User talk:Dusti/Archive 13
This is an archive of past discussions about User:Dusti. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
The Signpost: 04 July 2016
- News and notes: Board unanimously appoints Katherine Maher as new WMF executive director; Wikimedia lawsuits in France and Germany
- Op-ed: Two policies in conflict?
- In the media: Terrorism database cites Wikipedia as a source
- Featured content: Triple fun of featured content
- Traffic report: Goalposts; Oy vexit
The Signpost: 21 July 2016
- Discussion report: Busy month for discussions
- Featured content: A wide variety from the best
- Traffic report: Sports and esports
- Arbitration report: Script writers appointed for clerks
- Recent research: Using deep learning to predict article quality
The Signpost: 04 August 2016
- News and notes: Foundation presents results of harassment research, plans for automated identification; Wikiconference submissions open
- Obituary: Kevin Gorman, who took on Wikipedia's gender gap and undisclosed paid advocacy, dies at 24
- Traffic report: Summer of Pokémon, Trump, and Hillary
- Featured content: Women and Hawaii
- Recent research: Easier navigation via better wikilinks
- Technology report: User script report (January to July 2016, part 1)
The Signpost: 18 August 2016
- News and notes: Focus on India—WikiConference produces new apps; state government adopts free licenses
- Special report: Engaging diverse communities to profile women of Antarctica
- In the media: The ugly, the bad, the playful, and the promising
- Featured content: Simply the best ... from the last two weeks
- Traffic report: Olympic views
- Technology report: User script report (January–July 2016, part 2)
- Arbitration report: The Michael Hardy case
The Signpost: 06 September 2016
- Special report: Olympics readership depended on language
- WikiProject report: Watching Wikipedia
- Featured content: Entertainment, sport, and something else in-between
- Traffic report: From Phelps to Bolt to Reddit
- Technology report: Wikimedia mobile sites now don't load images if the user doesn't see them
- Recent research: Ethics of machine-created articles and fighting vandalism
The Signpost: 29 September 2016
- News and notes: Wikipedia Education Program case study published; and a longtime Wikimedian has made his final edit
- In the media: Wikipedia in the news
- Featured content: Three weeks in the land of featured content
- Arbitration report: Arbcom looking for new checkusers and oversight appointees while another case opens
- Traffic report: From Gene Wilder to JonBenét
- Technology report: Category sorting and template parameters
The Signpost: 14 October 2016
- News and notes: Fundraising, flora and fauna
- Discussion report: Cultivating leadership: Wikimedia Foundation seeks input
- Technology report: Upcoming tech projects for 2017
- Featured content: Variety is the spice of life
- Traffic report: Debates and escapes
- Recent research: A 2011 study resurfaces in a media report
The Signpost: 4 November 2016
- In the media: Washington Post continues in-depth Wikipedia coverage
- Wikicup: WikiCup winners
- Discussion report: What's on your tech wishlist for the coming year?
- Technology report: New guideline for technical collaboration; citation templates now flag open access content
- Featured content: Cream of the crop
- Traffic report: Un-presidential politics
- Arbitration report: Recapping October's activities
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Dusti. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
love and commitment to the community | |
---|---|
... you were recipient no. 1042 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:33, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 4 November 2016
- News and notes: Arbitration Committee elections commence
- Featured content: Featured mix
- Special report: Taking stock of the Good Article backlog
- Traffic report: President-elect Trump
The Signpost: 22 December 2016
- Year in review: Looking back on 2016
- News and notes: Strategic planning update; English ArbCom election results
- Special report: German ArbCom implodes
- Featured content: The Christmas edition
- Technology report: Labs improvements impact 2016 Tool Labs survey results
- Traffic report: Post-election traffic blues
- Recent research: One study and several abstracts
The Signpost: 17 January 2017
- From the editor: Next steps for the Signpost
- News and notes: Surge in RFA promotions—a sign of lasting change?
- In the media: Year-end roundups, Wikipedia's 16th birthday, and more
- Featured content: One year ends, and another begins
- Arbitration report: Concluding 2016 and covering 2017's first two cases
- Traffic report: Out with the old, in with the new
- Technology report: Tech present, past, and future
The Signpost: 6 February 2017
- Arbitration report: WMF Legal and ArbCom weigh in on tension between disclosure requirements and user privacy
- WikiProject report: For the birds!
- Technology report: Better PDFs, backup plans, and birthday wishes
- Traffic report: Cool It Now
- Featured content: Three weeks dominated by articles
Adoption Request
Hi there! I'm a new entrant in Wikipedia and would like a teacher. I'm very much enthusiastic about this and would really appreciate if you will give me insight on how to go about. Thank you very much in advance. I'm looking forward on working with you. SethMakaiWamboi (talk) 21:12, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 February 2017
- From the editors: Results from our poll on subscription and delivery, and a new RSS feed
- Recent research: Special issue: Wikipedia in education
- Technology report: Responsive content on desktop; Offline content in Android app
- In the media: The Daily Mail does not run Wikipedia
- Gallery: A Met montage
- Special report: Peer review – a history and call for reviewers
- Op-ed: Wikipedia has cancer
- Featured content: The dominance of articles continues
- Traffic report: Love, football, and politics
Your access to AWB may be temporarily removed
Hello Dusti! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot II talk 20:23, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 9 June 2017
- From the editors: Signpost status: On reserve power, help wanted!
- News and notes: Global Elections
- Arbitration report: Cases closed in the Pacific and with Magioladitis
- Featured content: Three months in the land of the featured
- In the media: Did Wikipedia just assume Garfield's gender?
- Recent research: Wikipedia bot wars capture the imagination of the popular press
- Technology report: Tech news catch-up
- Traffic report: Film on Top: Sampling the weekly top 10
The Signpost: 23 June 2017
- News and notes: Departments reorganized at Wikimedia Foundation, and a month without new RfAs (so far)
- In the media: Kalanick's nipples; Episode #138 of Drama on the Hill
- Op-ed: Facto Post: a fresh take
- Featured content: Will there ever be a break? The slew of featured content continues
- Traffic report: Wonder Woman beats Batman, The Mummy, Darth Vader and the Earth
- Technology report: Improved search, and WMF data scientist tells all
The Signpost: 15 July 2017
- News and notes: French chapter woes, new affiliates and more WMF team changes
- Featured content: Spectacular animals, Pine Trees screens, and more
- In the media: Concern about access and fairness, Foundation expenditures, and relationship to real-world politics and commerce
- Recent research: The chilling effect of surveillance on Wikipedia readers
- Gallery: A mix of patterns
- Humour: The Infobox Game
- Traffic report: Film, television and Internet phenomena reign with some room left over for America's birthday
- Technology report: New features in development; more breaking changes for scripts
- Wikicup: 2017 WikiCup round 3 wrap-up
The Signpost: 5 August 2017
- Recent research: Wikipedia can increase local tourism by +9%; predicting article quality with deep learning; recent behavior predicts quality
- WikiProject report: Comic relief
- In the media: Wikipedia used to judge death penalty, arms smuggling, Indonesian governance, and HOTTEST celebrity
- Traffic report: Swedish countess tops the list
- Featured content: Everywhere in the lead
- Technology report: Introducing TechCom
- Humour: WWASOHs and ETCSSs
The Signpost: 6 September 2017
- From the editors: What happened at Wikimania?
- News and notes: Basselpedia; WMF Board of Trustees appointments
- Featured content: Warfighters and their tools or trees and butterflies
- Traffic report: A fortnight of conflicts
- Special report: Biomedical content, and some thoughts on its future
- Recent research: Discussion summarization; Twitter bots tracking government edits; extracting trivia from Wikipedia
- WikiProject report: WikiProject YouTube
- Technology report: Latest tech news
- Wikicup: 2017 WikiCup round 4 wrap-up
- Humour: Bots
The Signpost: 25 September 2017
- News and notes: Chapter updates; ACTRIAL
- Humour: Chickenz
- Recent research: Wikipedia articles vs. concepts; Wikipedia usage in Europe
- Technology report: Flow restarted; Wikidata connection notifications
- Gallery: Chicken mania
- Traffic report: Fights and frights
- Featured content: Flying high
The Signpost: 23 October 2017
- News and notes: Money! WMF fundraising, Wikimedia strategy, WMF new office!
- Featured content: Don, Marcel, Emily, Jessica and other notables
- Humour: Guys named Ralph
- In the media: Facebook and poetry
- Special report: Working with GLAMs in the UK
- Traffic report: Death, disaster, and entertainment
The Signpost: 24 November 2017
- News and notes: Cons, cons, cons
- Arbitration report: Administrator desysoped; How to deal with crosswiki issues; Mister Wiki case likely
- Technology report: Searching and surveying
- Interview: A featured article centurion
- WikiProject report: Recommendations for WikiProjects
- In the media: Open knowledge platform as a media institution
- Traffic report: Strange and inappropriate
- Featured content: We will remember them
- Recent research: Who wrote this? New dataset on the provenance of Wikipedia text
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Dusti. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 18 December 2017
- Special report: Women in Red World Contest wrap-up
- Featured content: Featured content to finish 2017
- In the media: Stolen seagulls, public domain primates and more
- Arbitration report: Last case of 2017: Mister Wiki editors
- Gallery: Wiki loving
- Recent research: French medical articles have "high rate of veracity"
- Technology report: Your wish lists and more Wikimedia tech
- Traffic report: Notable heroes and bad guys
The Signpost: 16 January 2018
- News and notes: Communication is key
- In the media: The Paris Review, British Crown and British Media
- Featured content: History, gaming and multifarious topics
- Interview: Interview with Ser Amantio di Nicolao, the top contributor to English Wikipedia by edit count
- Technology report: Dedicated Wikidata database servers
- Arbitration report: Mister Wiki is first arbitration committee decision of 2018
- Traffic report: The best and worst of 2017
The Signpost: 5 February 2018
- Featured content: Wars, sieges, disasters and everything black possible
- Traffic report: TV, death, sports, and doodles
- Special report: Cochrane–Wikipedia Initiative
- Arbitration report: New cases requested for inter-editor hostility and other collaboration issues
- In the media: Solving crime; editing out violence allegations
- Humour: You really are in Wonderland
The Signpost: 20 February 2018
- News and notes: The future is Swedish with a lack of administrators
- Recent research: Politically diverse editors write better articles; Reddit and Stack Overflow benefit from Wikipedia but don't give back
- Arbitration report: Arbitration committee prepares to examine two new cases
- Traffic report: Addicted to sports and pain
- Featured content: Entertainment, sports and history
- Technology report: Paragraph-based edit conflict screen; broken thanks
Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018
- News and notes: Wiki Conference roundup and new appointments.
- Arbitration report: Ironing out issues in infoboxes; not sure yet about New Jersey; and an administrator who probably wasn't uncivil to a sockpuppet.
- Traffic report: Real sports, real women and an imaginary country: what's on top for Wikipedia readers
- Featured content: Animals, Ships, and Songs
- Technology report: Timeless skin review by Force Radical.
- Special report: ACTRIAL wrap-up.
- Humour: WikiWorld Reruns
The Signpost: 26 April 2018
- From the editors: The Signpost's presses roll again
- Signpost: Future directions for The Signpost
- In the media: The rise of Wikipedia as a disinformation mop
- In focus: Admin reports board under criticism
- Special report: ACTRIAL results adopted by landslide
- Community view: It's time we look past Women in Red to counter systemic bias
- Discussion report: The future of portals
- Arbitration report: No new cases, and one motion on administrative misconduct
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Military History
- Traffic report: A quiet place to wrestle with the articles of March
- Technology report: Coming soon: Books-to-PDF, interactive maps, rollback confirmation
- Featured content: Featured content selected by the community
The Signpost: 24 May 2018
- From the editor: Another issue meets the deadline
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Portals
- Discussion report: User rights, infoboxes, and more discussion on portals
- Featured content: Featured content selected by the community
- Arbitration report: Managing difficult topics
- News and notes: Lots of Wikimedia
- Traffic report: We love our superheroes
- Technology report: A trove of contributor and developer goodies
- Recent research: Why people don't contribute to Wikipedia; using Wikipedia to teach statistics, technical writing, and controversial issues
- Humour: Play with your food
- Gallery: Wine not?
- From the archives: The Signpost scoops The Signpost
The Signpost: 29 June 2018
- Special report: NPR and AfC – The Marshall Plan: an engagement and a marriage?
- Op-ed: What do admins do?
- News and notes: Money, milestones, and Wikimania
- In the media: Much wikilove from the Mayor of London, less from Paekākāriki or a certain candidate for U.S. Congress
- Discussion report: Deletion, page moves, and an update to the main page
- Featured content: New promotions
- Arbitration report: WWII, UK politics, and a user deCrat'ed
- Traffic report: Endgame
- Technology report: Improvements piled on more improvements
- Gallery: Wiki Loves Africa
- Recent research: How censorship can backfire and conversations can go awry
- Humour: Television plot lines
- Wikipedia essays: This month's pick by The Signpost editors
- From the archives: Wolves nip at Wikipedia's heels: A perspective on the cost of paid editing
The Signpost: 31 July 2018
- From the editor: If only if
- Opinion: Wrestling with Wikipedia reality
- Discussion report: Wikipedias take action against EU copyright proposal, plus new user right proposals
- Featured content: Wikipedia's best content in images and prose
- Arbitration report: Status quo processes retained in two disputes
- Traffic report: Soccer, football, call it what you like – that and summer movies leave room for little else
- Technology report: New bots, new prefs
- Recent research: Different Wikipedias use different images; editing contests more successful than edit-a-thons
- Humour: It's all the same
- Essay: Wikipedia does not need you
The Signpost: 30 August 2018
- From the editor: Today's young adults don't know a world without Wikipedia
- News and notes: Flying high; low practice from Wikipedia 'cleansing' agency; where do our donations go? RfA sees a new trend
- In the media: Quicksilver AI writes articles
- Discussion report: Drafting an interface administrator policy
- Featured content: Featured content selected by the community
- Special report: Wikimania 2018
- Traffic report: Aretha dies – getting just 2,000 short of 5 million hits
- Technology report: Technical enhancements and a request to prioritize upcoming work
- Recent research: Wehrmacht on Wikipedia, neural networks writing biographies
- Humour: Signpost editor censors herself
- From the archives: Playing with Wikipedia words
The Signpost: 1 October 2018
- From the editor: Is this the new normal?
- News and notes: European copyright law moves forward
- In the media: Knowledge under fire
- Discussion report: Interface Admin policy proposal, part 2
- Arbitration report: A quiet month for Arbcom
- Technology report: Paying attention to your mobile
- Gallery: A pat on the back
- Recent research: How talk page use has changed since 2005; censorship shocks lead to centralization; is vandalism caused by workplace boredom?
- Humour: Signpost Crossword Puzzle
- Essay: Expressing thanks
The Signpost: 28 October 2018
- From the editors: The Signpost is still afloat, just barely
- News and notes: WMF gets a million bucks
- In the media: Bans, celebs, and bias
- Discussion report: Mediation Committee and proposed deletion reform
- Traffic report: Unsurprisingly, sport leads the field – or the ring
- Technology report: Bots galore!
- Special report: NPP needs you
- Special report 2: Now Wikidata is six
- In focus: Alexa
- Gallery: Out of this world!
- Recent research: Wikimedia Commons worth $28.9 billion
- Humour: Talk page humour
- Opinion: Strickland incident
- From the archives: The Gardner Interview
Precious anniversary
Four years! |
---|
Miss you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:48, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
The Signpost: 1 December 2018
- From the editor: Time for a truce
- Special report: The Christmas wishlist
- Discussion report: Farewell, Mediation Committee
- Arbitration report: A long break ends
- Traffic report: Queen reigns for four weeks straight
- Gallery: Intersections
- From the archives: Ars longa, vita brevis
The Signpost: 24 December 2018
- From the editors: Where to draw the line in reporting?
- News and notes: Some wishes do come true
- In the media: Political hijinks
- Discussion report: A new record low for RfA
- WikiProject report: Articlegenesis
- Arbitration report: Year ends with one active case
- Traffic report: Queen dethroned by U.S. presidents
- Gallery: Sun and Moon, water and stone
- Blog: News from the WMF
- Humour: I believe in Bigfoot
- Essay: Requests for medication
- From the archives: Compromised admin accounts – again
The Signpost: 31 January 2019
- Op-Ed: Random Rewards Rejected
- News and notes: WMF staff turntable continues to spin; Endowment gets more cash; RfA continues to be a pit of steely knives
- Discussion report: The future of the reference desk
- Featured content: Don't miss your great opportunity
- Arbitration report: An admin under the microscope
- Traffic report: Death, royals and superheroes: Avengers, Black Panther
- Technology report: When broken is easily fixed
- News from the WMF: News from WMF
- Recent research: Ad revenue from reused Wikipedia articles; are Wikipedia researchers asking the right questions?
- Essay: How
- Humour: Village pump
- From the archives: An editorial board that includes you
The Signpost: 28 February 2019
- From the editors: Help wanted (still)
- News and notes: Front-page issues for the community
- Discussion report: Talking about talk pages
- Featured content: Conquest, War, Famine, Death, and more!
- Arbitration report: A quiet month for Arbitration Committee
- Traffic report: Binge-watching
- Technology report: Tool labs casters-up
- Gallery: Signed with pride
- From the archives: New group aims to promote Wiki-Love
- Humour: Pesky Pronouns
The Signpost: 31 March 2019
- From the editors: Getting serious about humor
- News and notes: Blackouts fail to stop EU Copyright Directive
- In the media: Women's history month
- Discussion report: Portal debates continue, Prespa agreement aftermath, WMF seeks a rebranding
- Featured content: Out of this world
- Arbitration report: The Tides of March at ARBCOM
- Traffic report: Exultations and tribulations
- Technology report: New section suggestions and sitewide styles
- News from the WMF: The WMF's take on the new EU Copyright Directive
- Recent research: Barnstar-like awards increase new editor retention
- From the archives: Esperanza organization disbanded after deletion discussion
- Humour: The Epistolary of Arthur 37
- In focus: The Wikipedia SourceWatch
- Special report: Wiki Loves (50 Years of) Pride
- Community view: Wikipedia's response to the New Zealand mosque shootings
It's going to be asked...
Hello all. After a couple of years away from Wikipedia, I've returned to edit sporadically. I know that there are some talkpage stalkers who have been waiting for this day, and hopefully for an answer with regards to Orain. So, here's a brief explanation and answers to what happened.
Ultimately Orain was hacked by one of the staff members. I'm not going to name names here to re-stir a fire and cause chaos and mayhem. Unfortunately this person was trusted and ended up using methods to wipe out the data, redirect the domain, and permanently destroy the Farm. I had attempted to contact the cloud host to see if we could recover some if the data, but unfortunately there was no way to do so. The farm was lost, and ultimately I ended up coming to my wits end with some of the issues that were happening.
In regards to the donations, the donations were spent on some of the hosting costs that we had, at this point I don't remember exact figures. The remaining funds that were left were donated to The Wikimedia Foundation anonymously. Some of you may ask for proof and honestly I wish I still had it, however, I no longer live in Canada nor do I have access to the bank account that was used when these funds came in.
Orain was a wonderful dream project. The potential that it had was unmatched, amazing, and it truly broke my heart when it fell apart the way it did, mainly due to one individual who was upset. That person's actions led to a snowball effect that hurt a lot of people, ruined a lot of hard work, and damaged a lot of relationships.
I am returning to Wikipedia to focus on the Wikipedia project. I'm not here to dwell on the past, hurt people who caused damage to the Orain project, or cause issues based on the past. I believe in this project, I believe in the people of Wikipedia, and I believe that there's a good possibility that another Orain could possibly happen. This is all I have to say on the topic, and I hope that we can all continue to move forward to create this Encyclopedia.
Warmly - Dusti*Let's talk!* 06:03, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Supremacism
There were weasel words and unverified claims which I was removing. Supremacism isn't just referring to class discrimination, it's referring to prejudice in general, so I changed class to category.Udihgi (talk) 05:13, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
How's that unconstructive?
The edit you mentioned in your message? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.139.38.11 (talk) 06:01, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Ayyubids
Hello, I have seen your messages and reverting my edits. I have stated what I have changed in the article. Also, you can read my huge comment on the talk page of that article. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:C400:149D:A14E:3FE4:C9A3:982D (talk) 06:35, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- I appreciate you reaching out. The problem is that you removed sourced information in that edit. This is a collaborative project and we need to remain neutral in the information that's contained in an article. I suggest you continue to talk with folks on the talk page to come to a consensus about the information contained in the article. Dusti*Let's talk!* 06:39, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- I appreciate your comment. I think my edits show neutrality since it was unbiased and did not state if it is Kurdish or Arab. Anyhow, I won't be reverting any edits further if my edits get reverted. I have made my suggestion that might prevent conflicts and if you refuse it it is up to you after all. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:C400:149D:A14E:3FE4:C9A3:982D (talk) 06:43, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Do you like unsourced material on wikipedia?
Do not revert unsourced material on wikipedia. "Religionfacts.com" is clearly a self published blog. Should you be reported further? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.61.199.202 (talk) 08:10, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
I've reported you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.61.199.202 (talk) 08:20, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
You should be explain
Mr. Dustin, You should be explain why reverted my my recent contributions from the article, Kerala Nadvathul Mujahideen.MalayaliWoman (talk) 02:27, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- You removed over 11,000 bits of text citing WP:DIRECTORY and what you felt were poor sources. There are still sources, there's still information there. While it may not be the best, blanking articles doesn't help other people learn about the topic. You're welcome to fix it yourself if you would like, otherwise, leave the problem tags up. Dusti*Let's talk!* 02:33, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Citations added only for two conferences only. MalayaliWoman (talk) 02:40, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- You still need to state a reason, a valid reason, for removing the rest of the text. Otherwise, it looks like you're attempting to own the article. This is a collaborative effort, so unless the information included is totally and completely false or fictitious, it's okay if it's in the article. The more information given about a topic the better - we're all here to learn. Dusti*Let's talk!* 03:13, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hello my brother, I am from Kerala, I know the organisation that running two madrassas in the kerala. My question why keeping the list of unregistered self-claimed organisations. MalayaliWoman (talk) 09:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- You still need to state a reason, a valid reason, for removing the rest of the text. Otherwise, it looks like you're attempting to own the article. This is a collaborative effort, so unless the information included is totally and completely false or fictitious, it's okay if it's in the article. The more information given about a topic the better - we're all here to learn. Dusti*Let's talk!* 03:13, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Citations added only for two conferences only. MalayaliWoman (talk) 02:40, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
I submitted an AfD for John Singer
I saw you rightly reverted the speedy deletion request that an IP editor made for John Singer (attorney). Bad as it is, it doesn't meet those criteria. However, I do feel it fails WP:N pretty clearly and I have nominated it for AfD. Feel free to weigh in. Thanks! Rupert Clayton (talk) 06:06, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- In my best Simon Cowell voice It's repulsive. I've weighed in on the AFD. Dusti*Let's talk!* 07:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
PrivatBank
I think it was a mistake to say that the bank had $180bn (profit), 5 billion UAH is "roughly" 180 milions USD, not 182 billions USD. Thank you.--81.101.159.55 (talk) 15:22, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisting AfDs
Just a friendly heads-up – per NOQUORUM, AfDs that have had no opposition, such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Westwood, should be soft-deleted as an expired prod, rather than relisted. Bradv🍁 03:29, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Account creator granted
After reviewing your request for the "accountcreator" permission, I have enabled the flag on your account. Keep in mind these things:
- The account creator right removes the limit on the maximum number of new accounts that can be created in a 24-hour period.
- The account creator right is not a status symbol. If it remains unused, it is likely to be removed. Abuse of the account creator right will result in its removal by an administrator.
If you no longer require the right, let me know, or ask any other administrator. Drop a note on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of the account creator right. Happy editing! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:23, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
We're on Twitter!
WikiLGBT is on Twitter! | |
---|---|
|
Barnstars for you
The Original Barnstar | ||
This is for your valuable efforts for contributing to Wikipedia PATH SLOPU 09:07, 6 April 2019 (UTC) |
The Invisible Barnstar | ||
This is for your valuable efforts for contributing to wikipedia without seeking any recognition or reward. PATH SLOPU 09:07, 6 April 2019 (UTC) |
The Userpage Barnstar | ||
This is for your hard work for creating a attractive and beautiful user page. Regards PATH SLOPU 09:07, 6 April 2019 (UTC) |
Please look at the discussion
Hi I am very upset with the false accusation you have put up that I am a sock puppet of these users I dont even known so please can you don't do this.Nora Fatehi (Talk/Edits) 17:41, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
- I have provided my basis for the checkuser request. It's up to them now on what happens and if they decide to perform a checkuser on you. I'm sorry if this upsets you, however, the information I've provided makes this seem rather highly suspicious. Dusti*Let's talk!* 15:04, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
But I am not these people why don't you get it and please put me off the suspicious list. I am not a sock puppet of anyone.Nora Fatehi (Talk/Edits) 17:41, 13 April 2019 (UTC) Please I really am defending myself here because you made false accusations about me. And I dont think your sorry was meeaningful and stop lying.
New Page Reviewer granted
Hi Dusti. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers
" user group. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encylopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:
- Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance. so that they are aware.
- You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
- If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
- Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.
The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. TheSandDoctor Talk 20:40, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
You've got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the TheSandDoctor Talk 20:46, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Mjahangir777
Just wanted to let you know that I've put Mjahangir777 on the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 16:02, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
- By the way, it occurred to me that Mjahangir777 posted his email address on HistoryofIran's talk page so I looked it up. Turns out that address is associated with a Twitter account, also "Mjahangir777", who is from Iran. Why would an Iranian be feigning ignorance of the Persian language? –Skywatcher68 (talk) 16:02, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
"keep"? That's it?
I disagree with your close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nature therapy; many of the !votes that were ostensibly for "keep" were actually in agreement with my "TNT delete" argument, in favour of removing the inaccurate content and permanently keeping the page on watch for content that violates MEDRS. Closing as "consensus to keep" is theoretically acceptable, but I think that kind of call should be left for an admin to make. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:07, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- The premise of the close, in my opinion, is keep - generally I provide a rationale however this case was pretty clear cut, again, in my opinion. I'm human, and I make mistakes and I'm open to feedback and criticism of my actions. From what I can see, I'm not seeing a consensus on a TNT delete - I'm seeing a consensus on keep. You are the only one who !voted that way - others actually said Keep - In its current form; Keep - It needs work, not deletion, and even Keep per [1]. As they say, WP:NOTCLEANUP and a case for WP:TNT hasn't been made. If you disagree with the close you're welcome to revert me and we can request an admin to process the close. Dusti*Let's talk!* 02:18, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- I'm not arguing for delete; I'm arguing for a close statement that doesn't implicitly encourage restoration of the content that virtually everyone at the AFD agreed was problematic. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:26, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- I appreciate that and understand. I've expanded the closing rationale. All that does is further clarify the reason I closed the discussion the way I did. Content dispute and such needs to be done on the talk page for Nature therapy. Dusti*Let's talk!* 02:44, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- I'm not arguing for delete; I'm arguing for a close statement that doesn't implicitly encourage restoration of the content that virtually everyone at the AFD agreed was problematic. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:26, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
You probably forgot this but not to worry.
Hi Dustry, you probably forgot to link to the deletion discussion on the article's talk page following this closure, but not to worry I've done it for you here just for our future reference. Thanks.Tamsier (talk) 11:26, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hmmm - I use the XFDcloser and it seems that it didn't do that (a couple of times). Thanks for the heads up! Dusti*Let's talk!* 14:26, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Kuchurgan power station revert
Not sure what's the reason for the revert on the Kuchurgan power station except a very vague 'not constructive'. And no, I do not wish to experiment, I do not understand why that comment seemed that something that would fit in a sandbox.
Here's the situation: the only fossil/gas power station (Kuchurgan) in the separatist Transnistrian regime was built during soviet times with a custom electrical grid, now incompatible with EU, and also incompatible with Ukraine. The other two, which you removed, have less than 1% of Kuchurgan's power output (20/30MW vs 2000) and cannot cover Moldova's consumption. Given its needs, Moldova can only import energy from Transnistria, with the upgrades discussed in the article, in 2008, still being renegotiated in 2018 - in the source I linked you.
It is, essentially, another way to keep the regime afloat. Regardless of political affiliations, I believe it is an important thing to note about the power station - it can be used by the Transnistrian regime, given that it is the only station capable of supplying Moldova, and Moldova has the need of power, at characteristics only Transnistria can supply.
It is odd that you think this was a random sandbox edit. It was not gibberish, and I took time to provide links to relevant information. While it could have been assumed to taken a political stance, I tried not to. If anything, how can deleting information be seen as "more constructive"? Regardless, if you think you can rephrase what I said in a more constructive way, I'd be happy to take my time to understand what I did wrong.
- The unconstructive edit comes with this edit that you did. Using the software that I use to patrol recent changes, sometimes the right wording doesn't really come out. The issue is some point of view wording that you have - we've got to remain neutral when editing the articles here on Wikipedia. The other downside of Huggle is that it reverts everything in succession. Your first edit to the page looks fine, let's leave out the bit about the station being a "monopoly" unless you can find some reliable sources that include that terminology. Dusti*Let's talk!* 20:12, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
You did not close the AFD as keep: you merely deleted the AFD notice from the article. If you want to close the AFD, you need to do so on the AFD page. I have to say that despite the addition of references, I am very doubtful whether someone who published half a dozen theological tracts is notable. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:50, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Peterkingiron: I'm showing that I did close the AFD? See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Bliss. Dusti*Let's talk!* 16:02, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Peterkingiron: I am confused? I took a look at the AfD and it was properly closed the first time (2 days before you posted here)? Am I missing something? --TheSandDoctor Talk 20:04, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- Peterkingiron, Per everyone else, I was asked to check and looking at Dusti's contributions, everything was done properly. A script called XFDCloser was used for the close as well so it was all done at nearly the same time! RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) 06:30, 21 April 2019 (UTC)