Jump to content

User talk:Guerillero/Archives/2012/October

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


The Signpost: 01 October 2012

ANI Comment on Canvassing

It appears that in an effort to place their own comment immediately after the ANI opening post, your comment has been re-factored by another to being doubled up (written out twice) and now appears to be responding to their comment in agreement. Just thought you should know in case you want to correct the doubling and/or placement. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 16:25, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Le sigh. I will fix it. --Guerillero | My Talk 17:54, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

File mover

You deserve a cookie. Hope it taste good! TBrandley 19:56, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for granting me File mover rights, and your kind comments at the request page! I hate to bother you so quickly after, but in my right log thing it doesn't say I'm a file mover, and there is no "move" icon on image page. Once again, I'm sorry to bother, just wanted to let you know that. TBrandley 19:41, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

FYI

FYI (& YGM). Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:32, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I will discuss this with you via email --Guerillero | My Talk 16:56, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Talk pages matter.

Hello sir i wanted to create all talk pages for the images i have uploaded.So that i have created those.But i have not requested to delete the page.I have blanked the pages because, i have created all the talk pages with that existing "file name spaces" names for ex: (File talk:Pokiri cd cover.jpg).So that i was in imagination that, "that content should be blanked".So that i did that thing.I will re create those pages if you give me permission.Thank you sir.Raghusri (talk) Raghusri 06:58, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Blanking pages that you have created without an edit summary is commonly used as a way to express that you would like the page deleted. In addition, unless there is content to place on the talk page, there is no reason for it to be a blue link. After all, only 19.8% of files have talk pages. --Guerillero | My Talk 18:27, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Asking question about recall

Hi Guerillero! I saw your question so wanted to point out that it isn't a good idea. Please avoid asking questions about recall as they are not useful nor makes any difference other then increase of opposes if difference of opinions occur. In past when asked such questions, the editor who asks that questions are asked to striked off their question. Read this for more info: Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Archive_164#Recall_blanket_voting, [1], Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_August_17#Category:Wikipedia_administrators_open_to_recall, and Wikipedia_talk:Administrators_open_to_recall/Archive_3#The_admin_recall_process_is_dead_.28WP:AN.29. I hope that you'll also remove that question. Cheers! TheSpecialUser TSU 01:17, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Unless there is a post 2010/2011 discussion that you can point to that shows that the community-at-large dislikes these kind of questions, I am not going to remove it. All questions are 100% voluntary. There is nothing that makes anyone answer any question(s). Also, please don't template me with highly patronizing templates. --Guerillero | My Talk 18:25, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
I will say though that questions about recall, from my observations, tend to generate a lot of oppose votes and no support. There is almost no way to answer that question without pissing off at least half a dozen people on one side or the other that are, to be frank, single issue voters. Sven Manguard Wha? 21:55, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
[2] --Guerillero | My Talk 23:13, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
-_- <sigh> I'm not entirely sure that I wanted you to pull the question, as much as that I wanted to make sure you were aware of it's ability to harm otherwise smooth RfAs. Being that this RfA certainly isn't otherwise smooth, and reading what TheSpecialUser said above again, I can see why you pulled it. I'm not sure whether that's good or bad, just that I wasn't explicitly asking you to do so myself. Feel free to, in the throws of confusion, moan/growl at me for botching my above comment so badly. Or not. Cheers, Sven Manguard Wha? 06:31, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Sven,
In outlining the problem, and letting Guerillero decide on a solution, your message was a model note, concise and unlikely to cause resentment. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 11:48, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Keifer.Wolfowitz. My relationship with Guerillero is quite good, the moan/growl part of the comment was mainly intended to be humorous. Sven Manguard Wha? 15:19, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
  • I'm a bit late with the reply (have been having some tough time). My apologies to you if you felt that I templeted you there. Infact it isn't a template but a post which I remember that was posted by me on another fellow editor's talk page. I didn't meant to give out any threats or didn't wanted to look rude. I just wanted to point out few points about the topic. Sorry if my post offended you there. TheSpecialUser TSU 12:58, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: September 2012

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 18:43, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 October 2012

Hey

Since you protected the Green Day template I thought I would ask you. The page Tune In, Tokyo... is a live EP and it could be added to either Live albums or EPs section but it should be in one since its not on there at all. And we agreed that Green Date should be added to the related articles section so if you could add those to it for me since I cant Id appreciate it. BlackDragon 02:34, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok thanks for adding the first one and as for the second If it stays then it doesnt need an agreement to add since its an album. Im working on expanding it so it most likely wont be deleted but if it stays ill notify you to add it. BlackDragon 04:19, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

AN/I

Hi Tom, new responses for you in this section. Best, SlimVirgin (talk) 19:53, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks SV --Guerillero | My Talk 23:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

This Month in Education: October 2012



Headlines

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription · Distributed via Global message delivery, 23:10, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Request for explanation

Guerillero, please see my response to your post at my talkpage, here. I would like an explanation for that post, which came of the blue.
Best wishes,
NoeticaTea? 05:51, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

School, work, and the real world have eaten up all of my time. I will answer your question tomorrow evening. --Guerillero | My Talk 04:13, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 October 2012

Your handling of MoS tensions

Tom, can you make some clarifications of the DS procedural "warning" to Noetica, which appear to single him out for permanent fear of action by any admin at guideline pages, while ignoring the behaviour of a number of other editors: do I need to name them?

You may be interested in a post I've left on Slim Virgin's talk page concerning this matter. There I suggest that you issue procedural warnings to a host of editors at MoS talk, including me, or withdraw or time-limit what appears to be your hasty and ill-considered action against one person.

WP:DS item 4 does say that "Warnings should be clear and unambiguous, [and] identify misconduct and advise how the editor may mend their ways", which is very nicely constructive; but perhaps this is not an area in which we have much precedent, or you were pressed for time?

I'm a bit confused about your statement that you were "entertaining the idea of topic banning you from the area based on the diffs presented on ANI". My thread at Slim's page raises some issues about that, indirectly. The DS rules say, "Discretionary sanctions should be used with caution where the community is already dealing with the specific issue through dispute resolution processes."

I was also confused by your statement "consider this in a way your official warning". (My italics) Did you actually mean this to be a pre-warning, as it were? To me, that would be a satisfactory outcome, given the circumstances. I look forward to hearing your views on the matter.


Tony (talk) 11:17, 17 October 2012 (UTC) (PS On my revisit to this post, I realised the struck-out bit is not a correct interpretation; could you confirm that, too? Thanks. Tony (talk) 13:23, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Tony, I am sorry about the wait. This is a busy time for me in real life. You are correct. The warning was only informal and should not be taken as the template type warning that is needed to fulfill WP:DS. It was the warning before the warning. I think he needs totake a step back from the MOS before he starts to hit sanctions. I was unwilling to sanction noetica, like many were calling for on ANI, because it would be one sided and that it would have been based on subjective "He has been disruptive before" evidence that I am 90% sure predate DS. The community-at-large seems to have resolved this issue and seems to like the 1RR limit I put on WP:MOS, so individual DS would go against the spirit of the guideline at this time. I firmly believe that the two threads at WP:AE should be closed down until we can see if the limits on edit warring make a change in the way people react on the page. --Guerillero | My Talk 15:37, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, Guerillero: I'm pleased to know that this is matter is calming and not escalating. Tony (talk) 23:39, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

AN/I Note

More nonsense; Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#JHunterJ. Can you expand the scope of the 1RR to include hats, collapse tags and other asundry refactoring to devalue other's comments. (But not indent fixes and the like)? Nobody Ent 16:00, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't feel comfortable doing this if there isn't some support for this. (I also think that the talk page guidelines already cover this.) --Guerillero | My Talk 05:09, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I can see how it'd be a stretch of discretionary sanctions. Thanks. Nobody Ent 01:58, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments from Neotarf

I note that Noetica has not edited at all since discovering the origin of the request to have him muzzled. Since Noetica edits almost exclusively at MOS, any recommendation that he "take a step back from the MOS" is a recommendation that he essentially leave the Project. It could also be interpreted as a recommendation that he not take his concerns about the recent RfC to ArbCom as he has recently stated his intention to do; and it might also make it dangerous for him to participate in any action that someone else would initiate at ArbCom. That would certainly be a coup for those who wish to weaken the MOS. There is no one who has done as much for MOS as Noetica. I would hope you would revisit the recent RfC. If you then decide to take sides in something that is a content dispute, I would ask you not to use your status an admin to intimidate those who do not agree with your side with even so much as a "warning before the warning". Sorry not to be so polite as Tony, who has also done much for MOS, but I have been up all night writing a response to those same partisans in the RfC that you are doing favors for, who have dragged me off to AE; the dawn is now breaking on my corner of the globe. --Neotarf (talk) 03:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

I have no stake or leaning in the MOS disputes nor do I count any of the parties as close friends. Tony is the editor I know the most from past work and I wouldn't claim that it makes me involved. --Guerillero | My Talk 04:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Singling out one editor after being lobbied by a high-profile Wikipedian on an obscure thread with no heading and a misleading edit summary, then no proper notification, no diffs, and certainly no attempt to hear both sides of an issue...that does not exactly look good. And would certainly have a chilling effect on MOS by giving one side of the dispute an unfair disadvantage. --Neotarf (talk) 05:16, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Your followup is much appreciated, thanks. --Neotarf (talk) 18:46, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Guerillero, thanks for replying at my talkpage. Please see my response to that. And note: I request that you monitor developments in that discussion there from now on without my having to notify you here.
Best wishes,
NoeticaTea? 03:09, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low Readership: Low to High Readership: High, while for quality the scale goes from Low Quality: Low to High Quality: High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs   Cleanup
Readership: Low Quality: Low Danilo Baltierra   Readership: High Quality: Low Leather subculture
Readership: Low Quality: Low Javier Tetes   Readership: High Quality: Low Dead week
Readership: Low Quality: Low Gustavo Badell (Uruguayan footballer)   Readership: High Quality: Low Hardline (subculture)
Readership: Medium Quality: Low Carlos Eduardo Gutiérrez   Merge
Readership: Low Quality: Low Guillermo Díaz Gastambide   Readership: High Quality: Medium List of search engines
Readership: High Quality: Low Kim Il-sung Square   Readership: High Quality: High Gangnam Style in popular culture
Readership: High Quality: Low Dogpile   Readership: High Quality: High Indie rock
Readership: Medium Quality: Low Sotirios Moutsanas   Add sources
Readership: Medium Quality: Low Gustavo Roverano   Readership: High Quality: Low World Tribunal on Iraq
Readership: High Quality: Low Sport coat   Readership: High Quality: Low Rubens Charles Maciel
Readership: High Quality: Low Texas Public Policy Foundation   Readership: High Quality: Medium Usability
Readership: High Quality: Low Cagoule   Wikify
Readership: High Quality: Low The Lacs   Readership: Medium Quality: Low Barette (sport)
Readership: High Quality: Low Pablo Pereira   Readership: High Quality: Low Youth of Today
Readership: High Quality: Low Hura crepitans   Readership: High Quality: Low Nicholas of Verdun
Readership: High Quality: Low Directory of Open Access Journals   Expand
Readership: Medium Quality: Low Darío Ferreira   Readership: High Quality: Low Red City Radio
Readership: Medium Quality: Low Philip L. Fradkin   Readership: High Quality: Low Víctor Rodríguez Andrade
Readership: Medium Quality: Low National Negro Opera Company   Readership: High Quality: Low Hazel Levesque

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:58, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Two things..

Hi Guerillero: Ottava Rima is still under the indefinite ban solely because they have shown themselves completely unable to work collaboratively with other editors, which he has shown on multiple Wikipedia projects (as well as the various mailing lists, criticism sites, etcetera. If they could show that they've modified their behavior to avoid these issues going forward, they'd be back. And if you note, I argued against an indefinite ban because as I noted, MF would never come "hat in hand" to request an appeal. I just want the behavior to change, that's all. SirFozzie (talk) 15:30, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Maybe there needs to be a third option. I have no idea what this could/should look like --Guerillero | My Talk 17:46, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to my life. SirFozzie (talk) 20:05, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

"Cherry-picking AfDs"

Hi Guerillero. Regarding this comment you made, I want to be clear that I wasn't "cherry-picking AfDs". I wasn't aware of the 2009 AfD when I started this AfD 2 weeks ago. Had I been aware of the 2009 AfD, I would simply have {{Db-g4}}'d the new article straight away. However, the old AfD didn't come up when I was creating the new AfD, due the capitalization difference in the article title ("in" vs. "In"), so I started a new AfD without being aware that it had been discussed before. Anyway, since the new AfD closed as no consensus, I believe it does not override the original AfD which closed as delete, hence my invocation of G4 now. I have contested the "no consensus" closure at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2012 October 22#Tune In, Tokyo.... Since you are an admin, and have rejected the speedy and commented at the related merger proposal, you may be interested in commenting at the DRV. --IllaZilla (talk) 04:12, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 October 2012

Ears burning?

I've mentioned you here. Bishonen | talk 13:41, 27 October 2012 (UTC).

Thanks for the heads up --Guerillero | My Talk 15:21, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 October 2012

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Guerillero/Archives/2012/October&oldid=1085951590"