Revision as of 00:44, 4 November 2011 editBorn2cycle (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers31,496 edits →Yoghurt: reminder of WP:ADMINACCT← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:48, 5 November 2011 edit undoFish and karate (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators36,449 edits →Yoghurt: replyNext edit → | ||
Line 260: | Line 260: | ||
Ignoring editors and admins like {{User|Vegaswikian}} who question your actions is probably not a smart move. --] (]) 00:44, 4 November 2011 (UTC) | Ignoring editors and admins like {{User|Vegaswikian}} who question your actions is probably not a smart move. --] (]) 00:44, 4 November 2011 (UTC) | ||
:I have already responded to this and your repeated nagging because I didn't close a discussion the way you demanded it be closed is not going to either upset me or make me change my mind. I have re-read the RM discussion and remain satisfied that closing it as no consensus was reasonable. I notice that the majority of editors commenting on the RfC (linked above) are in agreement with this. I accept and understand that you believe those who argued to oppose the move have no worth in their arguments, however I believe they did have value. A majority of contributors were opposed to the move, people citing the fact that the article has been stable at ] for over 8 years, and ]. To me, that alone was sufficient for a "no consensus" close. It is not for me to determine whose interpretation of guidelines and naming conventions is "correct" - if I am to do that then why even bother with a discussion? And note I closed it as "No consensus" NOT "Oppose move" - I would expect to always see a strong consensus in favour one way or another to close a discussion definitively. A strong consensus WAS NOT THERE. A close of "No consensus" is not a final sentence condemning the article to remain at that name for all eternity. Give it a few months and start another discussion. Or start one right now. I really really really don't care what you do. This one was closed as "no consensus" because, get this, there was "no consensus". I will not let your repeated complaining - and now passive-aggressive threats - to bully me into changing this. And I include Vegaswikian in this, not just Born2cycle. ]&] 06:48, 5 November 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 06:48, 5 November 2011
Please place your comments at the bottom of the talk page. Make sure you sign your posts using four tildes, like this: ~~~~
New to Misplaced Pages? - hello! See Misplaced Pages:Welcome, Misplaced Pages:Help, and Misplaced Pages:My first article for useful advice to get you started. If those don't help you, then by all means please do come back and ask me your question(s).
Can't edit my talk page archives? If there is anything (chiefly privacy stuff) you would like removing or amending, let me know below or by email. If you are unsure whether you want everyone seeing your message, don't post it here - again, email me.
Alansohn
That you for conducting the mediation of the article Dane Rauschenberg. The article has been relatively stable since the mediation until the past few months when several IP editors have offered edits that can be characterized as pro-Rauschenberg modifications. The IP addresses correspond to cities where Rauschenberg claims to be located on his blog.
The logical response would be to discuss the changes on the talk and then remove the edits, and that has generally worked. However, recently the one year civility probation of User:Alansohn has expired, and he is back on the talk page with some very incivil comments. For example, "has descended from pathetic to disgusting..."
He has also listed all of the pro-mediation results editors in a big "sockpuppet" complaint. Anything you can do to keep this civil would be appreciated. This is not an edit war, because most of it is not done by changes to the article, but rather by throwing down insults on the talk page. 158.59.27.249 (talk) 18:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
- I have no dog in this hunt, other than the creation of a reliably-sourced article for a clearly notable individual. Despute Racepacket's persistent denials, I have created an article that bears primarily my efforts to add reliable and verifiable sources and removed unsupported claims. I had filed an earlier sockpuppet complaint at Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Pats2001 trying to weed out problems on both "sides" which resulted in eight users on both "sides" being blocked. Since the start of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Dane Rauschenberg, User:Racepacket has used innumerable sockpuppets to votestack there and to edit war at Dane Rauschenberg, repeatedly violating the basic rules of Misplaced Pages by falsely projecting consensus by portraying the same viewpoint as coming from multiple editors. Racepacket has been caught repeatedly with his pants down and has been rather effusive in denying some of the clearest evidence of sockpuppetry that I have ever seen in my years on Misplaced Pages. Racepacket's socks now repeat the claim that the reason that an AfD can't be opened to address repeated claims of non-notability is that Rauschenberg will deal violently with whoever opens an AfD. I find it appalling that someone with such a blatant axe to grind is abusing your time to try to blame the person who caught him red handed. Are there other socks? Perhaps. But let's finally deal with someone who needs to be eliminated from Misplaced Pages as soon as possible and has not stopped this abuse after being caught and blocked on multiple occasions. Alansohn (talk) 19:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Cleaning out old accounts
Hey, how have you been. I was going through old talk pages and found two dead accounts that might need be deleted (a third one has already been deleted): User:Werewolfman07 is a sockpuppet account I actually did use :-). I dont recall the password and can't even get into the account anymore - best that it just be deleted, can you do that? You will also find it amusing (I think) that I did at last get the full story about User:CamelCommodore (thank God thats been deleted) and it was exactly what I thought - Senior Chief Petty Officer IT technician in my command stirring up the worst kind of trouble. I found out he was hacking into all our e-mails, had most of our Misplaced Pages passwords and could see everythng we were doing. In the end, we all got VPN's and that put an end to that. The CC account is already gone so no harm there. One last question for you is what to do about this guy's account. No activity since "the saga" and appears to have run away from Misplaced Pages screaming. I personally dont like the existence of this account since there was alot of fishy stuff going on and the entire deal about the Silver Star awarded to a deceased family member just didnt ring true. People will go to thier grave thinking that was me, but I can prove quite obviously it wasnt (wasnt in the Middle East anymore when most of those posts were made from Dubai) and dont like it that there are talk page histories directly accusing me of breaking Federal law (Stolen Valor Act). I think now it might have been someone who knew me but I just dont know. Are we allowed to delete it? Might be best for everyone. So, anway, here I am still here and most of the people who wanted my head are banned, retired, or just plain gone. How funny is that. Thanks for ALL your help back in the dark days. Best -OberRanks (talk) 03:53, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Accounts cannot be deleted. If you mean their user pages and talk pages be deleted, then that is for the account holder (the confirmed accoutn holder) to request. fish&karate 14:05, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Werewolfman was created by me but I have long since lost the password and the e-mail address it links to was deactivated over a year ago. The other account, since it was created by another party (whoever that may be) I guess I'll just let that drop. Thanks for your help both now and then. Best. -OberRanks (talk) 18:57, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
FYI
. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
- Oh for goodness sake, Andy. Stop reacting to him - I imagine the only reason you saw that edit is because you are watching his contributions. I suggest you stop doing so. fish&karate 14:02, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
- You asked me to draw such instances to your attention; and undertook to take action if they recurred. I, perhaps foolishly, took you at your word. And your imagination is faulty. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:53, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Disputed non-free use rationale for File:TheStig.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:TheStig.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Misplaced Pages:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 14:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
File:TheStig.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:TheStig.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages: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. Stifle (talk) 14:48, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
List of Dictators which you commented on in the last AFD is up for deletion again Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Dictators
You are welcome to comment about the discussion for deletion. Ikip (talk) 09:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
NowCommons: File:WarMemor.jpg
File:WarMemor.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:War Memorial Churchyard of Constantine Kerrier.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Misplaced Pages, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Misplaced Pages, in this case: ]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:13, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Constant vandalism and disruption
I don't understand why you admins turn blind to Tajik (talk · contribs) when he goes around use sockpuppets in your faces and vandalize pages after pages. Is Misplaced Pages some type of gang related website? User:Tajik is removing sourced material from articles, this is vandalism and you admins allow it. He uses the excuse "falsification and POVs" but it's really him doing those if you concentrate on his edits. These are only few examples: , , , , He and Inuit18 (talk · contribs) (sockpuppet of Anoshirawan) pops up as a tag-team and usually at the same time, I believe that account is shared by him and someone in USA who's English is not so great. It's so strange that he comes everyday but only edit very little, so it's very likely that he's using sockpuppets to evade his 1 RR restriction. Tajik pretends that he is against POVs but it's he that is a POV pusher."The author - in this case al-Biruni - is referring to the Suleiman Mountains. In that case, it is highly probable that he was referring to Pashtuns, because he had described them as a "Hindu people" before.... Tajik (talk) 01:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)". It's very clear for readers here that Tajik hates Pashtuns with great passion so he wants to give them a new history which would make them being Hindus when all the scholars, history books, encyclopedias, and the Pashtuns themselves, disagree. There is "zero traces" of any Hindu culture among the Pashtuns. Anyway, Tajik was blocked 17 times and banned for a whole year but he doesn't seem to care about any of that, he just wants to remove things from articles that he doesn't agree with or doesn't like. This is a serious problem and you guys should put an end to it. I also believe Muxlim (talk · contribs) is him.
Your old RFA standards
What were your RFA standards that you used to have, referred to such as here. --SmokeyJoe (talk)
RfD nomination of What is a planet
I have nominated What is a planet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. December21st2012Freak at ≈ 21:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Belated RfA news
Just letting you know that WP:Requests for adminship/SMcCandlish 2 goes live today. You (as User:Neil) had previously offered to nominate me, on October 2007 (I was not then in a position to accept), so I thought you might like to be notified. PS: I"m shamelessly ripping you off. :-) — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(ل)ˀ Contribs. 20:24, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Fish and karate! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 12 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 15 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
- Miloš Prica - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- Lublin Dilja - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- Caroline Millar - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- Andrzej Towpik - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- Gunter Pleuger - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- Euphrase Kezilahabi - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- Hayam Abbas Al-Homi - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- Zakes Mda - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- Annie Holland - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- Daniel Woodgate - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
More... |
---|
|
Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 13:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
List of one-time characters in The Simpsons
I have relisted List of one-time characters in The Simpsons for deletion. Apparently this was one discussed before when it was known as List of one-time characters from The Simpsons. Most people have left the project since the list was known by that name. I see that you are still active and wanted to notify you of this posting. JBsupreme (talk) 17:27, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
MWB
I think you've erred here; I did not remove a reference as "not needed" and then remove the text it supported as unreferenced. Rather, I removed both the reference and the text simultaneously, on the grounds that the reference was not an appropriate one. Steve Smith (talk) 16:33, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- My point is that, in deciding what merits inclusion when writing about living people (and most other issues, actually), we should generally confine ourselves to what secondary sources have considered worth mentioning. If it's important that Kohs goes by Thekohser, some secondary source should have mentioned it. Digging around people's internet footprint, even on sites they happen to run, in an effort to find information to add to Misplaced Pages articles about them is at best distasteful. Steve Smith (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Digging implies the information was unsavoury, and covered-up. Not really the case, Steve. fish&karate 13:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Lift to Experience
Would you kindly userfy Lift to Experience for me, thanks? this is a pretty notable band, reviewed by pitchfork media, etc. I can't believe it's stayed deleted this long to be quite honest, but I can probably get it to proper specs. thanks! riffic (talk) 05:01, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Peter Holmes a Court and JzG
Would you take a look at the activities of users Guy and JzG in relation to the Peter Holmes a Court entry. It seems editors are now being banned for providing referenced material and that valid links are being interfered with and then listed as 'dead links'. When an editor tries to add new information that is referenced and verifiable this is being removed and users/editors being banned. I see that JzG and Guy seem to have some relationship and that JzG has a 'past'. The entry in question has also been the victim of sockpuppetry but that appears to have been dealt with. Appreciate any assistance you can provide.Edasent (talk) 16:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
- Please be aware you are one of seven people Edasent has contacted about this matter. There may be an element of forum shopping. Stifle (talk) 17:15, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
You can check the talk page associated with Peter Holmes a Court which should be addressing some of Stifle concerns. Edasent (talk) 13:25, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
- I am making changes to the Peter Holmes a Court entry based on material asked for by Stifle and provided on the relevant discussion page associated with the entry. I would appreciate it if you wandered by this page once in a while to watch proceedings. Edasent (talk) 07:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Soccerpulse
Back in 2006, you contributed to the AFD discussion for this article. The article has since been re-created, and I have re-nominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Soccerpulse (2nd nomination). Robofish (talk) 16:04, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Swamilive/Scottish Coke
I have requested a checkuser take a look at both accounts and see if they can't shut down some of the socks in wait and do a rangeblock as well. Thanks for taking care of Scottish Coke. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 06:22, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
- Also, you might want to protect the talk page of Scottish Coke after messages like this. Not getting into an edit war over them. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 06:27, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
- Had the talk page protected by another admin for abuse of talk page. Working on a checkuser and rangeblocks. Might be futile, but it couldn't hurt. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 06:50, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
The board of outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The board of outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. Since you had some involvement with the The board of outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Robofish (talk) 15:41, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Beats of Rage
May I ask why did you delete Beats of Rage, it is a very noteable and recognizable homebrew game, it has received online, print and television coverage.--Cube b3 (talk) 23:09, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Not in 2007, it hadn't, when it was deleted. By all means feel free to recreate the article, citing this coverage as evidence of its notability. fish&karate 07:05, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
List of legally mononymous people
You may be interested in List of legally mononymous people, and helping to expand it. Thanks, Sai Emrys ¿?✍ 19:21, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Yerf listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Yerf. Since you had some involvement with the Yerf redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 19:54, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
the Public Policy Initiative Assessment Team wants You!
Hi Fish and Karate,
I saw some of your contributions on a pretty obscure article that falls within the scope of Wikiproject: United States Public Policy (history of ballot security), that kind of detailed expertise would be valuable to the project, and I was hoping you would be interested in assessing articles with the Public Policy Initiative. There is more info about assessment on the 9/13/2010 Signpost. If you're interested or just curious you can sign up on the project page or just contact me. Thanks! ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 22:59, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Nomination of Loglan 88 for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Loglan 88, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Loglan 88 until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:36, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Deletion
Hello Fish and karate,
I was wondering why you deleted the Wickaninnish Inn article (I know it's been awhile, so you may not remember), and what we need to to to make it acceptable?
Also, do you know how we can access the original content? Thanks for your help!
207.194.38.4 (talk) 18:58, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Nomination of Universal Edit Button for deletion
The article Universal Edit Button is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Universal Edit Button until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Merrill Stubing (talk) 14:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Please confirm your membership
This is an important message from WikiProject Wikify. You are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Wikify. As agreed upon by the project, all members will be required to confirm their membership by February 1, 2010. If you are still interested in assisting with the project, please add yourself to the list at this page—this will renew your membership of WikiProject Wikify. Thank you for your support, WikiProject Wikify |
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 20:15, 22 December 2010 (UTC). Redirected here from User talk:Proto.
Jean Bart image
Seeing the issue at Delta's page, and your claim it is in the PD: I did an Google Image search and affirmed there is actually an artist, Henri Le Monnier, that is affirmed for this image, and that it was created in 1933. I am trying to find the year of his death, but there are works still attributed to him as late as 1937, so I don't believe you can call that image PD. --MASEM (t) 15:06, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
- I have replied on my talk page, so you know. J Milburn (talk) 18:59, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
- Also, looking at the discussion on Delta's talk page, I think you need to brush up on the NFCC a little, you seem to be somewhat out of touch with policy/practice. J Milburn (talk) 19:01, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Platypus
Hey, your opinion is requested at the talk page of the platypus article, to finally put this stupid capitalisation debate to rest. Cheers! Aaadddaaammm (talk) 11:05, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
DNA Plant Technology
Hi, I embedded some of your old research in the DNA Plant Technology page which I have been trying to expand. I hope that is okay. Infoeco (talk) 19:03, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of 'Harbottle and Lewis" talk page
You appear to have deleted this page. I would like to know why this is, and if it is possible to re-create this. The reason given appears to be that there is no page to which it refers. This is not the case, and this law firm now appears to be playing a major role in the News Corporation phone hacking scandal, so the article is an important topical one, and a talk page is surely important. Thanks Epzcaw (talk) 16:51, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Little Wormwood Scrubs
A tag has been placed on Little Wormwood Scrubs, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages for multiple reasons. Please see the page to see the reasons. If the page has since been deleted, you can ask me the reasons by leaving a message on my user talk page.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}
) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Eduemoni 19:26, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Accurist Page
Hi there,
I noticed we are both editing the Accurist page. Whilst I have lots of information and knowledge about the Accurist history and other details, I am rather new to Misplaced Pages.
I appreciate your contribution. I propose to add the content first and then allow you to review it and let me know what you think, or help with minor edits, such as link changes.
Thank you,
Harry Harryapostol (talk) 12:02, 19 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harryapostol (talk • contribs) 10:31, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Accurist Page (HELP)
Hi Fish and Karate! I have more or less finished editing the Accurist Watches page.
If you could,please, have a look at it and let me know what you think.
I found it a bit difficult to place the photos in the center and I'm not sure if the way I've done it is 100% correct.
Many thanks,
Harryapostol (talk) 11:16, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Move and semi protected
Template:Move and semi protected has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Evil IP address (talk) 19:45, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Football world cup listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Football world cup. Since you had some involvement with the Football world cup redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Thryduulf (talk)
sockpuppet editing
There is an open WP:SPI case looking at sockpuppet editing primarily on the Johann Hari/ Talk page. As you edited the Johann Hari/Talk page between 2004 and 2011, your input is welcomed. Yonmei (talk) 22:30, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Virtual Path Identifier
I'll check that out later. I believe that some admin work was needed to do the move/merge. Vegaswikian (talk) 16:42, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Napoleonic Code
Thank you so much, Neil, for resolving my RM on "Napoleonic c/Code". --Wikiain (talk) 21:34, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
- No problem. fish&karate 10:12, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Yoghurt
You declared, "To be parfaitly honest, there are strong arguments in favour of both"
Strong arguments in favour of both? Honest? Really?
Can you expound on this astounding claim, please, especially in light of the fact that the proponents of yogurt listed thirteen points in favour of the move, including "Once the article is moved to Yogurt, there will be no legitimate justification for moving it back to Yoghurt, and so these requests to move the article will finally end", while the yoghurt contingent could only muster up two, and one of them was the pathetically weak, "The article is currently entitled Yoghurt". Thanks. --Born2cycle (talk) 15:29, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- I really don't care where the article sits; I just closed the requested move discussion as an uninvolved administrator, and tried to judge where the consensus, rooted in policy, lay. And yes, there were strong arguments in favour of both article titles; whoever assembled the "arguments supporting "Yogurt" as a preferred spelling" just didn't really try very hard in assembling the "yoghurt contingent" arguments, only those of Team Yogurt. The arguments in favour of retaining the article at "Yoghurt" were in the comments made by the 11 people who opposed the move. fish&karate 09:56, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
Re: your closing statement. You, sir, win an internet. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:05, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- I'm glad someone appreciated it. fish&karate 09:56, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
- If you put half the effort that you put into this clever wording into really explaining your decision, instead of claiming that both sides had strong arguments without substantiating that claim, even when asked to do so, more might have appreciated the clever wording, starting with me. --Born2cycle (talk) 18:46, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Fish, I'm assuming you are aware of Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/Yoghurt, but I couldn't find anywhere were you had been told or anything, so here you go, if you are interested. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 04:23, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
- Nope, hadn't a clue. Thanks for letting me know, Erik. fish&karate 05:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm going to ask that you reopen the discussion and allow another administrator to close the discussion. I believe that you seriously underestimated the impact of the first name used for the article. Clearly a no consensus says that the name the article was at, yogurt, should be the name it winds up at. Your decision supports a move that clearly lacks consensus. Leaving it at the wrong name based on WP:ENGVAR is OK for a lock in a move war but not in a WP:RM discussion. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:02, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
- But the article was at "Yoghurt" when the RM discussion was started. Not yogurt. fish&karate 19:37, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
- I think VW is referring to the fact that the article started out at Yogurt. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 19:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
- Indeed, I raised the WP:ENGVAR issue in the "Reasons to move". I was coming here to politely ask you to do what Vegaswikian already did, which I'm glad to see. I would have included you in the RfM, but it was an oversight on my part (I just plain didn't think to, since you weren't a voting party). I realize now that it was probably even more proper to contact you first before doing anything, I apologize for not doing so. -Kai445 (talk) 23:17, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
- That may be, but this was pointed out in the discussion as to why leaving it where it was was going to be a problem. If there was no consensus, a position that other are questioning with reasonable facts, this should have been moved to Yogurt since that was where the article was before it was moved creating this mess. The fact that you did not see that in the discussions, calls your judgement into question since that was a key part of the support for the move. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:06, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- Gosh, people get cross when they don't get their own way. I am very sorry that a discussion was closed in a way other then how you voted. Clearly this shows that there is something wrong with the closer, everyone else who voted, and the Internet in general. I was strongly inclined to just drop it, undo my close and let someone else deal with the hassle that would have come their way no matter what the closing result had been; I really don't care whether the article has a H in its title or not - for all I care, it could be called Yoghhhhhhhurt - but this hectoring and forum shopping is both rude and childish, and I don't want to further foster the attitude around here that constant and repetitive complaining, and passive-aggressive querying of competence, is a valid tactic that one can use to intimidate admins into backing down. If the next admin closed it in the same way I am sure this low-level and tendentious would be applied on him/her, too. I believe "no consensus" was a reasonable and appropriate call on that close. If you disagree then, frankly, tough. I do not believe in rewarding bad behaviour, if for nothing else then to protect my fellow admins; I will point out that this RM had needed closing for over a week, and the reason why is that very few admins are willing to deal with the flak of closing contested move discussions. I can't think why(!) fish&karate 04:06, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- Have you considered that a more well thought out explanation of your actions might have generated less friction? -Kai445 (talk) 04:31, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- Besides not reading the comments in the discussion, you have apparently also did not read WP:AGF. The close was bad, plain and simple. You are not able to support the close with facts from the discussion, if fact you admit to missing key points! Closing as no consensus, and failing to explain why there was no consensus to return the article to the name it had before a bad move is simply unforgivable. Accusing good intentioned editors of bad behavior is simply an appalling comment. I think your response shows that you should have not closed that discussion and again request that you reopen it and let someone look at this. This is not to reward anyone for anything. It is simply to do the right thing. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:25, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- Gosh, people get cross when they don't get their own way. I am very sorry that a discussion was closed in a way other then how you voted. Clearly this shows that there is something wrong with the closer, everyone else who voted, and the Internet in general. I was strongly inclined to just drop it, undo my close and let someone else deal with the hassle that would have come their way no matter what the closing result had been; I really don't care whether the article has a H in its title or not - for all I care, it could be called Yoghhhhhhhurt - but this hectoring and forum shopping is both rude and childish, and I don't want to further foster the attitude around here that constant and repetitive complaining, and passive-aggressive querying of competence, is a valid tactic that one can use to intimidate admins into backing down. If the next admin closed it in the same way I am sure this low-level and tendentious would be applied on him/her, too. I believe "no consensus" was a reasonable and appropriate call on that close. If you disagree then, frankly, tough. I do not believe in rewarding bad behaviour, if for nothing else then to protect my fellow admins; I will point out that this RM had needed closing for over a week, and the reason why is that very few admins are willing to deal with the flak of closing contested move discussions. I can't think why(!) fish&karate 04:06, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- I think VW is referring to the fact that the article started out at Yogurt. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 19:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
- But the article was at "Yoghurt" when the RM discussion was started. Not yogurt. fish&karate 19:37, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
It's been several days now, the question about what are the strong oppose arguments to which you referred in your closing remain unanswered, requests that you re-open remain ignored, and concerns are multiplying at Talk:Yoghurt. I am therefore reminding you of WP:ADMINACCT:
Administrators are accountable for their actions involving administrator tools, and unexplained administrator actions can demoralize other editors who lack such tools. Subject only to the bounds of civility, avoiding personal attacks, and reasonable good faith, editors are free to question or to criticize administrator actions.
Administrators are expected to respond promptly and civilly to queries about their Misplaced Pages-related conduct and administrator actions and to justify them when needed.Administrators who seriously, or repeatedly, act in a problematic manner or have lost the trust or confidence of the community may be sanctioned or have their access removed.
Ignoring editors and admins like Vegaswikian (talk · contribs) who question your actions is probably not a smart move. --Born2cycle (talk) 00:44, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- I have already responded to this and your repeated nagging because I didn't close a discussion the way you demanded it be closed is not going to either upset me or make me change my mind. I have re-read the RM discussion and remain satisfied that closing it as no consensus was reasonable. I notice that the majority of editors commenting on the RfC (linked above) are in agreement with this. I accept and understand that you believe those who argued to oppose the move have no worth in their arguments, however I believe they did have value. A majority of contributors were opposed to the move, people citing the fact that the article has been stable at Yoghurt for over 8 years, and WP:ENGVAR. To me, that alone was sufficient for a "no consensus" close. It is not for me to determine whose interpretation of guidelines and naming conventions is "correct" - if I am to do that then why even bother with a discussion? And note I closed it as "No consensus" NOT "Oppose move" - I would expect to always see a strong consensus in favour one way or another to close a discussion definitively. A strong consensus WAS NOT THERE. A close of "No consensus" is not a final sentence condemning the article to remain at that name for all eternity. Give it a few months and start another discussion. Or start one right now. I really really really don't care what you do. This one was closed as "no consensus" because, get this, there was "no consensus". I will not let your repeated complaining - and now passive-aggressive threats - to bully me into changing this. And I include Vegaswikian in this, not just Born2cycle. fish&karate 06:48, 5 November 2011 (UTC)