a report. Chesdovi (talk) 08:38, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

This is NOT a "I don't see a problem with you filing a report" statement, but more of a "You should ask someone else whether you should file that request or not" statement. - Penwhale | 09:34, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

As long as I know the only problem you seem to have is your knowledge of Islam, not that I am precluded from filing reports. Thanks! Chesdovi (talk) 09:46, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

ただいま。

Hello there. Any articles you want to work on? Mainly anime/manga but I am open to suggestions. -- Cat 09:24, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

... Wow o.O You are back to the realm of the living, right? - Penwhale | 09:32, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Well... Undead maybe :p I will finally have time for them wikis I think. Although my schedule is as always quite hectic. -- Cat 10:13, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

By the way you particularly busy? -- とある白い猫 01:25, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Why? o.o - Penwhale | 04:03, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit request for a protected page

I made an edit protected for that protected page, and listed my reasons. Could you please take a look there and kindly give some help? Thank you. The mediation on the dispute is closed with failure to resolve the dispute, i.e. the dispute is still ongoing. --Lvhis (talk) 18:13, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the dispute at the Senkaku Islands page

Hi Penwhale. I think you acted rather hastily in removing the dispute tag from the above article. First, it is disputed - it's not clear cut as you suggested. Second, there's no reason that the tag must be there right now. Third, you raised COI and I think it's correct for two reasons - i) you removed the tag in the past, overriding Feezo; and ii) Lvhis personally asked you to remove the tag.

If you read this soon, I think it would be good if you could remove the tag and let someone else decide how to address it. But I decided to raise the issue at the Admin intervention board, as I wasn't sure when you would next be on. I hope you don't take offence, and I'm sure you acted purely out of good faith. But I think your intervention was very inappropriate. Thanks, John Smith's (talk) 19:57, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

John Smith's, your using the word "removed" in above are really confusing. If you want to argue against adding the tag, you should argue on my two main points in my edit requested. You'd better to read the wp guideline Misplaced Pages:POV Cleanup#Guidelines for cleanup at least 3 times or more before you made such complain again and again. Admin Penwhale just did a thing 100% in line with wp policy and guidelines, nothing with COI at all! --Lvhis (talk) 20:29, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Penwhale, I'm a little confused by your actions re Senkaku Islands—you said on June 29 that I should "feel free to remove when the medation closes"—yet only a day after I did so, you answered a protected edit request to restore the tag. Has the situation changed? You should also be aware, if you aren't already, that there is a currently open ANI case on this. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 02:11, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Have replied at your talk and ANI. Mentioned my defense at Article talk. - Penwhale | 02:42, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard#The above close of the community ban of User:WCGSOldBoy is against consensus

Please see Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard#The above close of the community ban of User:WCGSOldBoy is against consensus. Your closing statement should be made as a comment, not as a close. You overrode community consensus in that debate. Cunard (talk) 07:03, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

• A CU block is (almost) equivalent to a community-imposed ban. Normally, they don't get reversed. Therefore, as the accounts are already blocked for CU reasons - effectively making them equivalent to de facto community bans, there's nothing more to be done. - Penwhale | 07:18, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Nova Publishers

Hi, yes, I realize that I violated 3RR, too, but hoped this would fall under vandalism fighting. I guess that's stretching the rules a bit. But what do I do with an IP who does not want to dicuss and insists on inserting all kind of stuff into an article that doesn't really belong there? This particular article has been a pain for a long time... (And to heap it on, they also spam me all the time... :-). Anyway, I will leave reverting the IP's latest edit to somebody else and back off for a while. Thanks for listening... --Crusio (talk) 16:58, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Penwhale, Can't be sure of the timing, but it looks to me like IP address 31.11.74.215 is continuing to edit war after his 24 hr block . Famousdog (talk) 09:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Technically, 2 consecutive edits, and more than 12 hours old, so I'm willing to wait and see whether he keeps up. Perhaps you should discuss with the IP on his talk page? - Penwhale | 09:37, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

S/he's still making pointless edits against what appears to be consensus ... Famousdog (talk) 09:24, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Try post to IP's talk page? Ask the IP why they want to keep an "Impact" section in the article. - Penwhale | 11:36, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Calvin • 17:12, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

thanks for this :) Much appreciated (was obviously going a bit too fast) Jalexander--WMF 02:05, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		Because the idea of a Chinese welcome template is, frankly, A Brilliant Idea. Yunshui (talk) 12:23, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

History

Ok, almohads was a dynasty (as family) but was a country too. According to all references legal heirless of Almohads was another (not Marinid dynasty).

• When Istiqal party create "Greater Morocco" says: all arab countries in Morocco was only one (Morocco).
• Kingdom of Fez was exits! (Reyno de Fez in Treaty of Tordesillas not Wattasid dynasty)
• Algeciras, Gibraltar, Ronda and Malaga was part of Marinid Empire (part of: Algeria, Gibraltar, Morocco, Spain) North Africa & South Europe
• nationality = Moroccan...?????? it`s an Anachronism!.Bokpasa 20:37, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello,

Since my request on ANI was archived without any answer by Ioeth, should I understand that all Bokpasa's OR/POV edits will not be reverted and that he will not be blocked as it is the 3rd time he vandalizes these (same) articles?

Btw, as I wrote before, I will not revert these edits, even after the expiry of the protection, without the consent of an admin or of the board... I don't think that Bokpasa works the same way.

Omar-Toons (talk) 22:15, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

• This needs more eyes. However, as he hasn't edited in a few days, let's see what he does after. - Penwhale | 00:28, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

repeat sockpuppets vs. banned editors

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/search/?title=User_talk:Jclemens&diff=436338835&oldid=436312677   FYI, Unscintillating (talk) 14:57, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Cent listing of block notice discussion

I note you relisted the discussion, however discussion stopped nine days ago. Relisting it gives the impression that it's a new discussion, and is somewhat misleading. We only list active discussions on Cent. Interest has faded from that discussion, and it's now waiting for someone to sum it and close it. I can't do that, as I took part in the discussion. However, you haven't taken part in the discussion, so you could have a go at summing it up to see if there is a consensus - and if so, updating WP:REMOVED. SilkTork 11:25, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

• At a glance, I couldn't find consensus on that; there are 2 alternative proposals given but are not discussed at length. - Penwhale | 17:17, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Proposed topic ban for Makesense thread

I have responded to your suggestion ahead of Zac and fixed some of his pipelinks for clarification up to the example he used of mine, even making a list of those ten examples. I've left the remainder for him to fix up on his own, but ATM what's there is a good start. I've also notified the user to check for any errors as I simply tried to merge links with neighbouring text and didn't check every link myself (except for the list of ten). CycloneGU (talk) 16:04, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

On agreeing with 'shonen

Not often agree with little 'shonen? That your problem, little user! bishzilla _ROARR!! 11:14, 2 August 2011 (UTC).

...? CycloneGU (talk) 13:58, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

. Bishonen | talk 14:13, 2 August 2011 (UTC).

Versus relaunch on the 2nd?

Every source I've read said the 1st. ViperSnake151  Talk  15:47, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

• USA Today article on this. - Penwhale | 19:20, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Kingdom of Sardinia

Hi Penwhale. I saw another block for the page about the Kingdom of Sardinia. Can a single user (Srnec) impose his own single view, call for a poll and (when our wiki-community refused his point of view) reject the result, refusing to show even a single English source according to his version (his version is more than poor of sources: it is COMPLETELY unreferenced! What about WP:SOURCES?)
I prevent a probable objection: speaking with him is completely useless, because he thinks that talk pages are simply places where he can explain why his versions must be imposed. I think that now it is time to take a decision: are wiki-guidelines as WP:SOURCES or WP:CONSENSUS relevant or they are simply a joke? --Jonny Bee Goo (talk) 19:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

• This is content dispute, and should be discussed at RfC/RfM/etc. I don't see enough discussion on the talk page for me to act for the time being. - Penwhale | 19:45, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

68,697 bytes of talk page is not enough discussion? An opinion that can be hardly sustained.... (By the way, what are "RfC/RfM"?)--Jonny Bee Goo (talk) 20:04, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

• Stop and go discussion isn't good (especially there was at least a 1 month gap before you re-started discussion). RfC = Requests for Comment, and RfM = Requests for Mediation. They are standard dispute resolution steps when editors cannot gain consensus. RfC is also used sometimes to look at user conduct. - Penwhale | 20:10, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for this fix ! causa sui (talk) 19:36, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

I was trying to figure out what was wrong, then I dived into the ReGex expression on that page (which, for the record, I'm not good at reading). Luckily it wasn't difficult to figure out what happened... - Penwhale | 19:41, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Annabel Park

Hello Penwhale. I noticed just now you posted on ANI that you had "full protected" Annabel Park for one week, but when I went to check afterwards, it appears the page can still be edited. Have I misunderstood what "full protected" means? Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 06:16, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

• I goofed and semi'd instead of full-protect. Thanks for letting me know, and fixed. - Penwhale | 06:37, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying, it had me confused at first too.  :) AzureCitizen (talk) 06:41, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Han-yi Shaw

Please take a look at a stub article about a research fellow at National Chengchi University. Perhaps you may have suggestions or comments? --Tenmei (talk) 16:24, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

• Whomever started stub that made quite a few factual mistakes... For example, they included the title "researcher" in the bolded Chinese name part... Updated: The Cambridge Journal abstract did point out that the author didn't include his own arguments, but did say that more evidence used by the author seem to support PRC/ROC claim. - Penwhale | 18:55, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
• It may be best to use materials used by Shaw, as Cambridge Journal clearly found flaws due to Shaw not listing how the claims are used. - Penwhale | 19:08, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Boris Berezovsky (businessman) article and sub page idea

Hi Penwhale, I have recently been randomly asked to comment on the Boris Berezovsky (businessman) discussion. It seems that the whole structure of the article is in question. (see recent discussion on the article's talk page.) I have suggested that we create a user (my own) subpage to try out a new structure. I am rather new to all this and don't want to add to the complexity unnecessarily. I have noted that you have protected the article and have been the last admin to be involved; thus my note to you here. Any thoughts? DonaldRichardSands (talk) 18:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

User:Bokpasa

Hello,

I saw that Bokpasa started his disruptive edits again and is involved in an EW with an IP editor...

Unfortunately, and as it is shown by the diffs that I shared on the ANI board , this guy is well known for his PoV-Pushing, and I don't think that the EW can be stopped until he stops his PoV edits.

As he can't quit editing without any discussion and as all the previous tentatives to convince him failed, isn't a RfC-User the more appropriate way to stop that? Or can any admin intervene basing on Bokpasa's previous cases of PoV pushing and nationalist editing?

Omar-Toons (talk) 21:59, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Resurrect the ANI report. Considering there are other SPI/socks involved, more eyes are needed. - Penwhale | 02:34, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 17:08, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Gilabrand

Hello, you informed Gila that her block was suspended, but you did not actually unblock her so she remains blocked. nableezy - 16:15, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

• As of Aug. 25. The block isn't actually suspended until then, so I'm actually not suppose to life it just yet. - Penwhale | 16:17, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Ahh, pays to read the end of the sentence. Thanks. nableezy - 16:29, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Translation

Hi, I saw that you were listed in Misplaced Pages:Translators available from Chinese to English, and I need a translation of a religious title for an article. It's 万众尊崇法力无边仁慈祥和的佛法之王, the literal meaning of Gyaltsen Norbu's title, which I gleaned from his zhwiki article. Could you translate that phrase into English for me? Quigley (talk) 20:23, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

• Something like "King of Buddhism, Idolized by Many, Power Unlimited, Kind and Peaceful". Title translation isn't exactly my forte, though... - Penwhale | 21:03, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Yeah, there might be some specialized Buddhist terminology in there, in which case a user with the requisite knowledge will probably refine the translation later. Your translation is good for now, thank you! Quigley (talk) 21:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Arbitration on Senkaku Islands

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests#Senkaku Islands and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for Arbitration;
• Misplaced Pages:Arbitration guide.

Thanks, Qwyrxian (talk) 10:07, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

DEL REV

Hi Penwhale!

You recently said in a DEL REV on WP:BLPSIGN that an RFC or VPP needs to happen. Would you please be generous enough to start one coz I don't know the procedure, yet. Thanks. Regards, Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 12:24, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Notification of arbitration case opened

An arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Senkaku Islands. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Senkaku Islands/Evidence. Please add your evidence by August 31, 2011, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Senkaku Islands/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 15:09, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi

You've added a lot of parties to ArbCom cases recently, on orders from higher up, but I hope you'll draw the line.Anythingyouwant (talk) 11:58, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

• I fail to see the point you're trying to make here... Please enlighten me a bit further, if you would? - Penwhale | 12:12, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Never mind, I was up past my bedtime, when my sense of humor sometimes misfires. Sorry about that. I was thinking about how people sometimes react to being added as parties, and this old video came to mind. Anyway, please disregard.Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:53, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Signature trouble

I have already received a warning for my signature and removed them almost instantly. Please refer to some of the latest signs and you will see no images. Only some messages still remain with the sign and since i cant resign or countersign the messages, i abandoned them. --Anirudh Emani (talk) 07:29, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

• I have replied to your talk page. - Penwhale | 08:11, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Friendly notification regarding this week's Signpost

Hello. This is an automated message to tell you that, as it stands, you will shortly be mentioned in this week's 'Arbitration Report' (link). The report aims to inform The Signpost's many readers about the activities of the Arbitration Committee in a non-partisan manner. Please review the article, and, if you have any concerns, feel free to leave them in the Comments section directly below the main body of text, where they will be read by a member of the editorial team. Please only edit the article yourself in the case of grievious factual errors (making sure ot note such changes in the comments section), as well as refraining from edit-warring or other uncivil behaviour on project pages generally. Thank you. On behalf of The Signpost's editorial team, LivingBot (talk) 00:00, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:The Musical in NYC Oct 22

You are invited to Misplaced Pages:The Musical in NYC, an editathon, Misplaced Pages meet-up and lectures that will be held on Saturday, October 22, 2011, at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts (at Lincoln Center), as part of the Misplaced Pages Loves Libraries events being held across the USA.

All are welcome, sign up on the wiki and here!--Pharos (talk) 04:49, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Abortion "page" ban

Could I ask you to take another look at the templates you've added to Talk:Abortion? You wrote that the topic-banned editors were banned only from the article but were permitted to edit the talk page. That's not correct - as far as I can tell, these editors were banned from all abortion-related pages, a term that typically encompasses all namespaces and not just articlespace. This distinction was discussed on the Proposed Decision talkpage, and my understanding is that the Arbs explicitly voted to ban these editors from all namespaces, including Talk:Abortion. Would you mind taking another look and updating these templates? Thanks. MastCell  05:39, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes I'd like confirmation here also. And see below.DMSBel (talk) 06:10, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Was there further discussion, re. not extending to talk pages?DMSBel (talk) 06:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

• The texts for template {{User article ban arb}} doesn't have a syntax to state ban from the talk page. However, the topic ban covers talk page as "broadly construed" implies that they are also banned from talk pages. This is the issue due to the existing wording of existing templates. Same issue takes place at the Talk:Opposition to the legalization of abortion and Talk:Support for the legalization of abortion. - Penwhale | 06:21, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I am a little confused, I had not seen that there had been a change from articles to pages, and the first two arbitators who registered support (for my topic ban) seem to have done so before the change from articles to pages.DMSBel (talk) 06:28, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

• These days most topic bans are construed as widely as possible, which includes talk pages. It's been the standard practice. - Penwhale | 06:39, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok thanks.DMSBel (talk) 06:41, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

• Now I see what the issue is: yeah, the template doesn't provide a way to add text that they're banned from talk pages too. - Penwhale | 06:50, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Well as far as I am concerned, I only need notification on my own talk page, Penwhale, that you had clarified the issue here was enough for me.DMSBel (talk) 07:49, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

{{User article ban arb}} is taking up quite a bit of space. I think we can WP:AGF somewhat and assume that the five topic banned editors will all respect their ban; if not, surely one of us will remember. Would it be OK to remove the five instances of the template? NW (Talk) 15:13, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

• Most likely. That template needs modification in my opinion, but we'll have to make do... Go ahead and do that. - Penwhale | 23:07, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Seriously guys? Wouldn't you wait until after there had been a violation of the sanctions before posting a badge of shame to the talk page of every abortion-related article to make sure that there are no violations of the sanctions? Even if you choose not to have any faith in the editors under sanction at least have some in the scores of admins watching these articles. - Haymaker (talk) 02:04, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree it's excessive to template abortion-related talkpages with the names of specific editors who are topic-banned. I can't recall that being done in other cases, although maybe it has been. Just do without the templates. MastCell  04:29, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

• The current procedure calls for posting of article bans to the talk pages last time I checked...

• Just removed that. NW (Talk) 04:20, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Abortion Arbcom definitely closed?

Sorry to question this, is it definitely closed? I see several arbitors have yet to vote on the move to close, maybe I am not familiar with how these things are normally wrapped up?DMSBel (talk) 06:07, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

My apologies, I see now that not all have to vote.DMSBel (talk) 06:36, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Template:Uw-sanctions

When adding new entries to {{Uw-sanctions}}, please make sure that they are added in all 3 places - with Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Abortion, you added it only in the first; I went and completed the task. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:49, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

National Archives ExtravaSCANza

You are invited to the National Archives ExtravaSCANza, taking place every day next week from January 4–7, Wednesday to Saturday, in College Park, Maryland (Washington, DC metro area). Come help me cap off my stint as Wikipedian in Residence at the National Archives with one last success! This will be a casual working event in which Wikipedians are getting together to scan interesting documents at the National Archives related to a different theme each day—currently: spaceflight, women's suffrage, Chile, and battleships—for use on Misplaced Pages/Wikimedia Commons. The event is being held on multiple days, and in the evenings and weekend, so that as many locals and out-of-towners from nearby regions as possible can come. Please join us! Dominic·t 01:31, 30 December 2011 (UTC) Wikipedians from DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Newark, New York City, and Pittsburgh have been invited.

MSU Interview

Dear Penwhale,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Misplaced Pages administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the communityHERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your nameHERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.11.206.39 (talk) 03:49, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Penwhale. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Misplaced Pages, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang 23:52, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

You're invited to Wiki-Gangs of New York @ NYPL on April 21!

Wiki-Gangs of New York: April 21 at the New York Public Library

Join us for an an civic edit-a-thon, Misplaced Pages meet-up and instructional workshop that will be held this weekend on Saturday, April 21, at the New York Public Library Main Branch. Venue: Stephen A. Schwarzman Building (NYPL Main Branch), Margaret Liebman Berger Forum (Room 227). Directions: Fifth Avenue at 42nd Street. Time: 11 a.m. - 5 p.m. (drop-ins welcome at any time) The event's goal will be to improve Misplaced Pages articles and content related to the neighborhoods and history of New York City - No special wiki knowledge is required! Also, please RSVP!--Pharos (talk) 18:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Abuse Filter on the Article Feedback Tool

Hey there :). You're being contacted because you're an edit filter manager, At the moment, we're developing Version 5 of the Article Feedback Tool, which you may or may not have heard about. If you haven't; for the first time, this will involve a free-text box where readers can submit comments :). Obviously, there's going to be junk, and we want to minimise that junk. To do so, we're working the Abuse Filter into the tool.

For this to work, we need people to write and maintain filters. I'd be very grateful if you could take a look at the discussion here and the attached docs, and comment and contribute! Thanks :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:28, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Off-wiki

Were you contacted by TrevelyanL85A2 off-wiki with respect to the ongoing arbitration request? Hipocrite (talk) 12:04, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

• No - I'm answering this on the RFAR page, hang on... - Penwhale | 13:16, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

The period is actually too long & unsudden image change without any discussion

Mitt Romney is a prominent politician and the fixed period that you set down on this page is too long and a lot can happen for the next three days. Users should be warned instead and reprimanded instead of locking a very prominent page. It's akin to locking the Barack Obama page leaving no one to edit it.

Another thing is a user made a big change which is the unflattering image before the lock which is Skidmore #3 instead of the agreed Skidmore #6 which has been used for months. The change is here http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Mitt_Romney&diff=502717588&oldid=502713163 which uses the image http://en.wikipedia.org/File:Mitt_Romney_by_Gage_Skidmore_3.jpg instead of the http://en.wikipedia.org/File:Mitt_Romney_by_Gage_Skidmore_6.jpg If the unlock does not happen, I request that you edit the page to change it to #6 in favor of the community's preferred image instead of that user's preferred image. ViriiK (talk) 08:38, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

• I can't find evidence that skidmore #6 was preferred (the only discussion I saw did not reference it). If you can provide me with a link to that discussion, I will be glad to change it. Added: The issue is that there are too many parties that would need to be warned, and the history of that article reads more like a dispute rather than disruption. As we try not to block punitively, we protect and require editors to discuss, instead. - Penwhale | 10:43, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
  • It sucks to have the bio of a presidential candidate protected, but I can understand why you did it. Incidentally, this is exactly why I complained about the lack of administrative response at WP:AN3 - when edit-warring doesn't get nipped in the bud and people get away with it, then it tends to escalate into an arms race and articles end up locked, which punishes everybody. I still think timely administrative intervention could have nipped this in the bud, but maybe I'm just grouchy. MastCell  18:32, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

• The number of editors that would have had to be blocked is what made me protect the page instead -_- - Penwhale | 18:39, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

3RR

The material shouldn't be the same to count it as revert.From WP:3RR "An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing other editors—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Violations of the rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as a 3RR violation. See below for exemptions."--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 08:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

• It's not clear that it's a revert; also, it's a content dispute, so 3RR is not the proper forum for it. - Penwhale | 08:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

What not clear he reverted this edit .And most of the reports in WP:3RR are part of the content dispute.--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 08:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Please be careful: (1) I don't see him reverting that edit (the stuff that you removed was not added back), and (2) at 3RR we look at all sides of the reverts. Either way, your diffs are not convincing. - Penwhale | 09:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

(1) ,(2) fine by me I have discussed thoroughly with this user on article talk page.--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 09:19, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I count 3, because this one is not a revert. Unless you can show me evidence that that edit reverted something? - Penwhale | 09:26, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

He reverted this edit .Words starting with "Dhimmitude refers to discrimination against or treating... "--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 09:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

The user made another revert --Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 10:20, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

this is utter nonsense...YOU are edit warring against consensus. you removed sourced content. my revert is totally justified (which amounts to a *single* revert of your *disruptive* edit.) you are now being *disruptive* because your misrepresentation of sources, your edit warring allegations ended in total failure. deliberately making disruptive edits so that you get reverted won't get me banned... it will get you banned for gaming the system.-- altetendekrabbe  10:24, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Regardless, BOTH of you have reverted more than 3 times. STOP, AND DISCUSS, before blocks are applied. - Penwhale | 10:31, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

please see his latest edits on the noticeboard here, . he is adding unrelated edits to the diffs. this is extremely serious disruptive behavior.-- altetendekrabbe  10:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Please prove you accusation or strike it I only made two edits to the article(counting consectuve edit as one per WP:3RR) in the last two days--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 11:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Please note that I have blocked altetendekrabbe based on the additional revert. Still reviewing other editors. Kuru (talk) 11:40, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Acknowledged; I do believe that there is fault on both sides here, though. - Penwhale | 11:43, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Concur, but I don't see enough to entertain extreme edit warring by one party. Other methods have been tried; page protection, discussions, etc. If there's a general sanction that you feel can resolve the issue less unilaterally, then please feel free to reverse any action I've taken without consultation (I'm going to be offline for then next six hours or so). Kuru (talk) 12:21, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Understood. We can talk about it later. Won't act on this unless situation changes. - Penwhale | 12:31, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Please Unblock Me

This is Colton Cosmic. Dear Penwhale, I am asking that you look over and unblock my account. I wanted to put this on the administrator's noticeboard but it won't accept IP edits. I decided to post it on three admins' talkpages instead. I picked you three for no reason other than I noticed you had made recent edits. Colton Cosmic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.81.199.240 (talk) 09:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

This is Colton Cosmic. Bah Penwhale, your fellow admin Timotheus Canens is on me like white on rice. He even reverted my comment at my own talkpage (and then locked the page) but you can view my comment here . I hope you read my comment. The short version of this affair is that TC banned me for WP:SOCK but I say I didn't do it. Colton Cosmic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.81.28.75 (talk) 13:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

• You need to use the proper forums for appeals. I am unable to assist you. - Penwhale | 01:31, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Your recent block of me - did you really intend to do this?

Hi, Penwhale;

You recently blocked me from editing Sandra Fluke, by acceding to Hoary's request for page protection. While there have been some new IP SPAs crop up, their activities have been short and have not occurred in that last week. There is essentially one IP editor making extensive contributions, and that is me. I would ask if you have considered the actual practical effect of this block, particularly since you followed it with the helpful comment, "I would like to see more discussion taking place on the talk page." The complaint I made about Hoary's request was that Casprings, which is virtually a Sandra Fluke SPA was repetetively inserting material that had major WP:RS issues, without addressing the questions extensively raised by myself and others on Talk, nor abiding by consensus. If you meant to block me, even though no allegation of edit warring was made against me, I would appreciate and be open to an explanation, if not, would you consider reversing this block; its effect is to make it less likely that Casprings will in the future acknowledge issues on Talk.

PS; the ANI was filed as consensus was achieved, and so also circumvented the Talk discussion. If really pushed after twice establishing WP:RS/WP:BLP consensus and then twice getting User consensus for removal, probably would have taken it to the WP:RS board. --209.6.69.227 (talk) 18:51, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

• I didn't block you; the page protection was intended because I'm not seeing enough discussion. Ergo, protection forces editors to compromise so there will be less edit warring. - Penwhale | 01:30, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

user shrike

i am trying to stay away from shrike... but see how is after me like a hound, . he should also try to de-escalate rather than follow me around. i am pretty sure he will begin an edit war pretty soon (that is his modus operandi). the last time he edited there was like weeks ago... suddenly he began editing again..today... on my post. that's not a coincidence. anyway, i'm not going to be part of that discussion anymore. could you please ask him to stop stalking me?-- altetendekrabbe  18:18, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

UTRS Account Request

I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. - Penwhale | - Penwhale |

Hi Penwhale

The Bushranger closed this so that can be deleted per that. Arcandam (talk) 21:16, 22 July 2012 (UTC) p.s. Why does your editnotice say "Please pay attetion to this message" (emphasis mine)? Is it a typo or intentional?

• Oops. It's been ages and I didn't even realize that -_- - Penwhale | 21:24, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

• It certainly did grab my attention, so in a way it worked really well (for pedantic idiots like myself). Arcandam (talk) 10:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom notification

As you participated in the AE thread which led to this request, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Amendment_request:_Race_and_intelligence — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rue Cardinale (talk • contribs) 10:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)