Misplaced Pages

User talk:Jimbo Wales: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:31, 28 December 2014 view source79.101.88.30 (talk) Happy Holydays and the New Year 2015!: Should be enough for the Stub.← Previous edit Revision as of 17:35, 28 December 2014 view source Igor the bunny (talk | contribs)391 edits Happy Holydays and the New Year 2015!: rNext edit →
Line 300: Line 300:


P.S. You added more while I was replying; I've not checked those. I really wanted '''only''' 3 '''good''' references '''about''' the person, and I'm not seeing them, sorry. ] (]) 17:13, 28 December 2014 (UTC) P.S. You added more while I was replying; I've not checked those. I really wanted '''only''' 3 '''good''' references '''about''' the person, and I'm not seeing them, sorry. ] (]) 17:13, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

1. Independent, 2. DerStandard. 3. Radio Free Europe, are 3 good sources. I hope it is enough. As well as New Macedonia and Makfaks.] (]) 17:30, 28 December 2014 (UTC) 1. Independent, 2. DerStandard. 3. Radio Free Europe, are 3 good sources. I hope it is enough. As well as New Macedonia and Makfaks.] (]) 17:30, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

:They are not articles '''about the subject'''. Sorry, can't help. ] (]) 17:34, 28 December 2014 (UTC)


== When even Arbcom can't be trusted, who else can I turn to? == == When even Arbcom can't be trusted, who else can I turn to? ==

Revision as of 17:35, 28 December 2014


    Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
    Start a new talk topic.
    Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates.
    He holds the founder's seat on the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees.
    The three trustees elected as community representatives until July 2015 are SJ, Phoebe, and Raystorm.
    The Wikimedia Foundation Senior Community Advocate is Maggie Dennis.
    This is Jimbo Wales's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.
    Archives: Index, Index, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252Auto-archiving period: 1 day 
    This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.


    Archiving icon
    Archives
    Indexindex
    This manual archive index may be out of date.
    Future archives: 184 185 186


    This page has archives. Sections older than 24 hours may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 2 sections are present.
    (Manual archive list)

    Check Your Fireplace

    WP:DENY

    (link removed) is clearly continuing his campaign of harassment against Jimbo. He has gotten permission and has uploaded this comic to Commons. First he asks an artist to paint a painting of Jimbo with his unspeakables, and now he is uploading comics where Jimbo is being shat upon. Will he ever stop! 90.191.5.205 (talk) 16:39, 26 December 2014 (UTC)]]

    (link removed) :) Merry Christmas! - NeutralhomerTalk00:56, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
    👍 Like Rcsprinter123 (confer) @ 01:19, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
    Haha, He should go after the vandal, not Jimbo--Chamith (talk) 05:31, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

    I've removed the link as harassment and I strongly recommend that a Commons administrator delete the file on Commons for the same reason. I also recommend that Russavia be dealt with appropriately on other projects as he has been here. Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:04, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

    I've removed the other link for the same reason, I'll go over to Commons and see if this can be deleted--5 albert square (talk) 17:09, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
    Ooookay. How'd this blow up into a shitstorm (pun intended)? Seriously. - NeutralhomerTalk17:04, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

    Mele Kalikimaka

    Have a bright Hawaiian Christmas!--Mark Miller (talk) 16:49, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

    Now, there's a phrase I learned fom writing Christmas in Hawaii. Rcsprinter123 (remark) @ 22:42, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
    👍 Like Christmas in Hawaii is a unique experience for sure.--Mark Miller (talk) 01:58, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Happy Holydays and the New Year 2015!

    Dear Jimbo, Happy Holydays and the New Year 2015!

    Now sorry again that I have a difficult question for you. It is about Draft:Igor Janev. Igor Janev should be classified under WP:NPOL person, since he was Special Adviser of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Macedonia in 2002. See more from data base Macedonian Emigration Agency (national government source:"Специјален советник на Министерот за надворешни работи" in eng. Special Adviser of the Minister of Foreign Affairs) in Macedonian lang. . In any country Special Advisor to the MFA is WP:NPOL by definition of Misplaced Pages. See Special Adviser status.183.86.209.161 (talk) 17:34, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

    Good first try at an article. Welcome to Misplaced Pages.
    The entire process for new people creating new pages is fucked up.
    If, instead of following 'best advice', you'd made an account, made 10 edits, and waited 4 days - you could have made a live page, then it'd be very unlikely to be deleted.
    The easiest answer is probably to do that now. Otherwise you'll be swamped with well-meaning but largely useless advice.
    If I had an account, I'd just make it a live page. That means making a user account and 10 edits (to anything) and waiting 4 days, and I can't be arsed. Maybe you can.
    Misplaced Pages politics is bullshit.
    Happy Christmas, new person.
    Jimbo, in case you read this, please realise that the way 'drafts' (prev AFC) circumvent the prevention of new people making articles (post-Seigenthaler) is killing the wiki; AFC/drafts clearly can't cope with helping new people (check the backlog) - let 'em make articles, and let the (over)keen patrol admin-wannabe's who can't write for shit sort out the mess. Crap gets speedied within minutes because there's a hella lot more people out there who get their kicks from deleting things than making them (and, fair enough, can't write articles). Happy Xmas to you, too; I hope you might listen to this, and make the wiki much more friendly to new users by treating all new articles the same way, instead of the current fucked up 'drafts' v. CSD-warnings etc. 88.104.28.116 (talk) 01:10, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    P.S. I feel sufficiently strongly about the issue that I've made this account, I'll wait 4 days and copy it over to a live article (WADR to the wiki's perceived acceptable practices of links to prior publication).

    Maybe Mr. Wales can think about how to fix this for all case, instead of some random annoyed person butting in.

    The way new people get their intro to make new articles is really fucked up. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 01:31, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    If new users ask for help, they might get a response in a couple of weeks - and it'll probably be telling them that the references aren't good enough;
    There are 2,826 pending submissions in Category:Pending AfC submissions.
    If they ignore 'best advice' and make a user account, 4 days later they can make a live article.
    Of course it might then be speedy-deleted if it's utter crap, but if it isn't total crap they'll have a chance to fix it - and people will even help try to find sources (in AFD).
    Fundamental problem: More people can use clicky-tools to 'tag for speedy deletion' and 'warn user' etc than can actually help 'em make new pages,
    Answer: Treat all new users the same. Let 'em try to make articles, and wikipedia can try to help them.
    What a wonderful world it'd be. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 01:41, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    This thread from the Wikimedia Stewards Noticeboard archives may be of relevance here: . There were concerns that Janev is not as notable as was claimed. Articles on Janev have twice been deleted from the English Misplaced Pages. I think it is safe to assume that the sources in any new article on Janev will receive particular scrutiny. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    If it was made live, it'd likely survive AFD. As a draft, the new person just gets a shitstorm of rejection. Do you disagree?
    (There is more to this than this article; it's really just a typical example). Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 02:02, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    It would be more likely to survive (as a draft or otherwise) if it had properly-formatted references. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:06, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Perhaps more importantly:

    I made this account so that, in 4 days, I can copy the article live. Not to really make a point, but because - having discussed the specific case - I feel a need to give it a fair try.

    The specific article isn't really the reason I'm intervening here; it's because of the blatant way that new articles are treated very differently from drafts.

    In an ideal world, Misplaced Pages users would help all new users with their early articles.

    Real world: there are not enough good editors to do so.

    That's fine; that's just the way things are. OK, so, given that...we should at least treat everyone the same way.

    Currently there are two very disparate systems;

    A) DRAFTS - wait 2 or 3 weeks, get a review. Likely get rejected for 'lack of sources' with spam-template messages. At least you get some idea how to fix it.

    B) Make live article. If it's complete crap, it gets speedy-deleted. Fair enough.

    The problem I have is, a large number of good users spend their time trying to help A. But sadly, A is snowed-under, and full of spam.

    A great many good-potential new users use B and get no real help at all, just spammed warnings (CSD, etc).

    Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 02:09, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Andy, It would be more likely to survive (as a draft or otherwise) if it had properly-formatted references - so, fix them! That's easy for experienced users, but super-hard for new ones.
    That is the entire point here.
    New users need help, not spam templates.
    "properly-formatted references" is just wikipedia internal crap. Formatting is just meh. And stops new users getting involved. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 02:11, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    I cannot fix references for material I cannot read. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:25, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    (Assuming you mean because it is in Macedonian)
    Sure Andy, so, if you came across this as a live article elsewhere you'd leave it to others, right?
    That's what I mean about this double-standard;
    Live articles are 'good until proven bad',
    drafts are 'bad until proven good'. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 02:30, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    If I came across this article, knowing as I do that an article on the same subject had already been deleted twice, I'd find someone who could read the sources to see if they supported the claims made. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:35, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    Exactly. And that's cool.
    But, because it is just a draft, it doesn't get that treatment. It just gets 'rejected', so it is never even evaluated! Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 02:40, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    If you are so concerned about articles being rejected for inappropriate reasons, why have you just tagged this article for speedy deletion? AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:45, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    Unrelated discussion, please take it to my talk page if you want. Thanks. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 03:00, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    See Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Igor the facetious xmas bunny - NOT HERE. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:14, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    You tagged it and another inappropriately to disrupt wikipedia to make a point I think. Then you went off to cry off line to User:GorillaWarfare. Legacypac (talk) 06:04, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    I am trying to talk about the way new users are treated. This discussion of my other edits is totally unrelated. I tried to 'hat' it, and you hauled me over to ANI, and I was even blocked for 'disruptive editing'; you've repeatedly removed my attempts to 'hat' this sidetrack discussion.
    If you have concerns about my edits, please ask me on my talk. Here, I'm asking about new user articles. Is all. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 06:19, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    'New user articles' include the ones you inappropriately tagged. If you want to be taken seriously, you need to start by considering your own actions. Until you accept responsibility, you are in no position to complain about others. AndyTheGrump (talk) 06:26, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    You are posting these issues in the wrong place - that's why I'd rather 'hat' this section. If you have questions about my edits, post on my talk page with diffs, and let's discuss them. It's unrelated to the discussion I was attemting to have about new articles in general terms. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 06:35, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    No. You don't get to dictate what gets discussed here - if you don't like your inappropriate behaviour being discussed, I suggest you stop behaving in such a manner in future. Meanwhile, your double standards when it comes to new articles are very much on topic. AndyTheGrump (talk) 06:43, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Back to the point;

    Would it be "disruptive" if someone just moved the 2700 articles in Category:Pending AfC submissions to live articles?

    Why shouldn't they be treated the same as the other articles that are being created (and deleted) every few minutes? (*)

    Maybe if I move 10 of them. Or 100. Or 1000.

    Perhaps nobody will notice; after all, I have just as much au-thor-i-teh to move them as anyone else, right? Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 06:47, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    It is my opinion that for some reasons Igor Janev is not welcomed on English Misplaced Pages. Reviewers automatically reject drafts about him. So anyone supporting article on him should just give up. As for case User:Operahome when you look, one can see that most of socs were created on the German Misplaced Pages. Either person like account creation(s), (less likely) or He/She was constantly blocked, and as a reaction on blocking , operator was actually forced to create new (and new) accounts. On the discussion on Meta, one of German user even gave comment that Igor Janev does not Exists. Now it is obvious that he not only exists, but that he is sufficiently notable.

    Apart from that conclusion, he will not get his BLP (by the way Second time, few months ago his Draft was not rejected, but removed probably by Igor Janev himself, after series of page blanking).183.86.209.149 (talk) 08:52, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    It is pointless to create Account. Whenever someone start creating anything abuot I. Janev, He/She is blocked and classified as sock of User:Operahome. May be the best way to check status of Igor Janev is to send e mail to Macedonian Emigration Agency and see what will their official answer be. Additionally to consult eng. Wiki. Maced user / editor User:Local hero to see what is his opinion. As a Macedonian editor on Wiki he may have some information about Igor Janev.79.101.88.30 (talk) 09:47, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    There's no conspiracy. Reviewers reject drafts with poor/no sources.
    It's really not that "Janev is not welcomed on English Misplaced Pages". It's all about the refs. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 09:46, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    How come that He is Welcome on Macedonian Misplaced Pages, and sources are relevant there , but not here. As for the conspiracy in a few occasions there were attempts by some (mostly) German editors to remove his BLP on Macedonian Misplaced Pages too. People who were doing that, even did not know Macedonian language.79.101.88.30 (talk) 10:12, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    No; the rules are very different on different language wikipedias. The English one, in particular, has much stronger insistence on referencing. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 10:17, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    Just see that Standards on Eng. Misplaced Pages. See Stubs under Category:Macedonian nationalists, see for instance Strašo Angelovski or Dragan Bogdanovski. Some of them are much less sourced.seeTodor Petrov. That proposed Draft on Igor Janev was in accordance with Misplaced Pages standards for Stubs. And most of the article of Macedonians and Albanians are even much less sourced than Draft on Igor Janev. You can see that yourself. List of Macedonians (ethnic group) List of Albanians. 79.101.88.30 (talk) 10:21, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    Yep, sure, WP:OTHERCRAP, but that was my point in responding here; the article would survive if it were live, yet it's rejected at AFC because... well, because no reason. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 10:37, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    Ones it has been established that he is Relevant, first, as a courtesy, the Tag Blatant hoax at Igor Janev should be removed. Second, someone like Macedonian editor here User:Local hero or anyone else, should get the task to "bring" the Draft on Igor Janev "to the Wiki Standards". As far as I see, Macedonian editors are afraid to create anything about him, since no one wants to be associated with User:Operahome. Further, I strongly suggest that someone from the group User:Operahome or maybe Igor Janev himself apologize to Misplaced Pages or to Jimbo Wales himself for any misunderstanding or misconduct. 79.101.88.30 (talk) 11:07, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    In addition you Igor the facetious xmas bunny may also try to "bring" the Draft to the Standards. (Apparently one can conclude that amateur(s) created previous version of art./drafts. That does not imply that information or data were incorrect.) 79.101.88.30 (talk) 11:17, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Welcome to Misplaced Pages - it's full of ammeters. Fortunately. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 11:26, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Note: An "ammeter" is a "measuring instrument used to measure the electric current in a circuit". I'm pretty sure you were meaning "amateur". - NeutralhomerTalk11:31, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    Thank you for correcting me.79.101.88.30 (talk) 11:37, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    If you observe revisions on the art. Tito Petkovski you may find that person who created article didn't knew English word " spouse" or "wife" and that until two days ago no one here corr. that. (There was "Zena vesna petkovska" instead "Spouse Vesna Petkovska" at )79.101.88.30 (talk) 11:52, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Where does the "four days" come in? Using the just creates NE Ent new user 2 it appears I could create an article with it -- got as far as preview, at least. NE Ent 12:10, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    That would be fine. I am not professional Wikipedian, and I don't know all the possibilities here, but it sounds as a good for beginning.79.101.88.30 (talk) 12:18, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    In order to create pages in the article space, accounts must have the 'confirmed' flag; you generally become WP:AUTOCONFIRMED after 4 days and 10 edits. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 12:41, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    So if I had hit "save" from the preview screen, it wouldn't have worked? NE Ent 12:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    Probably not. Easy way to see is, log out and type 'asdjaksdghad' into the search box; you can't make the page. Same if you make a quick test account. 10 edits, 4 days, usually. Unless an admin sets 'confirmed' status on your account - which is unlikely, but has sometimes happened so new people can upload files straight away.
    You can make pages in other namespaces - that's why Articles For Creation made articles in "Misplaced Pages talk:" namespace. Nowadays, there's "Drafts:" instead. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 12:52, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    I just add some notes to the Draft. That is only the proposal. If some of you think that they are not necessary, you can reduce it or remove it. Further, I have added the new Category for Prime minister of Macedonia Nikola Gruevski for his project Skopje 2014. This is too a proposal only.79.101.88.30 (talk) 13:28, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Going back to the start of this thread, just having the title "Special Adviser" does not automatically give notability under WP:NPOL.

    Even when autoconfirmed, the facetious but helpful Bunny will not be able to move the draft to the mainspace without the agreement of an administrator, because the title has been salted - protected against re-creation - following a sustained and continuing campaign of sockpuppetry, described at m:Stewards' noticeboard/Archives/2013-08#Igor Janev and WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Operahome/Archive.

    Last time a draft was created, an IP repeatedly blanked it and asked for it to be deleted, claiming in this edit that they were acting "under request and authority of Igor Janev" and that he "does not want to be in Eng. Misplaced Pages." Perhaps his friends should respect his wishes and spare him further embarrassment. JohnCD (talk) 13:27, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Special adviser to the Minister of MFA actually qualifies Igor Janev. Like in US State Department, Special adviser is a diplomat who absolutely qualifies for mention Category. (See as well UN system). As for private wishes of Igor Janev, they may not be relevant here at all. I do not think that he would (as anyone else) against to be on Misplaced Pages. There are no firm evidence to the contrary. If he is personally against to have a such publicity, he would probably remove himself from Macedonian Wiki.79.101.88.30 (talk) 13:43, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    (edit conflict)

    Oh. I was previously unaware of the discussion on meta; I will have to reconsider. Unless there are excellent sources to show N, I agree it shouldn't be made. I didn't know about that previous stuff before; thanks for telling me about it. I expect the cynical will think I'm lying, especially given this 'socking' crap, but nope, I just stumbled across the article! Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 13:47, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    The only person who contacted Igor Janev was User:Neotarf. But Wikipedians made ban on him too. As for relevance, again you may contact the Ministry of Macedonia to verify his rank. What I heard from people is that he is still Advisor of State in the Ministry. As for socks , you should not judge someone based on Believes or actions of other people. 79.101.88.30 (talk) 13:56, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    you have a clear case here. Again I am reluctant to continue discussion were it is absolutely evident that people here don't want art. on him here. If one analyzed situation on META, it can easily see that some of people tried with maximum power to discredit Janev. They were just to fast in making their decision. All or most of them do not know Macedonian or even Serbo-Croatian. They do not (and did not) know/knew even Cyrillic alphabet. On the other side, they tried for several times to remove Janev from Macedonian and Serbian Wikies, with no success. These actions were obviously not based on knowledge of History or anything related to Igor Janev. They made two attempts to remove him from Croatioan wiki, but again with no Success. In conclusion, Igor Janev is not welcome on Misplaced Pages, for reasons external to the Wiki Standards. 79.101.88.30 (talk) 14:22, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    79, forget all the conspiracy stuff. Can you show me - here - links to 3 articles in reliable sources which are substantially about this person? It doesn't have to be in English. 3 good, reliable sources that give detailed information about the subject. Examples of "Good sources" are national newspapers.
    If you can provide that, it's pretty easy to get an acceptable article. If you can't, it's tricky. WP:VRS.
    I know there's some refs in the draft, but still...can you show us 3 specific references here, to prove notability? In Macedoian or English or whatever... somebody here will be able to check 'em for us. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 14:26, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    See for instance couple of them. 79.101.88.30 (talk) 14:35, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    See reaction on removing Janev from Misplaced Pages 79.101.88.30 (talk) 14:37, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    See more stuff: LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE USE OF A PROVISIONAL NAME FOR MACEDONIA IN THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM , p.77-78 , When we say US, p. 845, note 28. G. Ivanov, "Recalling that the International Court of Justice 1948 advisory opinion had determined that placing additional criteria on United Nations membership contravened the United Nations Charter", Thomas D. Grant, Admission to the United Nations, Martinus pub. , pp. 203-212 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.88.30 (talk) 14:41, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    particulary see

    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.88.30 (talk) 14:54, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Now let me remind you on the "arguments" on the META, particular "it was recently discovered in dewp that the article about "Igor Janev" was a fake. Either the person does not exists at all, or he is very irrelevant and the sources to tell otherwise are fakes. The article was deleted today under the protest of many sock-puppets and some legal threats (AFAIK there is a discussion at Jimbo’s talk-page too)."

    and so on... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.88.30 (talk) 15:01, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    What was fake here? Where is the Hoax? No Explanation was given! They absolutely disregarded view of the Serbian editor who was the only editor fit to make judgments on Janev: "Please refrain from unilateral actions on Serbian Misplaced Pages. We have our local deletion policies. The person is real, so the article is not a hoax. It doesn't meet the requirements for speedy deletion. If you feel that a person is not notable, you can nominate it for deletion. --Wikit 12:07, 29 August 2013 (UTC)". After that five times people who does not speak Serbian attempted to remove Janev from Serbian Misplaced Pages. Now anyone can conclude that plan for removal was created even before that was brought to META. You may call it Conspiracy or probably setup. Furthermore, they were pasting tags for deletion on more than 20 Wikies with grate enthusiasm. They invented that articles were bias, even when content was related to simple fact that he was Special adviser.15:18, 28 December 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.88.30 (talk)
    It is very hard to check through massive lists of such links.
    Once again - Can you show me - here - links to 3 articles in reliable sources which are substantially about this person? It doesn't have to be in English. 3 good, reliable sources...
    Just 3 good ones. Is all. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 15:51, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    The WP:BURDEN is on you to find those links, not the user. - NeutralhomerTalk15:54, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    First, you can find relevant link at Macedonian E. Agency (first link here). Than links of Nova Makedonija, Makedonsko sonce, Koha, Lajm, Vecer , MIA, and MINA.79.101.88.30 (talk) 16:05, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.88.30 (talk) 16:08, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    79.101.88.30 (talk) 16:14, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    new — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.88.30 (talk) 16:19, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    In Independent e, Radio Free Europe

    79.101.88.30 (talk) 16:31, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Der Standard . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.88.30 (talk) 16:38, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    @Neutral, yes, I am just trying to narrow it down so that perhaps we can help the person better.
    79, again, can you please show me just 3 good ones. Only 3. Not more. Just 3 good ones. Thanks. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 16:40, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.88.30 (talk) 16:42, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Probably best source is Macedonian Agency (government source). Than would be the First. 1. source, than independent , Radio Free Europe, Der Standard 79.101.88.30 (talk) 16:48, 28 December 2014 (UTC) maybe MINA also. 79.101.88.30 (talk) 16:52, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Makfax/ Makfaks . Pro-government source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.88.30 (talk) 16:59, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    His biographer in "Macedonian nation" 79.101.88.30 (talk) 17:07, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    support of presidential candidate for I. J. 79.101.88.30 (talk) 17:11, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    (edit conflict)

    OK well, that's 5, but close enough. The 3rd seems to be the same as the first, and the last two are 2 pages of the same. Looking at them;

    1. Independent.mk "Experts: Macedonia's Name Cannot be Isolated from Its Identity" - is not an article about Janev Igor; it just mentions him in one sentence. It is about the name of the country. It does not give any significant information about Igor that we can use in a biography.

    2. MIA Time has come to put an end to name issue is similar; about the name of the country. It makes a passing mention of Igor.

    3. Same link as 1?

    4. and 5 novamakedonija Трета варијанта за решавање на проблемот за името (2 pages of the same article?) are in Macedonian (I guess). Google translate tells me the title is "A third option for solving the problem of name". Again, these seem to be articles about the name of the country and not articles about Igor.

    None of these are what I was looking for, so it looks like he does not meet the requirements. Those articles are not about Igor Janev - they are about the name of the country, and mention him.

    As I said earlier - WP:VRS. I wish you the best of luck, but I do not see that this person meets the notability requirements. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 17:13, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    P.S. You added more while I was replying; I've not checked those. I really wanted only 3 good references about the person, and I'm not seeing them, sorry. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 17:13, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    1. Independent, 2. DerStandard. 3. Radio Free Europe, are 3 good sources. I hope it is enough. As well as New Macedonia and Makfaks.79.101.88.30 (talk) 17:30, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    They are not articles about the subject. Sorry, can't help. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 17:34, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    When even Arbcom can't be trusted, who else can I turn to?

    Dear Mr. Wales,

    I am not posting from my usual account - or even my usual Internet connection - because I fear the wrath of those I criticize.

    It has been brought to my attention that there have been several very suspicious goings-on recently related to the ongoing Arbcom case about Gamergate. Most recently, a new user was indefinitely blocked, and appeal denied, as a result of participation in the case. The crime? A single edit to the Workshop page (nothing else pertinent shows up in the user's contribution history) attempting to introduce evidence that that user thought had been missed. The evidence in question is a simple breakdown of number of edits to the Gamergate controversy, by editor, intended to support claims of WP:TAGTEAM.

    Now, that would be bad enough on its own, as a blatant contravention of WP:AGF. But then I looked up some of the surrounding discussion between admins about the decision. User:HJ Mitchell is involved in the Arbcom case in question, having proposed multiple findings of fact and not just doing janitorial duties there. User:5 albert square came into the discussion assuming that it must be a sock puppet account, and deciding that it must otherwise be a "troll" with the sole intention of causing trouble for Ryulong. Which, er, really makes no sense to me; the entire point of Arbcom proceedings, surely, is to establish the case that certain of the involved parties should be sanctioned; and it's only to be expected that everyone involved takes sides. That's no different from how anyone else has been conducting themselves, anyway. 5 albert square also personally thanks User:Ryulong (who, as is often noted in these sorts of discussions, has a very long history of Misplaced Pages infamy) in that exchange, which frankly looks incredibly suspicious.

    I have to ask, how can any Wikipedian - or any outside viewer - have any confidence in the system after witnessing such a blatant display of apparent cronyism? How are we supposed to believe that there is anything fair or equitable about the treatment of Wikipedians, when we witness Ryulong get off the hook for everything (including, for just one example, casting aspersions and using profanity in front of Arbcom), even as he brazenly flouts the system (per his own account of events, when he worried about a possible conflict of interest and appearance of paid editing after having raised funds via Reddit, he chose to ask them if contributing to that page was okay, rather than anyone on Misplaced Pages), while new users are immediately and indefinitely blocked for trying to point it out?

    I knew things were bad, but I never realized they were this bad.

    69.159.80.46 (talk) 07:49, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    An accurate version of the data had always been available for anyone to add as evidence to ArbCom. What a random new (or 'new') contributor expected to happen as the result of an unverifiable uploaded image being posted after the evidence stage closed, I have no idea. AndyTheGrump (talk) 07:54, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    When you say that "an accurate version of the data had always been available", and then call the image "unverifiable", you contradict yourself. Further, it looks to me like the data matches up just fine - when I run the tool, it shows Ryulong as having 18.4% of the edits, NorthBySouthBaranof at 16.2% etc. And anyway, the fact that the data is "available" isn't a reason not to present it. The entire point of Arbcom is to make a case about the parties. The user would not have been allowed to come in and say "WP:TAGTEAM is going on" without providing some kind of evidence. Everyone is allowed to participate in Arbcom cases, per my understanding, and the new user in question presumably couldn't find something to point to on the Evidence page, and perhaps didn't know about the WMF tools.
    But more importantly - are you seriously going to ignore every point about the ridiculously unfair application of rules and policy to focus on that? Here we have someone doing what they're supposed to, to the best of their ability, given a presumed good-faith desire to participate in a process they're entitled to participate in, and getting indeffed for it. And you want to defend that on the basis of how they chose to present information? 69.159.80.46 (talk) 08:03, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    The point is that ArbCom don't need anonymously-uploaded data when they can look at the raw data themselves - all of it, not just evidence picked by one side or the other. Nobody was prevented from entering it as evidence. At the appropriate time. Not after the evidence stage had closed. Though I'm quite sure this alleged tag-teaming has been discussed in the evidence submitted anyway. As for the rights and wrongs of the block, personally, I don't think it was justified - but I don't think that it proves anything much beyond the fact that people are getting heartily sick of new (and 'new') accounts turning up and complaining that the world is conspiring against them. It is all getting rather tedious, and frankly indicates just how warped some people's priorities are. If some poor downtrodden Gamergater got blocked unjustly, it rates about 0.0001 on a scale of 1 to 10 measuring the injustices of the world today. AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:28, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    I wonder if AndyTheGrump may side-track this discussion, as he has in the one above.
    Arbcom needs to show exemplary openness, and there's certainly reason for concern in the above case. I hope it won't be side-tracked, but this is Jim's page, so it'll probably disperse into unrelated pointless argument and be archived before you can blink. Seasonal best, Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 08:10, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    This section is mistitled -- arbcom can be trusted -- an arbcom clerk reverted the removal of the evidence NE Ent 11:37, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    I'm happy to see that, but if an Arbcom clerk doesn't think it should have been removed, then surely that's more evidence for the unjustness of the block? To be clear, I'm more concerned about Arbcom the process than Arbcom the individuals, here. (I'm also concerned, of course, about the named editors; but they aren't part of the committee, as far as I can tell.) It looks really bad when participation in the process seems to put non-parties at unusually high risk of scrutiny, to the apparent benefit of actual parties to the case. 69.159.80.46 (talk) 12:34, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Apologizes

    My apologizes for the thread above and how it spiraled out of control. I thought it was a funny comic (which I follow online) and was my way of wishing you a Merry Christmas...with a smile. :) There wasn't anything malicious about it, it was just funny. :) An editor obviously took it as a way to insult you, which I never intended and it exploded from there. I, again, apologize to you and to the editors who had to clean up the mess. It was never my intention. - NeutralhomerTalk08:09, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Perhaps the best way to deal with this is to stop discussing it? Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 09:52, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    @User:Igor the facetious xmas bunny would you like to stop WP:TROLL Neutralhomer? @Neutralhomer it only really happened because of the commons uploading. Your intent was clearly in good faith. --Mrjulesd (talk) 11:43, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    it wasn't trolling, but regardless, yes, I've dropped the stick. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 11:55, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    @Mrjulesd: I know, but I always apologize when things get out of hand (and it did here). - NeutralhomerTalk12:00, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    @the bunny if you really are acting in good faith could you please explain what previous accounts you have edited under? --Mrjulesd (talk) 12:31, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    I have already confirmed my identity in confidence to GorillaWarfare (talk · contribs) - who is an administrator, checkuser, oversighter and arbitrator. I hope that's good enough for you; check with her if you need to confirm I'm in 'good standing', no blocks/bans, etc. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 12:45, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    See also "Sure, and people could demonstrate AGF by not demanding them." -GorillaWarfare NE Ent 12:51, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    (edit conflict): Explain your use of an IP sock to game the system, then. If you are a user in good standing, then you should have no problems explaining that. - NeutralhomerTalk12:53, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    @the bunny. Well I'm glad that you've done all that. But why not explain here? Surely if you've only been acting in good faith you have nothing to hide? --Mrjulesd (talk) 13:00, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    Call it "on principle", if you like. I really would rather not say more, because if I do, people will guess who I am. I really don't think there is any need for me to tell the world, when I've told an arb, and she can confirm I've done nothing wrong? I honestly don't know any more; my mere knowledge of Misplaced Pages means people are shouting 'sock' at me constantly, and accusing me of all kinds of nefarious things. Maybe I'll just give up on editing altogether; it's kinda offensive to keep being accused of things. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 14:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    You can't say admit you were another user at one time and then in the next sentence say you have "mere knowledge of Misplaced Pages". That's clear BS. - NeutralhomerTalk14:49, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    You really are clutching at non-existent straws. In the sentence, "my mere knowledge of Misplaced Pages means people are shouting 'sock' at me constantly" I meant that my merely knowing about Misplaced Pages stuff means people accuse me; not that my knowledge of it was 'mere'. Sheesh. Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 15:06, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    If you don't explain your previous accounts then, lets face it, people are going to be concerned. Just saying you've told someone else doesn't cut much ice. And your behaviour so far has done nothing to lessen concerns, with numerous complaints against you, including umpteen admins. And you've been here 14 hours? Can you see the problem? WP:DUCK?--Mrjulesd (talk) 15:17, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    That may be true, but a real man apologizes for a problem, even if it isn't 100% his fault. The entire situation began with my post, so apologizes are due. Now whether NYBrad or whoever put the picture on Commons will apologize, I don't know...that's not my department. - NeutralhomerTalk12:53, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    I notified Newyorkbrad of this discussion Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 14:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Igor has been very clearly id'd by behavior to a globally banned and editing pattern to User:Operahome but he now says he just stumbled across the article... total garbage.Legacypac (talk) 15:11, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    @Legacypac: if you believe that a user is a sockpuppet of a banned editor, please file a case at WP:SPI with your evidence. Do not post unsubstantiated allegations elsewhere on the project. Thryduulf (talk) 15:20, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    I am utterly sick of Legacypac constantly casting aspersions on my character, to the point where I am considering just giving up. Is there really nothing that can be done to prevent such harassment? Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 15:28, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    See here. He's been editing for 1 day and causing nothing but trouble. Legacypac (talk) 15:31, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

    Whereas you've been doing it for years?
    Seriously, please, stop harassing me.Igor the facetious xmas bunny (talk) 15:38, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    It takes two. If you walk away, I will make sure he doesn't follow you. Jehochman 15:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)