| Revision as of 21:30, 4 March 2013 editFluffernutter (talk | contribs)Administrators41,664 edits →Comment: if Kevin knew the private evidence that cause the block, we have another set of problems← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 02:36, 22 April 2021 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,301,392 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Kevin/Archive 7) (bot | ||
| (128 intermediate revisions by 44 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{notaround|3=June 13, 2015}} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |maxarchivesize = 250K | |maxarchivesize = 250K | ||
| Line 38: | Line 39: | ||
| Cheers! | Cheers! | ||
| ⚫ | == Important Notice: Your 2013 Arbitration Committee Election vote == | ||
| == Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested) == | |||
| Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at ]. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at ]. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, ] | |||
| ], who generously ] to Misplaced Pages editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Misplaced Pages editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that: | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:TParis@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/User:TParis/SecurePoll/List --> | |||
| ==] nomination of ]== | |||
| * Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): | |||
| ] | |||
| A tag has been placed on ] requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under ] because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted. | |||
| It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve. | |||
| If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes. | |||
| At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through ]). | |||
| If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may '''contest the nomination''' by ] and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with ]. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the {{Querylink|Special:Log|qs=type=delete&page=Template%3AAfc+b|deleting administrator}}, or if you have already done so, you can place a request ]. <!-- Template:Db-t3-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> ''''']]]''''' 18:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot. | |||
| ==File permission problem with File:Bobestelle.gif== | |||
| ] | |||
| Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license. | |||
| If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either | |||
| If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! ]<sup> ]|]</sup> 17:22, 11 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| * make a note permitting reuse under the ] or another acceptable free license (see ]) '''at the site of the original publication'''; or | |||
| <!-- EdwardsBot 0298 --> | |||
| * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to '''permissions-en@wikimedia.org''', stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter ]. If you take this step, add {{tl|OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion. | |||
| If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to '''permissions-en@wikimedia.org'''. | |||
| == Marc Sinden page == | |||
| If you believe the media meets the criteria at ], use a tag such as {{tl|non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at ], and add a ] justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See ] for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. | |||
| Hi there, many thanks for the revert this morning, however I would have thought that the Daily Mail, Esquire magazine and BBC Radio 4 fit into the parameter of good sources, would you not agree? If you are OK with them I shall put the para back. ] (]) 10:14, 20 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :If I was OK with them I would not have removed it. The ''Daily Mail'' piece supports nothing of that paragraph, and the BBC Radio piece even less. The rest are gossip rags. Much better sourcing will be needed to replace the material. ] (]) 22:38, 20 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Understood. I'm not that bothered, but the main jist of it IS from the article in Esquire, which is properly sourced and certainly seems very extensively researched and not what I would call "a gossip rag"! Last appeal to replace...? ] (]) 00:20, 21 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::You could ask at ]. ] (]) 00:39, 21 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Life's too short!!!! Cheers! ] (]) 01:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in . '''Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''', as described in ]. You may wish to read Misplaced Pages's ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no permission-notice --> <span style="color:#fff;background:Blue"> ★ </span> ] ] 02:12, 22 April 2021 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Just a heads up: When you semi-protected the page a short while back, no icon was put up on the page to reflect it's protection. ]'']'' 00:30, 14 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Yeah, I find people tend to find out when they try to edit. ] (]) 04:56, 14 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | == |
||
| Hello, Kevin. Please contact the Arbitration Committee by email at {{NoSpamEmail|arbcom-l|lists.wikimedia.org}} or ] at your earliest convenience; I will be sending you an email shortly with more information. ] <small>]</small><sup>(]/]/])</sup> 16:39, 4 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == Comment == | |||
| It was a fairly bad idea to unblock Cla68 and ignoring the private evidence and concerns regarding outing, and for making it so that nobody, not even an oversighter who has access to the evidence, can reblock under penalty of desysopping, as that would be wheel warring. --''']]]''' 19:13, 4 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :Anyone can re-block should Cla68 repost the offending material. If he doesn't then he equally doesn't need to be blocked. ] (]) 20:21, 4 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
| Kevin, could you please clear something up for me? The blocking admin posted in his edit summary "please do not unblock without consulting the oversight team". Did you have any contact with the oversighters before unblocking? ] (]) 19:29, 4 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :Yes I saw that, and no I didn't. ] (]) 20:21, 4 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::Er. Could you explain why? ] (]) 20:46, 4 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::Hmmm, maybe because Cla68 stated that he had no intention of repeating the sort of actions that prompted the block. Just a thought.--] <sub>] ]</sub> 20:58, 4 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::::That's not really an explanation for 'An ArbCom-appointed functionary told us explicitly not to do what I just did'. It's an explanation for why Kevin might've thought talking to the OSers was a good idea. ] (]) 21:00, 4 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I believe the point of the blocking admin's statement was that the decision on unblocking was supposed to be made by the oversight team, not J. Random Administrator. Kevin isn't an oversighter or an arbitrator so hasn't been party to the discussions that have being going on behind the scenes. I don't think anyone will be reblocking, but it's also fairly obvious that Kevin has trodden rather heavily on the toes of the Arbcom and the oversighters - not the kind of thing they appreciate. Herfold's message in the section above is unlikely to be an enquiry about what Kevin had for breakfast today. ] (]) 21:07, 4 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I wasn't aware the Beebs had the authority to force all the lesser admins to abide by his decrees. Oh wait, he doesn't. Kevin obviously knew the basis of the block and, given Cla68's pledge, lifted it on the basis that such a decision was within reason under the circumstances.--] <sub>] ]</sub> 21:09, 4 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::DA has covered it, so I won;t repeat that. In addition, the concept of sticking an editor in the corner with a gag, whilst holding discussion about his fate seems to me to be entirely unfair. There would have to be extreme circumstances to do such a thing, i.e. that the revealing of private information was a certaintly to recurr. ] (]) 21:19, 4 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::{{ec}} (in reply to TDA:) If Kevin knew the content of the basis for the block from private communication with Cla68, I'd say that demonstrated that Cla didn't understand that continued outing wasn't acceptable and that Kevin shouldn't have unblocked someone who didn't understand that. If he knew it from some other method, he was making a decision based on possibly-faulty information from a third party. If he didn't know it at all, then he was taking an administrator action in a situation where he wasn't able to adequately review the evidence. There's pretty much no explanation for this unblock in which Kevin made an informed decision based on familiarity with the evidence of the case. ''That'' is what Beeblebrox's "do not unblock without consulting" restriction was supposed to account for - no non-oversighter ''can'' adequately review the basis for the block or the prognosis for an unblock without access, either directly or through a consultation with an OSer, to what went on to cause the block.<p>(in reply to Kevin:) Kevin, you made an unblock when the person you unblocked had clearly stated that rather than acknowledging that he wouldn't continue pursuing the issue of another editor's identity, he was going to take it to public noticeboards. He ''told us'' that that's what he intended to do, in the same note where he declined Newyorkbrad's recommendation for how to be unblocked. That seems a very clear indication to me that he was going to continue his behavior, with his only concession being that he wouldn't directly say or link to the name of the person. Outing policy covers more, far more, than that - an important point that Cla68 does not yet seem to grasp or abide by, and you don't seem to have taken into consideration. ] (]) 21:30, 4 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 02:36, 22 April 2021
 | This user may have left Misplaced Pages. Kevin has not edited Misplaced Pages since June 13, 2015. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
Please note that if you post something for me here, I'll respond to it here.
If I posted on your talk page, I have it watched so you can reply there. It just makes for easier reading. Thanks.
 Archives | |||||||
|
|||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Are you certain?
http://meta.wikimedia.org/Steward_requests/Permissions#Kevin.40enwiki —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avraham (talk • contribs)
John Avlon marketing his book.
Hi,
So I noticed a sentence in the "radical center" wiki with no citation.
The definitive history of "Centrism" in America, and probably the best-selling radical centrist book to date, is John Avlon's Independent Nation (2004, pbk. 2005).
I was unaware that sales figures were kept for "radical centrist" publications, so I did some searching for a top 10 list of radical centrists books by various years (2009, 2008, 2007 etc..). Unfortunately, I was unable to find such a list.
So, I removed the sentence. Then I went to John Avlon's wiki to remove the following sentence, which cites as its source the sentence in the "radical center" wiki that has no citation!
Independent Nation has been called, "the definitive history of 'Centrism' in America, and probably the best-selling radical centrist book to date."
Unfortunately, I'm a newbie so I can't change the page. I imagine there were some "angry" edits made in the past few months which is why the page is protected. Nevertheless, the above sentence strikes me as pure unsupported marketing which shouldn't have a place on a factual bio page.
Cheers!
Important Notice: Your 2013 Arbitration Committee Election vote
Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis
Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Afc b
A tag has been placed on Template:Afc b requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. NYKevin 18:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Bobestelle.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Bobestelle.gif. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Misplaced Pages:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Misplaced Pages:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Misplaced Pages's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ★ Bigr Tex 02:12, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Categories: