Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MZMcBride (talk | contribs) at 01:49, 2 April 2009 (→BLPs: +comment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

Index of archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Aitias

You said you'd welcome comments on taking the case. I don't feel comfortable about posting on that page (try to avoid drama as much as possible!) so I thought I would drop you a note here.

I see an editor who sometimes acts rashly and who does not react well to criticism. (Admittedly these two traits do not go well together.) I also see an editor whose heart is in the right place and who is willing to improve. I don't see any abuse of the admin tools.

Cheers, — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:04, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

You may already know, but FYI, Aitias seems to have retired. I would ask the usual motion be proposed with regards to where an admin has retired in the light of controversy surrounding his administrator status. Ncmvocalist (talk) 13:39, 16 March 2009 (UTC) Actually, there may be no usual motion, but you know what I mean, hopefully. Ncmvocalist (talk) 13:43, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

No motion would really be necessary if this is what winds up happening. See discussion of last proposed principle and the Jossi-related items on the proposed decision page in the pending Scientology case. Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:04, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay. If he still has them, I'm hoping he will not use his tools while I try to talk to him. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:59, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I've responded to clarify what I meant here - awaiting your response. Cheers, Ncmvocalist (talk) 13:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Cheers again. Ncmvocalist (talk) 13:57, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

You're invited!

New York City Meetup Next: Sunday March 29th, Columbia University area Last: 01/18/2009 This box: view • talk • edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, sign official incorporation papers for the chapter, review recent projects like Misplaced Pages Loves Art and upcoming projects like Misplaced Pages at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Misplaced Pages and the other Wikimedia projects (see the January meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Misplaced Pages:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

BLPs

I thought you might find this thread interesting, particularly the number of (seemingly completely) unreferenced biographies of living people we have (approx. 1 out of 10). --MZMcBride (talk) 09:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm travelling this weekend but will take a look when I get home tonight. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 11:36, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

The bad news continues. Another possible 19,000 unreferenced biographies that aren't properly being taken into account (when things like the number of articles in Category:Unreferenced BLPs are looked at). Bah. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Monty Python's Life of Brian ban in british town

NPR story --Jeremyb (talk) 23:30, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Mail

Hey Brad, you've e-mail. Best, —Anonymous Dissident 07:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Adminbots

WP:BOT: "... When the Bot Approvals Group is satisfied that the bot is technically sound, they will approve the bot and recommend that it be given both 'bot' and 'sysop' rights. The bureaucrat who responds to the flag request acts as a final arbiter of the process and will ensure that an adequate level of community consensus (including publicity of approval discussion) underlies the approval. ..."

Adminbots are given separate accounts. One of the core tenets of the new policy is that adminbots should be segregated from their operator's account. (You have to be an admin already to operate one of course). Dragons flight (talk) 22:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Noted. I missed that. I'll modify accordingly. Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:16, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom and Aitias

Does this mean that the ArbCom is back on? Does he really think that he can slip in and slip out while he was supposed to be at ArbCom? Ottava Rima (talk) 15:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

As I understand it, the case should only be necessary if he requests adminship back. Simply editing is not the issue. Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:20, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

He did the same thing to Ironholds. Blanking your page, stating a right to vanish, then going back on it, then disappearing, then coming back to oppose RfAs, its all just a little unsettling. Not as strange as this, but yeah. Maybe its just me. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC)