Jump to content

User talk:Ged UK/Archives/2010/May

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


First Amendment of US Constitution

I assume that you know that Wikipedia is an US based organization. Therefore, a full subject of the US Law. Your 'protection' of the Catholic sex abuse cases is yet another way of imposing censorship, contrary to the First Amendment and the public declaration that Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia free of censorship.--71.163.232.225 (talk) 00:01, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

This claim is false - read the relevant Wikipedia policy at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_censored
- especially the following quotation:
<< Wikipedia is free and open, but restricts both freedom and openness where they interfere with creating an encyclopedia. Accordingly, Wikipedia is not a forum for unregulated free speech. >> Afterwriting (talk) 09:32, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Indeed. GedUK  08:54, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Need help

Dear sir, I hardly and painstakingly created a new article House of Cerva, page concerning a noble family of ancient Dalmatian origin, now widespread in northern Italy. User Direktor insists rollback and reset the page.
Whilst I do not go into the other pages processed by that user, who perseveres in contributions unilateral sense, without any discussion on the subject, but i need your help to preserve my work, especially because i think it's important for the Project, and shouldn't be modified according to someone's taste or for someone's convenience.

Thanks and regards. --Theirrulez (talk) 15:29, 1 May 2010 (UTC) (confl.)I need to underline the extreme national point of view of user:DIREKTOR who has just switch the redirect of House of Cerva into a Croatian form. Without any xplanation. I have to let you know that al that Croatian form of the nouns and names don't correspond tho the ones usually accepted in english. Please help. Regards, --Theirrulez (talk) 15:35, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Ged, be advised, this is just another in a looong line of very obvious socks. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 15:32, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
No sock, I just cannot understand about your incredibly fast intervet to change what I did. I CREATED a NEW article, and you without any discussion rollback it? I need explanation.
(Make every Check User you want, I'm a wiki user since 2006).--Theirrulez (talk) 15:39, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes you most certainly do "need help", Giovanni. Unfortunately I'm still years away from being qualified to help you.
Ged, its maybe the twentieth sock or so of User:Giovanni Giove created a few days ago (on 28 April 2010) in response to your semi-protection of the Maritime Republics article. Highly disruptive sock (e.g. WP:OUTING), recommend you remove any posts on sight (would've done it myself already but its your talk). (See the History page of Template:Maritime republics, for example.) --DIREKTOR (TALK) 15:45, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Your making a big mistake. I'm not interested anymore to contribute in pages so strongly influenced by few users. So I STOP CONTRIBUTING there. Anyways I'm not a sock, I'm an honourable wikipedian since 2006, so don't accuse me any more please. Everybody can see how my talk are censurated on DIREKTOR's discussion pages and reflect. Anyways, stay quiet. I'll never more stop your plans. Thanks --Theirrulez (talk) 16:40, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Is this done now? I've been off-wiki of the Bank holiday weekend. GedUK  08:51, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Magyar Televízió

It will be unprotected on Tuesday. Can you let me make draft for a full day and then I will revert to your version. (This idea is suggested by my friend, who is 12 years old, Thai, that edits TVP, I think you know him) So I will help find sources. And how can I know it's a blog or not. And once I've found 10 or ten reliable sources, then I will revert to mine and put the sources. I will remove some unreliable sources or YouTube. Do you know that protecting a page can discourage me?--125.25.14.95 (talk) 15:06, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

You can draft your version of the article on the talk page, where other users will also be able to check. GedUK  08:58, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for suggesting this idea. Can you give second chance by unprotecting Vietnam Television?--125.25.14.95 (talk) 10:30, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
The talk page isn't protected as far as I remember. GedUK  10:55, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Help with Bianca Jagger article

Hello, how are you doing? The controversy article died down overnight but now regular editors are combatting each other. On another note while looking at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians project page, I noticed that Jimbo Wales made a request about adding material to her article Bianca Jagger. In his post back in 2007 on her talkpage (see these DIFFS), Jimbo listed the material Ms. Jagger contacted about having added to her article. It got added in but it appears someone slapped several tags on the article. The one, from my viewpoint, that makes no sense is additional citations necessary. The article has 19. I would like to start citing this article but its revision history points to editors battling over additions. Although those wars have died down, I feel that if I source the article, my cites will get challenged. I have several great ones and am about to put an Underconstruction tag on the article as I begin to cite it. Additionally, I found just a little while ago a great URL that lists almost verbatim her awards. Now, it may be that she gave it to the site or it mirrored Wikipedia but I will use it judiciously. It comes from a site that an article here:

While you are digesting this post, I will begin my initial citations so you can see my work. I will look at your talkpage as I have it under Watch.Morenooso (talk) 07:15, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I've not time to look at this in depth now, but a quick scan of the article as it stands (i've not looked at the history) indicates:
  • Under the 'Activisism' section, there's a lot of unsourced stuff there, most of which should be pretty uncontroversial (chair of this, founder of that, nominated for the other). Sources for the awards would be good too. I would have thought that a Council of Europe release was a very reliable source. If yuo're not sure, the best place to ask is at the reliable sources noticeboard.
Additionally, if you're worried about making controversial edits, suggest them on the talk page first, and iron it out there so the article doesn't become unstable with lots of reversions. GedUK  07:29, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Good idea. I will post under Jimbo's last entry. --Morenooso (talk) 07:30, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Part of the problem I kind of identified is that these URLs could almost be seen as circular, self-posting efforts by her or wholesale press releases of her bio/resume. But, almost everyone uses or mentions the same ones - ergo, it looks like the various URLs got it right. --Morenooso (talk) 07:40, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Indeed, that's often a problem. The editors who frequent the WP:RSN are much better at determining that than I am. GedUK  07:49, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I think I had a run-in with an editor from there on an AfD. Basically, he called all my cites bogus and I requested a Third Opinion. The TO came in my favor and he caved in on the AfD. I suspect Jimbo has the article under Watch and that an admin called by one of Monty Python Knight nicknames will hopefully help or intercede should my work get carved up. --Morenooso (talk) 08:14, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Wow, that went a lot faster then I thought it would. I couldn't find one award but added 14 references. Could please click through them and see that they resolve? I would the fun and games will begin. . . --Morenooso (talk) 09:07, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Yep, they all seem fine to me. I can't see why anyone would have an issue with any of those; adding sources about facts rather than opinoin should never be a problem if they're reliable. The area you might run into issues is trying to source some of the rather POV bits in the activism section (was shocked by, persuaded to, etc). GedUK  11:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I think I've identified the problem and it stems from the talkpage discussions. The easiest one is a lawsuit about a ring she lost. It was found in Austria whose law says the finder is entitled to 5% of its value or about 10,000 euros. If you read between the lines, the finder probably expected Jagger to automatically give the money over. Something happpened between her lawyers and his and the case became a defamation suit. In America, some people will purposely exhort lost items such as pets or jewelry because they know the items can be sentimental to the owner.
The very next section, Challenges in improving the article, is very revealing and contains the bones that is hurting her article. Difference in birth years is listed. To be honest, I bet many articles have inaccurate birthdate because the subject shaved some years off or a legitimate error exists. Jimbo Wales has that problem. What surprises me about this is that no one seems to care about his date. It used to be that new editors did not change info otherwise admins and page patrollers would revert. I've even chipped my opinion that being that he is on the foundation may have had it put his note on the article with a reference {WP:RS) and annotation on his talkpage.
The crux of the improving section seems to be the dichotomy between her earlier "jet set" image and now being a world-wide advociate. Like many articles, editors want to tip the POV balance to reflect material that is available. . .reflection of her own attempts to overcome her previous image. I translate to meaning someone wants dirt or perceived bad lifestyle RS news that can be used in the article. However, that info is vintage 1970s' news.
From the info provided by her to Jimbo, either she or he (I would to think Jimbo) identified 1981 as a key year in her life. A death squad marched into Honduras and captured 40 UN camp refugees. Jagger and relief workers trailed the death squad back to El Salvador. When the two parties came within earshot range, Jagger etal supposedly shouted that the squad would have to kill the UN party who would become witnesses or martyrs (martyrs my interpretation). The squad departed without the refugees.
From that point on, she has led a good life IMHO. Most people would park her as being leftist but when the battle for human rights is fought, history usually records those people as being heroic and the bedrock of what made the Magna Carta great - fighting against the system or status quo to obtain inalienable rights.
Sorry to be so long winded. I never knew all this about her. While I was working on the Recent changes page, I saw an article "fly by" with the word escadrille in it. I backed up my screen because I love the early history of aerial escapades in WWI that detail famous escadrilles. I was kind of disappointed when I clicked on Allen Escadrille to find out it was a high school marching band. Looking over its article I discovered it was nominated for an AfD. In looking at the article, I said to myself this escadrille is notable for performing overseas in Dublin, in Macy's and the Rose parades and an award from the John Philip Sousa Foundation (I wonder who John was - probably a piker, not). I then found citations for all those events and sourced the article. I think two of the participants, who voted Keep, are angry because my "Strong Keep" analysis shows that like the nominator, they did not really examine the article or try to improve it.
I saw it was listed at WP Musicians and wanted to add that tag on the escadrille's talkpage. I visited the WP, looked high and low but could not find the appropriate {{WikiProject Musicians}} tag. I did see in the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Musicians#...Expansion Expansion section that several groups/bios I like need work. I probably should stick to my WPs but thought I would pick up one or two articles. I noted that Jagger's entry had special request by me (Jimbo) which further reads:
  • Ms Jagger has contacted me very sweetly and very politely with concerns about some errors (which I corrected) but also supplied me with some additional info (see the talk page). It would be nice if the article could be improved, as I like to reward people who approach us in the right way (nicely!).
Not that I am trying to score points with anyone to include Jimbo but I thought that if he cared enough to post there, I would look at her article. As Paul Harvey said, "Now you know the rest of the story. Sorry for the emphasis but Harvey had a way of booming his voice on those words. I miss him. . .but I digress.
Sorry to be so long winded. Hope all this helps. --Morenooso (talk) 15:10, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Hmm. Is the info she provided Jimbo verifiable? Is there a WP:COI? Just because he's Jimbo doesn't mean we stop adhering to our basic tenets. The rest of your points seem sensible, but the point is, what do her biographies say? Those are probably the best sources of info we could have. (Personally, I've no problem with her being leftist, but it seems to be a dirty word in the US!). GedUK  20:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure. I would think the 1981 story should have been part of some UN report or that the staff would have made mention of. We're talking almost 30 years later and documentation may be fleeting. Much of the info on the article talkpage made it into the article but is unsourced. I thought about looking at it later when I have more time to see if I can source some of the other claims she made to JW. The more important posts/deeds/commissions she has been appointed should have a reference but they too could be circular. --Morenooso (talk) 21:13, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I found one quote for the 1981 death squad episode. It is:
It is pretty much the same account as provided to Jimbo in the third, fourth and fifth paragraphs. I did several searchs using first the camp name (?), then Jagger+death squad which got the hit. Every other search seemed to be circular pointing back towards her bio or press releases. I would like to have two great WP:RS cites so the wordsmithing can form one three sentence paragraph. --Morenooso (talk) 04:21, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Lightning strikes again! I remembered one of the cited articles I used last night being similar in content because it too came from a British newspaper. Present citation #27:
About 60 percent down or if you search for "1981", two big paragraphs fill the first news account with quotes from Jagger. I am going to set up a file in my userspace to work on because I had some hiccups last night and destroyed one or two cites I built. That set me back 20 minutes and a potty break to get fresh air. --Morenooso (talk) 04:39, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Those sources all look good! Good work! GedUK  07:28, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. And thanks again for what you did last night. As I've told other admins, I expect no quarter when I've done something wrong (although a spoonful full of sugar makes the medicine go well I hear). I took the day off to clear my head and need to look at my watchlist. Since I've have problems not only with editting her article (the hiccups and my laptop battery dying), I'm going to do the initial work in my userpage. When I am done, I will drop a note by your talkpage (here) and then on her talkpage before I post the change. I hope it is taken well but have a feeling some editors might take offense because they might view it as a whitewash effort. I almost could not believe that she gave two different newspaper almost the same account she gave Jimbo Wales which he posted on her talkpage. It's almost chilling to realize that as per her description, she had a distinct change of heart and went from jet-setter to go-getter. --Morenooso (talk) 05:44, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
I've begun the editting in my userspace under User:Morenooso/Bianca Jagger work area. I expect to be done in under an hour as the paragraph will most likely be about five sentences long. Since I had the references semi-built and have my new handy-dandy template file for creating citations/building articles, this will be much easier than possibly screwing up her article. I really seem to "lose it" staring a b/w screen with the Wikipedia mark-up. Even with the citation already built, I seem also to get killed by the subsequent <ref= namebbcnews1981/> short ref cite (for lack of better words.) I am still new to doing this type editting but trying to do more of it as I find it peaceful after working with vandals. Man, those vandals can put body hits on you. Anyway, I will let you know when I am about to post a section on her talkpage detailing Jimbo's account and the two citations used to build this section. I am torn over what to name the section. I like Ephinany but Life changing moment also speaks to me. If you have a better idea, post it after this new entry. --Morenooso (talk) 04:35, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm done and now going on Jagger's talkpage. I don't see you around to be my wingman. Morenoso 01 Flight, now proceeding solo until rejoin. Come up Bianca Jagger when able. Morenooso 01, out of FL 280 descending for initial run. Target in sight. --Morenooso (talk) 04:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
The downside is the Independent URL documented her landlord battle and there is some minor stuff in both articles that could be used by the negative-minded editors in general. --Morenooso (talk) 05:18, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Morenooso 01, target run complete. Nose is cold; switches safe. Climbing out of 1,000' MSL for FL 280. Wingman rejoin in progress. Come up voice, Bianca Jagger's article. Morenooso 01, out. --Morenooso (talk) 05:46, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Good work! Yes, sometimes negative stuff goes into RS, but biographies should be balanced, negative stuff is important if it's not WP:UNDUE weight. GedUK  09:02, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm glad Jimbo chipped in his two cents on her talkpage. I see what he said in lots of articles where editors get hung up on "the media" is portraying the article in a good/bad light according to the editors' POV. They will use lines like "claimed", "the press said" or try to take down the messenger. After I review my Watchlist, I will add the other RS sources and remove the tag the other admin placed on the article. I will post right now my intent. It was very nice to have you as a soundboard and you provided me great advice as to what needed to be done. I've revealed you to the other admin who posted on her talkpage article. You should post there and take some credit. --Morenooso (talk) 12:35, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
That's very kind of you to say so, but I really didn't do a lot; just helped you refocus away from the dramarama and back on the basic Wikipedia tenets! GedUK  14:30, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome. And, you never know. Jimbo gave another admin a 100 percent raise the other day. Granted, 100% of no pay for volunteer work is nuthin' but nothing is better than a stick in the eye. --Morenooso (talk) 14:40, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

request for unlock

hi ged i would like to add two up date sentences in sislej xhafa page, can you please unlock (since was my first time that i reviewed, no experience with wikipedia.. maybe we touched to many bottons:).., thanks johnnyes

Hi there. Please let me know here what you want to add, and i'll add it for you. Cheers. GedUK  20:42, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

thanks Ged.. please add that sislej is Kosovarian too..:

... is in Kosovarian-American artist...


and add the Awards too..I thank you in advance...

Awards

  • Hardau City Park, Zürich; Y project (collaboration with Iso Asani and Frederic Levrat) Supported by City of Zürich, ZHDK and IFCAR 2009 (First prize)
  • NEONS in collaboration with Contemporary Art Fund of the City and Canton of Geneva (Fmac and FCAC) Plaine de Plainpalais; Geneva 2008 (Winner)
  • Fondazione Pistoletto, Biella 2001 (First Prize)
  • Fondazione Querini Stampalia, Premio Querini- Furla per l’Arte, Venice 2000 (First Prize)
  • Onufri National Gallery, Tirana 1999 (First prize)
Do you have any sources for those, otherwise I can't add them. Thanks. GedUK  07:24, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

sources

hi ged....i forgot about welcome cockies, thanks...gnniam,gniam...

here are the sources for the Awards...thanks and pls. let me know if you need more details..

http://www.stadt-zuerich.ch/ted/de/index/gsz/planung_u_bau/bauprojekte/stadtpark_hardau.html

http://www.ville-ge.ch/culture/neons/en/pro_3phase.html

http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0ATKjJ_MhOK0mZGd4ODk3MmhfMTZnejdoZHJncg&hl=en

http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0ATKjJ_MhOK0mZGd4ODk3MmhfMTZnejdoZHJncg&hl=en

http://www.magazzinoartemoderna.com/GALLERIA/ENGLISH/news_singola.php?id_news=25

source

ged...i just repeat one two times as a sorces..here is the source of one the awards in 2001..thanks

http://www.arteconomy24.ilsole24ore.com/news/cultura-tempo-libero/2008/02/premi-pistoletto.php?uuid=5579577a-d10a-11dc-a28e-00000e25108c&DocRulesView=Libero

I will have a look at these tonight. I've been offline for a few days. GedUK  09:00, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
I can't work out some of those, and I can't open the google docs ones at all, which probably means they aren't verifiable. You should take them to WP:RSN, where other editors can work out if they're reliable or not, because I'm not sure. GedUK  20:31, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Legend of the Seeker Vandalism

Hi Ged, we spoke about The Amazing Race 16, anyway I noticed not so long ago quite a few people Vandalised the Legend of the Seeker page messing up the format, adding in ridiculus text and things like that, all in the name of saving the series(It's officially cancelled, cast have tweeted on twitter saying it's cancelled too), I've tried to restore what I could, but is there any way you could revert the page to the revision from Jonjames1986 please? That's when the page was fine, virtually everyone afterwards went on an editting rampage it seems, you can see by checking older revisions after my attempt to clean. Also could you check the page every now and then, it's mostly Wikipedia members doing this 82.15.9.249 (talk) 06:39, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I will try to look at this this evening. If you need the page protecting sooner, please take it to WP:RPP where another admin can look at it. GedUK  08:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems to have settled down now, and the predominant culprit has been indef blocked for spamming. Let me know if it picks up again. GedUK  20:40, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010

A well-deserved barnstar!

The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For dedicated and considered work at Requests for Page Protection -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 21:08, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Gosh, thanks! I feel a little guilty, as I took the Bank holiday weekend off pretty much, and didn't have time to get to it this morning either! GedUK  21:14, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I concur, a well deserved barnstar. I always feel bad when I get time in my morning to check it and see you have handled all the reports! You deserved the weekend time off, especially since you have been clerking the board whilst VoAbot is down too. Regards, --Taelus (talk) 21:17, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Hardly, that's Rami R's script! Thanks though, nice to be appreciated! GedUK  21:27, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

thanks!

I really am just overjoyed that this would be my first 'big' project on Wikipedia, a nasty edit-war. Oh, well - it can only get better from here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panthera germanicus (talk • contribs) 14:25, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

They are incredibly frustrating. Hopefully heads won't have to be banged together to encourage communication. GedUK  14:38, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Your talk archive

I've changed my mind from RPP, and have protected it. Sorry about that. GedUK  14:35, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank You :). TbhotchTalk C. 15:59, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

General election prot.

Thanks. There are some admins. forming against this, please don't remove it - protecting it is entirely sensible. Leaky Caldron 20:59, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Decline of speedy deletion

Hello, you've previously declined speedy deletion of SnapComms because "Winning an award is a credible assertion of notability." I've now prodded the article, and amongst other things, I don't think that they won an award as such. They were awarded grant funding for export by an economic development agency. You may wish to refer back to the article. I don't know whether your talk page is the right place to raise this with you, or whether there's an area for speedy deletion where I should point this out. Schwede66 01:44, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

That's an interesting point. The CSD criteria are intentionally a lower standard. For now, just let the prod run. If it's removed, take it to AfD (I've watchlisted, and will do it if I see it). GedUK  06:54, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 10 May 2010

United States Senate election in Utah, 2010

Please explain why you've protected this article. The dispute is based on the current revision that Jerzeykydd made with the "I'm a veteran" line. I've been working on this article for over a month to make it better. I reorganized it back at the end of March. Now when I was ready to start adding real content, the "veteran" comes in and adds noting of value. Why protect his version and not the original version? Jerzeykydd isn't open for discussion, so his version ends up being the default. The dispute will simply end up being resolved by him not lifting a finger. Point me to the appropriate policy that states that the original article shouldn't be protected and the subsequent edit should be. JustAKnowItAll (talk) 15:07, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I protected it because there was an edit war taking place. They are not tolerated. The other option is to block both of you. GedUK  18:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I understand that you protected it because of an edit war. But why protect the article in its current form and not the original form. At this point there is no reason for Jerzeykydd to settle the dispute since his article organization is the current recognized article. JustAKnowItAll (talk) 19:23, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Because that happened to be the version it was on when I protected it. As the template says, it's not an indication of the preferred version. GedUK  20:11, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. However, this experience has nearly soured me from continuing to work on this article. I had very limited time to make the changes I had planned. Now, instead of making them I have to cater to the other editor since he's convinced his organization is best. JustAKnowItAll (talk) 20:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a collaborative project. Hopefully the RfC that's been started will help clarify consensus. It's hard to get consensus when the two main editors on an article disagree. Fingers crossed, and I hope you're not too disheartened. GedUK  14:41, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
I hope there is a consensus. I completely understand that Wikipedia is collaborative, which is why I was shocked when the other editor didn't want to have any discussion. Thanks for being involved, though. JustAKnowItAll (talk) 16:45, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Can you look at the discussion page and determine if there is a consensus yet. Also look at my user page to see the layout I was proposing. The other editor doesn't seem to want to contribute anything past the layout. Your comments and direction are appreciated. JustAKnowItAll (talk) 18:41, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

United Kingdom general election, 2010

Would you mind reverting your protection of the article? Myself and Ryan Postlethwaite had intended to keep an eye on it in order to keep it open as long as possible. Thanks for your consideration. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:01, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done Though I'm not sure it's sensible. GedUK  21:07, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
I'll protect it if it get ridiculous, but I've created an editnotice, so I'm hopeful that I can keep it under control for a while. Thanks. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Wow- it worked! With the help of an editnotice, I managed to get it right through the election without having to protect it! Thanks for unprotecting it :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Well, I'm glad! I didn't AGF enough, so kudos to you for being bold! :) GedUK  09:21, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

the amazing race 16

spoilers have again appeared in this thread, please kindly flag this thread from furthur vandalism for another 3 to 5 days, as the show will finish on Sun night, US time.Evan Weinstein 16:16, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually what has been posted by users on the section are sourced from the CBS adverts, I suggest looking at Youtube for said adverts Ged to verify this, these spoilers are not being posted by anonymous people either, so protecting the page against anonymous contributions would be beyond pointless, where can I report this guy Ged? For essentially wasting peoples time on here 82.15.8.135 (talk) 19:00, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Also Evan is showing edit warring behavior, by reverting Masems edits, then having that revert, reverted, then reverting again, if Masem re adds the stuff then Evan is essentially breaking the 3RR rule on here, he's not being obvious but check the revisions, what Masem added gets reverted the second Evan replys, then Masem reverts that, then Evan does, etc consider him for the 3RR if you're watching the page Ged 82.15.8.135 (talk) 19:05, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Ged Evan Weinstein has broken the 3RR Rule see here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Amazing_Race_16&action=history he is reverting legitimate information added from CBS adverts, and has done so more than 3 times in a 24 hour period, and keeps continuing to do so, if this isn't an edit war I don't know what is, it certainly is by the rules stated on Wikipedia 82.15.8.135 (talk) 03:29, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I am doing so, because the page have been flagged twice for the last and this month. and i fully understand the rules here, however i would like to comment on 1 issue, which is, i don't care where the sources came from (youtube, cbs or any other spoilers forum), i am editing back, because there might be countries and people have not even watch that episode, and many people, do not want to get spoiled. I hope i have made myself very clear, and i also do understand the assume good faith rule. Evan Weinstein 07:59, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

You probably don't understand but Wikipedia is a place for spoilers, legitimate information be it summarys or otherwise are perfectly acceptable, I can't quote off hand but there's a section confirming all this, the information being added isnt speculation either, this is all sourced information from legitimately added news from broadcasts, and should be allowed to stay. And by the way, if people don't want to be spoiled, they should not come onto Wikipedia to begin with, I can name several things for example, take Stargate Universe, do editors avoid adding a summary because it doesn't air in England till Tuesday? No, if it's available, add it, Ged I can quote the adverts to you that people like Masem have added the information from, they have been uploaded to Youtube recently. You've been reverting information from TAR16s page for too long now, stuff aired on TV is legitimate, leave it alone, end of. 82.15.8.135 (talk) 20:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Spoiler - "It is not acceptable to delete information from an article because you think it spoils the plot." -- Boing! said Zebedee 20:50, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Exactly what I meant, thankyou for posting that Zebedee, and I would like to apoligise to Ged for using up a lot of his talk page space but he wasn't aware of the full story, and I felt he needed to know, I hope we can consider this subject closed, the finale airs today at 8pm US time, 2am UK time, the information should stay for the reasons I said above, and after it airs this whole issue won't be valid anyways, just wanted to point out that Evan doesn't seem to like being reminded he's done something wrong, Apprenticefan pointed the issue out to him here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Evan_Weinstein&oldid=360844949 but instead of addressing him, who happens to be a long time editor to TAR pages, he deleted his comment. 82.15.8.135 (talk) 09:41, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Last time I protected it, there weren't reliable sources. i didn't protect it to keep out spoilers. If the sources added are reliable, there's no reason to protect. GedUK  11:50, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Thankyou Ged, and if Evan kicks up a fuss I can quote you the different adverts that have aired on TV/been released online by CBS to silence him if need be on this subject, as they have all been uploaded onto Youtube hoping the subject is closed now anyway. 82.15.8.135 (talk) 18:29, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Page has been protected due to a whole bunch of non members vandalising the page today, kinda surprising, I guess another admin took the lead to prevent anything being ruined prior to the episode airing 82.15.8.135 (talk) 21:32, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

To: 82.15.8.135, Excuse me, i am not making a fuss out of it, and i understand that threads like this needs to be protected from spoilers, also massive vandalism, if Ged UK doesn't do this, i am sure other admins will also do the same thing. Please be considerate, i am just helping those who have not watch the episode yet. This is a fact, so please assume good faith of what i do. Thanks. Evan Weinstein 14:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

We simply don't protect pages to stop spoilers being added. GedUK  06:47, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

United States Senate election in Utah, 2010

Could you unprotect this page? It's been stable for three days, and it is a current event (as in 5/8/10), and major changes have occurred today, seriously outdating the page. Star Garnet (talk) 21:59, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

It's stable because it's protected. What needs to be added, let me know, sources etc and I'll add it. GedUK  11:47, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Well, you did it yourself because I unprotected the page, mainly because it was becoming apparent that it was becoming out of date rapidly, and the edit warriors were talking on the talk page. GedUK  09:27, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Request Page Move

Hello, I would like to ask you to move page from Azerbaijan Wikipedia to rename to Azerbaijani Wikipedia as due name Azerbaijani Wikipedia is merged with other article, I want to create separate article for this article.Big cheers --NovaSkola (talk) 20:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi there! There was a discussion (now archived) relating to articles about smaller wikipedias, following on from a string of AfDs, where the consensus was to redirect these to the list. Could you let me know what reliable sources you have that would meet the notability guidelines. The consensus is that even articles on wikipedias need to follow the same rules as other articles. GedUK  07:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Question?

- Thank you for the message. I'm afraid you're mistaking. The concerned issues were indeed discussed. Moreover, the relevant sources were provided. Could you please provide the relevant diffs for all of the three articles and edit warring taking place on the aforementioned three articles? (please use my talk page for continuation of the discussion)--Rubikonchik (talk) 11:32, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Re:Talk:Catholic_sex_abuse_cases#3RR_advice

This Talk:Catholic_sex_abuse_cases#3RR_advice talkpage and its accompanying article continue to be a hotbed of edits/reverts. I believe the two main editors are now mindful that they need to slow down and be considerate of each other. Time will tell. . . --Morenooso (talk) 17:54, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I guess I was wrong. Both editors made reverts between the general advice given. One editor decided to take the other editor to the WP:ANEW noticeboard. Here are the [1] with the second editor's response. --Morenooso (talk) 21:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Looks like an anon IP figured out Catholic sex abuse cases came off protection a hour ago or or. Let the games begin. . .--Morenooso (talk) 02:03, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems so far to be relatively stable. GedUK  08:10, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Request

Hello. I would like to request a couple of additions for the Template:Country data Philippines; the 1912 & 1986 variants. Thank you. Banana Fingers (talk) 12:09, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Do you have svgs of them? Have you uploaded them? GedUK  17:28, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
There are svg's of the different variants including the ones I'm requesting here: Flag_of_Philippines#Flags_used. Banana Fingers (talk) 17:54, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
The 1912 version is just the US flag with 48 stars, and the 1986 is the same as the 1919-1981 version. GedUK  18:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
About the 1986 variant... ok fair enough, I didn't really bother to compare it to others. About the 1912 variant... I'm planning on editing an article and it would require that variant. I understand the difference with the 1908 variant is barely noticeable, perhaps not noticeable at all when used but I was thinking that it would still be worth using to be more historically correct? Banana Fingers (talk) 18:38, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't explain that very well. The 1912 version is the US flag with 48 stars, the file is called [[File:US flag 48 stars.svg]]. If you're saying that is actually wrong, then I'm afraid I wouldn't know. You'd be better asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology for their opinion. There is also Wikipedia:WikiProject Flag Template who look after the flag templates if you can't find the one you need. GedUK  06:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
That flag is correct, so yes, the 48 stars flag is the one I'm requesting to be added to the template. Banana Fingers (talk) 07:55, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 Done Excuse my questions, I'm always hyper careful editing templates, let alone admin protected ones! GedUK  08:06, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Elachista infuscata

We have Wikipedia articles for neither E. infuscata nor Elachista baltica, and only the sources cited in Fauna Europaea (which is considered a RS if no quality peer-reviewed article stands against it, as is not the case here AFAICT). And nobody has read the Fauna Europaea sources et. So they need to be redlinks, because the use of these names for the species is not correct, and WP:R#DELETE #9 vs no reason to WP:R#KEEP. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 20:37, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 Done GedUK  06:50, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

List of Johnny Test episodes again

Only a mere two hours after the protection expired, IPs once again began vandalizing and adding unsourced content once again. If you're on, please protect it. If not that's fine too, I put it in the current requests page. This article just needs to be protected as quickly as possible. [2] [3] Thank you. Heavydata (talk) 02:37, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Already protected. I'm not on much on weekends as a rule, I see it's been protected now :) GedUK  06:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Max Dolan

Hi, why have you deleted the page on max dolan.You need to stop sticking your nose into other peoples business and get a fucking life.How would you know anything about that?

Right,i was there,i know,why would i lie,i wouldnt,everything on there is 100 percent the truth,and 100 percent notable ,he a famous musician for fucks sake,wake up.What that had to do with you i dont know,that is adverstising,it had a link to buy his songs on itunes,and that page was none of your fucking business.Paul —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxdolan1 (talk • contribs) 16:52, 16 May 2010

If he's famous, please provide sources. Also, wikipedia isn't to be used as an advertising platform. GedUK  07:16, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Unreal Media Server article deletion

Hello,

We have noticed the deletion and feel it's a mistake. There was no copyright infringements in the article; this software is free for home users and is of high interest for general public interested in streaming media tools. We had about 20 visits a day from this article; other free-commercial streaming servers have their wikipedia pages, such as Microsoft, Adobe media servers.

Please undelete the page. UMedia team 71.236.3.185 (talk) 15:50, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

It was a word for word copy of this page. If that text belongs to the company, that's fine, but please follow the instructions following:
  • If you have permission from the author, send an email with the message to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
  • If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, let me know with a link to where we can find that note.
  • If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on here. GedUK  07:10, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

OK. Email sent as you requested. The text was NOT a word for word copy of that page at download.com, you are mistaken. Thanks. UMedia team.

OK, I'll look into it and restore as soon as I get confirmation. Thanks for your patience. GedUK  06:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Unreal Media Server deletion

EMail sent as requested. Text in Wikipedia did not violate any copyrights. UMedia team. 63.243.52.90 (talk) 16:03, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 17 May 2010

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 99 support, 9 oppose, and 2 neutral. Your support was much appreciated.

Regards -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 17:12, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure :) GedUK  15:13, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Amazing Race 17 protect request

Hey Ged, Just wondering if you could help again, people are adding a route that hasn't been confirmed, which is borderlining hearsay to The Amazing Race 17s main page, there is no proof or evidence of the route but Anonymous users keep adding, it has happened 3 times in the last 48hrs, and am hoping you would considering a long term protect status of the page, I myself can easily just log in and undo any users adding false information to the page so it won't affect me much, see here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Amazing_Race_17&action=history I've removed 2 instances of false information being added in a short space of time, and Evan has once. Unofficially sources are saying that perhaps the amazing race 17 could start filming in the next few months, so a protect status till official news from websites filters out would be amazing, less worrying about Vandals in all Thankyou 82.15.9.249 (talk) 12:57, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  07:18, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 24 May 2010

Karabakh Khanate

Thank you for your attention to my request about the escalating dispute on Karabakh Khanate article. Aregakn (talk) 14:13, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Request to re-protect Eli Soriano article

Hi Ged UK,

An Anon is engaged in edit warring over at the Eli Soriano article. Please see this first edit, it is quite deceptive. The edit summary says "reinserted NPOV statements" yet the Anon did not really inserted any statements but re-factored 7 elements of the whole article. Please re-protect. – Shannon Rose Talk 20:30, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  15:23, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Much obliged, Admin! – Shannon Rose Talk 15:28, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Where is Unreal Media Server section?

So? We have sent an email more than a week ago. The page is still not restored. UMedia team 64.207.14.125 (talk) 18:39, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ged_UK/Archives/2010/May&oldid=1184012704"