Jump to content

User talk:HJ Mitchell/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11→Archive 15

Re: G11

Hi, you commented on my talk page that I had incorrectly tagged an article as G11 (Unambiguous advertising or promotion), but you did not specify which article it was. Could you enlighten me?

Also, on a related note I tagged Cobblestone Farm and Museum with a cleanup tag {{advert}}. Do you think this was justified or am I being overly strict with articles that could be 'promotional' of their subjects?

I am quite new to new page patrolling, and have been trying to deal with the backlog of unpatrolled new pages so please don't bite me too hard! Thanks. CosmicJake (talk) 21:19, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

No worries :). I was where you are not too long ago. I was cleaning out the spam category and the 2 articles that prompted me to leave you a note were this tagging of Oyster Marine and this tagging of BOC insurance company. Neither article had a particularly promotional tone so far as I could see. The {{advert}} tagging you asked about didn't seem invalid to me, but i's worth explaining what you think need improving on the talk page. Anyway, new page patrol is a thankless, endless task but it's invaluable to keeping the crap out of Wikipedia- we just need to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. We all make mistakes, though- for example, my own CSD tagging before I was an admin was far from perfect, and that's why I only really deal with attack pages, spam and copyright violations. :) Let me know if you need any more help and keep up the good work. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:03, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, that's helpful. There's a common theme in the Oyster Marine and the Cobblestone Farm and Museum articles which gave me the impression of promotion of their subjects and that is the word 'pioneer'. With the BOC insurance company I accept it was rather stretching the definition to tag it as spam, however I considered the article to be of such poor quality that "Article would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic" seemed apt! CosmicJake (talk) 22:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, HJ Mitchell. You have new messages at Wintonian's talk page.
Message added 22:39, 31 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wintonian (talk) 22:39, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Gaza flotilla clash

Hi HJ Mitchell, I don't think the article needs to be fully protected. Actually, there is not much edit warring going on. A lot of edits, clearly from editors with somewhat different preferences, but mostly covering different aspects and parts of the article. When there is some back and forth, often parts of edits that are more consensual are being kept, thus resulting in progress even where the editing process may be a bit more controversial as we might wish it to be. Regards,  Cs32en Talk to me  00:15, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Fully protecting an article that is top of ITN and removing it from ITN is not done. Could you please revert your actions on Gaza flotilla clash? I'm afraid it's going to have to go to WP:AN/I otherwise. Please don't think for a moment that I'm not assuming good faith in your actions - it's just that your decision is not the way we do things. And the decision to remove the #1 news story on every news website in the world is simply not credible. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Go to ANI. It came in at RfPP and editors have been going back and forth all day. I haven't the time or the patience to deal with this mess, so by all means, take it there to get the perspectives of other admins, who may freely reverse my protection without further consultation with me. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:22, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
OK, fair enough. Sorry about that but it needs to be done - nothing personal. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Of course not. I'll defer to whatever course of action is deemed necessary there. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:26, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
FYI, I raised it at WP:AN/I#Gaza flotilla clash protected and removed from In The News. I've seen worse, I have to say (and bear in mind I was an admin for 6.5 years). It's always going to be the case that a huge controversial news story is going to attract a lot of edits, some of which may be a little rough - more so than we would tolerate for an established article. However, I always found that the way to deal with that was to occasionally knock heads together if some editors were cutting up too rough. Full protection for a developing news story is, though, really only a last resort if an article has got completely out of hand. I'm not saying that might not be necessary but from my experience what we're seeing now (or up to now) is really not much worse than usual. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up, very courteous of you, but I won't be participating there. I actioned a request at RfPP and as far as I'm concerned, that's as involved as I'm going to get! I spend a lot of my time at ITN- I'm in the 20 odd most prolific contributors to WP:ITN/C and T:ITN so it's not a case of wading in where I don't know what I'm doing- and I know the troubles faced by articles on current events but anyway, I've no interest in getting involved in this particular mess- one of the other 1800 odd admins can sort it out! I've got more than enough on my plate right now. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:39, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Please revert your removal of this story immediately. Just because the story is controversial does not mean that it should not be covered on WP:ITN. Physchim62 (talk) 00:53, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

You've been contributing to ITN longer than I have so you know as well as I do that the quality of the article has as much to do with the decision to post as the significance of the story. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
I was highly surprised when I came to the article after reading a New York Times story. and found it full protected. The article received over 61,000 views yesterday. I think that such a high figure is indicative of the fact that we should try to keep the article open for editing as long as possible. Would you consider dropping the protection to semi-protection and enforce a 1RR instead? NW (Talk) 01:05, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
You're more than welcome to do so if you want to enforce a 1RR, Nuke, but I've no further interest in the matter and I don't have the time that would be required to enforce it properly. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:14, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough, but ITN is not your play-thing (or mine) – nor is your admin bit. Please restore the top story in the world media, which had wide support on WP:ITN/C, to the active template. Physchim62 (talk) 01:22, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks HJ Mitchell.  Protection lowered to semi and 1RR implemented. I'll leave the ITN matter to those who frequent it more often. NW (Talk) 01:30, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome. Good luck with it. Hopefully that'll persuade editors to resolve their differences civilly. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:31, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
@Physchim et al. Since there's a 1RR in force and a number of editors I respect disagree with me: [1] HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:33, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Obviously, I'm late to the party, but I must point out that your characterization of what has been going on at the article is way off base. I, like I'm sure others, have been watching the article intensely over the past day (if not for signs of trouble, for information about the event), and I have to say that as far as the article is concerned, things have gone relatively well. Yes, there is some disagreement -- and that is expected with news of this nature and news covered so widely -- but there have been very few people who I would say are genuinely edit-warring (in fact, I could only find one). Instead, there's been a lot of jostling to find the best way to characterize the event in a manner that, if not solely judged by the number of major changes in a period of time, has been healthy. I won't comment on the ITN removal -- everyone else above has said what needed to be said -- but I thought it was important to clarify the state of the article. I'm afraid too often people will assume that because an article is about Israel and Palestine, it must be in tatters. -- tariqabjotu 02:49, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

List of FM

Did I do something wrong? kcylsnavS{screechharrass} 00:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't follow. Could you be more specific? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:24, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
The recent protection applied to List of Freemasons. kcylsnavS{screechharrass} 00:29, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
It's only semi protection so you should be able to edit through it as normal. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:31, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Well, my main concern was whether something I was doing was improper. kcylsnavS{screechharrass} 00:37, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
?? kcylsnavS{screechharrass} 10:37, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, kcylsnavS, I wasn't involved (but I watchlist several talk pages, including HJ Mitchell's). Protection of the article was requested due to "edit warring by IPs" (see here). So I'd assume it was nothing to do with you or your behaviour. I would recommend that you take this opportunity to try and discuss the IP's changes with them - it may prevent further edit-warring from them once the article is un-protected. In the meantime, as HJ Mitchell notes above, you're free to edit the article. TFOWRis this too long? 10:52, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I didn't see any edit warring by the IP's. By that I mean I didn't see IP's fighting with each other; just adding list items. As far as I could tell, all the adds could have been valid, but without sources there's no way to tell, which is why I was undoing them, along with a note as to why. Thanks for the response; have a good day. kcylsnavS{screechharrass} 11:06, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Richard Arthur Norton

Hi, I just undid this edit of yours, as it appeared to be an error. The effect of your edit was to remove several notices from the page advising the user of AfDs that they had an interest in as the creator of the relevant page. If this was not an error, my apologies, and feel free to repeat the edit with an appropriate edit summary explaining the change. Thanks. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:43, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

They were posted by an editor out to cause disruption and at least one of the AfDs was closed as seedy keep, but there's no harm in letting RAN decide what to do with them :). Thanks for the note. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:45, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I hadn't seen the speedy keep yet - it was SO speedy! - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:48, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Pro-death

I wasn't aware that there was such an entry, but there's a slight problem here: You shouldn't automatically route it to the abortion debate page. It could just as easily route to a discussion of capital punishment or warfare. To have it direct only to the abortion page amounts to POV-pushing or pointiness, or something that just doesn't seem right. If I were in your shoes, I would either delete it altogether or make it a disambig page to those various topics. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and asked for a reduction to semi-protection or to delete and "salt" it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
I deleted it and salted it. If I must provide a rationale, consider it an invocation of IAR (my first as an admin!). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Louise Bourgeois

She is waiting for you. ;) --candle•wicke 18:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do, but i have to say that 30ft spider is somewhat off-putting! ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I surrender!

OK, I accept! With a due sense of dread and apprehension, but I accept, nonetheless. TFOWRidle vapourings of a mind diseased 19:10, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

talkback

Hello, HJ Mitchell. You have new messages at Soap's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Soap— 00:08, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Avril Lavigne

I have expanded the article, and I believe it is now ready for your review. Please read my caveat on the GA review page (someone transcluded it back onto the talk page) before proceeding, just so you know that I'm aware of the minor tweaks that need to be made. I also hope you learn a thing or two about Avril! – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 05:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I'll take a look later today :). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Wilhelm.ogg

This has come up at the help desk (diff). You deleted the file because it lacked licensing information, but there is evidence that the sound is in the public domain. Copyright is not my strong point. What's the next step? -- John of Reading (talk) 15:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I've restored it for now, but it's tagged as non-free and there's no source provided so the uploader will need to fix that or decide what to do with ASAP. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Cascade-protecting Template:In the news

Hello! What purpose do you have in mind? Note that locally uploaded images already fall under the cascade-protection of Main Page and Wikipedia:Main Page/Tomorrow. Also note that this change prevents non-administrators from editing Template:In the news/doc. —David Levy 00:08, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I thought it might affect the cascade protection quicker on the off chance that someone added an unprotected image, but if it's a problem, by all means revert. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
It's a minor issue outweighed by the theoretical benefit you describe. Unless and until someone technically knowledgeable states that no such benefit exists (or someone notices a downside of greater significance), I support the change. Thanks! —David Levy 00:27, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. Well I've no issue with it being reverted if it causes any problems, though I can't imagine any pressing need to edit the /doc that couldn't wait for an {{editprotected}} request to be granted. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:30, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Agreed. —David Levy 01:00, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
I think that T:ITN shouldn't be cascade-protected because it would be redundant with the Main Page's cascade-protection, but there are real benefits. If an image gets added to T:ITN (a local image, ie hosted on enwiki), it will take a while (from instantaneous to hours) for the Main Page's cascade-protection to take effect. However, if T:ITN is also cascade-protected, the new image will be covered by T:ITN's cascading protection as soon as an admin saves the page. (more detail: Mediawiki recalculates which images/files/pages should be cascade protected every time the cascade-protected page (the original one, like the Main Page, not transcluded pages like T:DYK) is saved. Even a null edit (hitting "edit" on the Main Page and scrolling down and clicking save, for example) will trigger the recalculation (and no, purging does not trigger it). If admins don't use this trick (few know about it), cascading protection will kick in at some time in the future depending on the server load.) Shubinator (talk) 04:46, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Template:Lang

Please see the editprotected request I've made on the talk page. The current change that you made doesn't close the category markup properly and hence breaks every template that uses this. The fix is to add the missing closing brackets. Thanks for your attention. — Gavia immer (talk) 01:50, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I reverted myself as soon as I saw your request. Fancy telling me how to do it properly? I might even learn something! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:56, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for deleting the userpages I marked. I'm doing some spring cleaning, and I appreciate your assistance. --- Dralwik|Have a Chat 01:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries. If you have any more, you could link them from a separate subpage and I can zap them in two clicks with Twinkle. Just leave a note here. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:54, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Joel Wallen

Man, why can't I write a page for a close friend? Mrhalohunter24 (talk) 01:55, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

You can, but unfortunately not on Wikipedia because we're not a memorial site. This page contains some links to other places that might be more suitable. Sorry, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:59, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks anyway. Hey, how do i upload a picture becuase i would have had one. Mrhalohunter24 (talk) 02:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

If you use the default skin, there's a drop down menu on the far left (under the Wikipedia logo) called "toolbox" that has an "upload file" button. Or you can just go straight to WP:upload. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:08, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Workout delayed reimbursement of advances

This close seems improper. Please review WP:DGFA and reconsider. Colonel Warden (talk) 06:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

If you think it's improper, take it to WP:DRV. That's what it's there for. Regards, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Goldstone attempts at compromise

Since the expiration of my block for violation 1R, I have refrained from making any edits to the Goldstone article. I have been vocal on the Talk page advocating compromise and possible solutions. Offending sources were removed and phrasing altered. The following four diffs represent my attempts in this endeavour.
Thus far, my efforts have been met with a brick wall from the die-hards. If this uncompromising stance continues, I'll reinsert the edit with altered phrasing and of course, without the "weak" sources. It's not something I want to do but I think some editors view this (and the entire IP arena) as a zero sum game.--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 23:29, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Before you do anything, read up on the policies to make sure your arse is covered and you're not violating any of them. I suggest you read WP:BLP from to to bottom. It's not that long and you might find some useful information in there. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:35, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Not to butt in, but there's no consensus to re-add the disputed information; at present there are no sources that are more or less weak, since the problem remains that all of them rely on Yediot's claims, and make no independent attempt to either verify or refute them. If you try to insert anything approaching these claims, I can assure you that you'll have left yourself exposed to accusations that you have violated the BLP policy. — e. ripley\talk 00:01, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Read it and understand it. I'll be careful. thanks--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 15:14, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

G6 Images

I'd been using G6 as i've been told NOT to use F2, given that the wording of the CSD for F2 doesn't currently cover local pages for Commons images..

Do you think the issue of 'local' page for Commons image needs it own CSD? If created it would solve this issue straightforwardly. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:19, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

The trouble with {{db-g6}} is that it doesn't, at the minute, categorise anywhere other than CAT:SD which means I have to click each one and delete it, whereas the F2 category is usually empty, so I can just empty it in a few clicks with Twinkle. I might raise it at WT:CSD. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:27, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Template:Wikipedialang

Why did you self-revert? Was there an issue? —David Levy 16:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, when I looked at it on the Main Page, it buggered it up. I think there's a noninclude tag or something missing somewhere, but my template skill is minimal at best! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:28, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stoneriver

I have some questions about this about your closure of this AfD. Please note that I don't have a problem with the result, I'm really just curious.

As far as your closure of keep instead of no consensus, I understand that many editors didn't return to the conversation, but can you assume their opinion has changed or should be discounted and not assume the same about those who were inclined to keep? It seems a one-sided adjustment. Also, for a straw poll there's 5.5 deletes and 3 keeps, and while they are !votes, isn't the quantity necessarily at least some indication of community consensus? Looking at the arguments at least Stifle and I looked at later additions of references and AlphaQuadrant's keep didn't even address notability, which (discounting earlier deletes and AQ's cmt) leaves 2 on one side and 2 on the other (including 1 SPA). Lastly, I thought your opinion as a closer should only be to judge the strength of the arguments, not whether or not the coverage was significant or not.

I'm sorry if I'm rambling and I really don't mean this to sound like an attack of any kind, but it just seems odd to me given how I thought the process worked. VernoWhitney (talk) 17:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I've come here to express asking the same question. Closing as keep seems to be make a lot of assumptions about what editors are thinking. I explicitly noted that I had not changed my stance with the addition of earlier material. I did not think it necessary to weigh in with a "me too" comment after VernoWhitney's assessment of the subsequent source presentation as it's quite evident that I was following the discussion and not simply !voting. Stifle's opinion was added after the conclusion of the last sourcing discussion, so it would seem that there are at least 3 editors that hold a delete opinion because the sourcing remained inadequate. -- Whpq (talk) 17:49, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm still new to this AfD-closing milarky! I suppose no consensus would have better, but the result is the same, so there's not much point changing it, but your comments are noted for future reference. I must say, the discussion was hardly the best, but I supppose it was doomed once the SPAs started showing up. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:41, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
    • Well, the outcome from a "no consensus" and a "keep" both result in an article remaining, but they aren't the same. A "keep" is a much stronger statement than a "no consensus" and is a stronger barrier to a subsequent nomination for deletion. For example, I'm accused of murder. The police investigate and find exculpatory evidence that clears me and thus no charges are laid. Compare with: the police investigate and find some circumstantial evidence but nothing solid enough thus no charges are laid. Same outcome, but they aren't the same thing. Would you consider amending to a "no consensus"? Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 19:17, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Question

Hi, as someone whose opinion I respect and who is an uninvolved person, can you tell me (discreetly or sternly - whichever you believe is required) if I'm being too harsh here in raising these questions or the way in which I'm going about it? I appear to have caused offence and don't want to cause any more. --candle•wicke 17:46, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, marking it minor and not using an edit summary is odd, but not (yet!) the 8th deadly sin (though make me king for a day...!) but he does kind of have a point- I wouldn't use the term "spam" but do we really need to list all those ambassadors? It's just politics and will probably have had no impact in a month's time. I'd be inclined to leave it be- I've seen edit wars over much pettier things, but it's not that important- you could just work in a link to the international reaction section or combine it with (X number of countries) recall their ambassadors... Hope that helps :). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:15, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes. No intention to edit war. Thanks for your kind words. :) --candle•wicke 21:48, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

What about Agatha?

Is there a reason when balancing out the Main Page you skipped over re-adding Tropical Storm Agatha? Do you not remember removing it just an hour earlier? -- tariqabjotu 01:04, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Evidently not, no! Ha! Temporary amnesia? :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

RfPP

Hey, if you get something crazy like that in future, drop a note on my talk page as well- if I'm on, it'll be done instantly and the worst case scenario is I don't see it in time and someone else will probably protect it. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:22, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

OK, only if I see you are online and it's really necessary. TbhotchTalk C. 01:25, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Works for me. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:27, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Wooden

Thanks for your help. BTW, that kitty is freakin' me out and I'm a bear! ----moreno oso (talk) 01:36, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries. I'm keeping a close eye on it. As for the kitty, I don;t like cats, but that pic makes me laugh (yes, even admins have a sense of humour. sometimes!)! ;)HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:38, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
It doesn't look good for him. Supposedly he hasn't eaten in days. The trucks are thick around the hospital but he's a tough bird. It would nice to see him hit a 100. Gosh that kitty is scaring me again. Aargh! ----moreno oso (talk) 01:43, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Your Signature

Hi HJ Mitchell, Just wanted know how you created your signature with some nice colors, font etc. Wanted to learn and also wanted to change my signature. KuwarOnline (talk) 09:27, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Talk page stalker here, but since I recently wondered the same thing, I thought I would give you a helping hand to pass time before HJ can possibly give a more precise answer. I learnt from this tutorial: User:Smurrayinchester/Tutorial/Signature. I did also use alot of trial and error however. I'll also give a rough guide to the layout you should put in the box in your preferences:
'''[[User:Taelus|<span style="color:#007FAA">Taelus</span>]]''' ([[User talk:Taelus|<span style="color:#AA22CC">'''Talk'''</span>]])
It is very similar to what the default signature is, except with added font tags to allow colour change. If your looking for colours, and their hexidecimal codes, check out List of colours. It has a huge list, and shows the codes for each one. Hope this helps, I don't know any of the more complex tricks though! --Taelus (Talk) 12:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Another talk page stalker here... Unicode is a useful trick, too: I've (temporarily) used it in my signature for the talk page link:
[[User:TFOWR|<b style="color:#000">TFOWR</b>]]<sup>[[User talk:TFOWR|<span style="color:#f00">ɹʍoʄʇ</span>]]</sup>
Cheers, TFOWRɹʍoʄʇ 12:32, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
hey thanks bro...the link User:Smurrayinchester/Tutorial/Signature was really helpful and explanation above, thanks again KuwarOnline (talk) 14:43, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
These talk page stalkers are handy! It took me a lot longer to figure out how to do it! In case you;re wondering, the code for mine is [[User:HJ Mitchell|<span style="color:Teal; font-family:Tahoma">'''HJ Mitchell'''</span>]] | [[User talk:HJ Mitchell|<span style="color:Navy; font-family:Times New Roman">Penny for your thoughts? </span>]]. Have fun with your fancy new sig! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for reply and code KuwarOnline (talk) 15:32, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

2010 FIFA World Cup squads

Hi HJ Mitchell, I noticed that you were the admin who initially semi-protected this page and now I'm asking you to do it again. Ever since protection ended the page has been bombarded with misinformation from IP addresses and new, inexperienced users. It really could use semi-protection again, at least until the tournament ends on July 11. It's becoming a real hassle having to undo all the wrong information so it would be much appreciated, thanks. --Spartan008 (talk) 12:03, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Let me have a look. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

You've got mail...

...sorry, this is becoming a habit ;-) TFOWRidle vapourings 12:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll check it in a mo! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
HJ, hope you don't mind but I made the necessary administrivial edits to make the nomination live. (Not to steal your credit, just to get the ball rolling.) -- llywrch (talk) 16:20, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Excellent! Here we go! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:23, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

John Wooden

Could you take a look at my edit request at Talk:John Wooden? Thanks. Connormah (talk | contribs) 21:51, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Done :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:51, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Actually, according to the article, he's been in hospital since May 27 (or was it 26?). Could you update that to reflect that, and cite the article? Thanks. Connormah (talk | contribs) 23:46, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm thinking of lowering the protection, now that it's calmed down a bit. What do you think? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Sure, I guess it's worth giving it a try. Maybe semi-protection for the next week? Connormah (talk | contribs) 23:55, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
I've reduced it to semi for the original duration. I can always extend it or put it back up to full protection if need be, but let's how that goes. Btw, any chance I could tempt you into a second RfA? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:05, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm not entirely sure at this point. I have exams coming up, so I wouldn't be able to pay too much attention to the questions and all. Maybe this summer, but thanks. Connormah (talk | contribs) 00:14, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough, I'll just continue stalking you then! ;) Seriously though, any time you change your mind, I'd be more than happy to nominate you. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:16, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Sounds good. The main reason for my RfA sinking last time was my knowledge of the CSD criteria, but I think I have at least some decent knowledge of it (though I really won't touch into CSD). My main use for the tools would probably be vandal fighting, and possibly some RFPP. I'm still not entirely sure, I've had a couple rejected RFPP reports, mainly due toi lack of recent activity (which I understand the reasoning behind, but it may sink an RfA) Connormah (talk | contribs) 00:28, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
We're all human. I don't generally work in CSD and I avoid A7 like the plague! I deal with the odd bit of spam and attack pages, other than that I stick to G6 and G7/U1. I think the vast majority of your RfPP are accurate and it can be pretty subjective so I doubt a few declined requests would sink an RfA as long as you know the protection policy. There's always a need for more admins at AIV (and RfPP for that matter). I reckon you'd have a pretty good chance and it's been just over 4 months since your last one... HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:14, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
That sounds good. This time, hopefully I'll have more time to respond thoroughly to the questions (assuming I get pounded by them), and not get tripped up. I'm also concerned that I may get opposed for lack of content creation. I'll leave a note here when I feel I'm ready. Thanks again. Connormah (talk | contribs) 01:49, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
All right then, I'll look forward to it. :) And there's a simple way to solve that- it's not too difficult to write a reasonable article and get it on DYK, at least then you'd have something to point at and you'd probably enjoy it- never hurts to broaden your horizons. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:02, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Looks like you have this all sorted out. As HJ says, DYK's aren't that much work, just follow the rules and you'll be fine. Courcelles (talk) 02:19, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

ITN

I jsut undid your edit to T:ITN, as the words you changed made little sense in light of the entire blurb- you left it reading; "Naoto Kan (pictured) becomes Prime Minister of Japan by the Diet, following the resignation of Yukio Hatoyama.". If that's the wording you want, "by the Diet" needs to go. Courcelles (talk) 23:09, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Oops! That's embarrassing! Thanks for the heads up! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

You are appreciated

If I could find the template for the "being the only admin we ever see at RPP" barnstar, I'd give you one. (Barnstar that is). DuncanHill (talk) 01:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Well thank you! It's nice to be appreciated! It would be even nicer to have more admins at RPP, though! :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I can't provide you with more admins (for some unaccountable reason I don't have the ability to create them), you'll have to make do with this -
The Admin's Barnstar
for tireless and often single-handed work at RPP DuncanHill (talk) 01:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you! Like I say, nice to be appreciated ;). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:41, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Bling, bling!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For doing an outstanding job with your mop. Keep it up! ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐) 03:57, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Well thank you very much, NSD! It's always good to hear from you, especially when you come bearing gifts! ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:52, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Template semi-protection

Good morning. I noticed that you recently semi-protected a number of nav box templates including Template:FOSS and Template:Linux even though neither has a history of vandalism. I started a discussion on both at Template_talk:FOSS#Semi-protection and Template_talk:Linux#Semi-protection respectively and I was wondering if you could add a few words as to why you believe this step was needed? - Ahunt (talk) 12:11, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. Generally "highly visible" templates are either semi or full protected even when there's no history of vandalism (I spend several hours some days running round dealing with requested edits to fully protected templates!) but the phrase "high visibility" is rather ambiguous. There was a request earlier this morning at WP:RPP for a bunch of templates to be semi protected (I copied the list into sandbox so I could batch protect them if you want to see the rest) so I obliged. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply on that. As an established editor it doesn't affect my own ability to edit those templates, but I am just concerned that when we protect templates that don't have a history of problems that we are compromising the open editing ability that characterizes Wikipedia. I am always cognizant that my own first IP edits were to fix spelling mistakes in articles I was reading as a casual user. That lead me to realize how easy it was to contribute, so I opened an account and 34,000 edits later I am still here. I am not at all opposed to protecting pages where there is a history of vandalism, I am just concerned that if too many pages are protected it may discourage new editors from getting involved in Wikipedia. - Ahunt (talk) 12:34, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I see your point, but I think it's important to differentiate between articles and templates, of which the latter often employs intricate syntax and markup and to which changes can affect the appearance of several hundred (or in some cases thousands or even millions in one or two cases) of articles and pages. You might also like to contact User:Koolabsol, who requested the protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:04, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
That does make sense vis-a-vis articles versus templates. Thanks for addressing the issue. - Ahunt (talk) 13:24, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Bradford Murders.

Just to say I'm extremely pleased that this article has been renamed/protected ahead of the court hearing. Worse case scenario was one of the new IPs being someone connected with the trial. Whilst I have experience of working with journalists on contentious/potentially libellous material, is it possible to get some Wiki guidelines for UK bios affected by subjudice so that these could be quoted in future?

Regards JRPG (talk) 12:44, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't think we have a specific policy- probably because the WP servers are in the States- but the two most important policies in the area would be WP:NPOV and WP:BLP. Also, the article is only move protected- it can be edited by anyone, but it can only be moved by an admin (I'll be happy to oblige if there's a consensus on the talk page)- that's just to "enforce" the AfD close in case anyone were tempted to try and get round it. If issues arise, then please do let me know and I'll take swift action given the... sensitive issues involved. Hope that helps, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:18, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Khojaly Massacre

The protection of the page on the version advocated by some does not accord to the requested consensus by the same protection. Neither does it encourage those users to be more constructive. The request for edit was not even requesting the deletion of the claim. It was a request to input that the issue is being discussed. What were the bases for rejection considering this? Aregakn (talk) 04:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I declined it because {{editprotected}} is only for uncontroversial requests or those that have consensus because bold, revert, discuss is a lot more difficult when only admins can edit the page. The protection expires tomorrow anyway, so you can make the edit yourself. Sorry, 16:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Understood. But I thought marking that the sentence (for which the edit-wars started and the page was protected) is disputed and link it to the discussion is an uncontraversial change, because it just projected the reality :). Regards, Aregakn (talk) 12:41, 2 June 2010 (UTC) Aregakn (talk) 12:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Pst... can you keep an eye on the article? it is again becoming a battle-ground :(. Aregakn (talk) 21:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
I'll add it to my watchlist. Anything in particular I should be looking for or just the usual edit warring? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:12, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
The edit warring in general. There's an editor that doesn't want to edit after discussions and compromise and he jumped into it just at once after the block on the article was lifted. He did the same thing on Karabakh Khanate Article. I remember the WP:TE speaks of this type of behavior. There's also a big Arbitration case against a large group of editors conducting their actions on Wikipedia and harassing people in real life now taking place in Ru.WP ru:Википедия:Заявки на арбитраж/Азербайджанский список рассылки where the editors involved in these and other articles in En.WP are participating. Don't know if it's relevant. Aregakn (talk) 13:34, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, well if anybody specifically is edit warring or generally causing trouble or making a nuisance of themselves on en.wiki, I might be able to do something, but unfortunately what happens on ru.wiki will have to be dealt with by the admins there. I'm keeping an eye on things there, though, don't worry. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:46, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes, they do have to deal with that themselves, but if the editors are conspiring and agreeing on every move (on en.wiki too) it should be brought up here too, right? Maybe I should file an Arbitration on en.wiki soon oo. Thanks for watching! Aregakn (talk) 19:53, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I did some poking around and it looks like it's already subject to discretionary sanctions from a previous arbitration case, so if there's anyone being particularly disruptive, I can take action as an uninvolved admin. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:55, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Grandmaster, Brandmeister and Parishan are the most active. But they have calmed down due to these activities now. I think they're busy with the case at the moment.

From their conversations it is obvious they have a connection to the Azeri media and press as well and they are putting recruiting announcements on them periodically calling for edit-warring in Wikipedia. As a result there's now this whole thing taking place. I have invited the attention of Admins to it on ANI once or twice.

So now we have a group of 26 members under arbitratin. And these are yet the ones that could have been spotted. Also it's a closed circle, in a way, and I wonder how many miscellaneous editors we have of this type. Aregakn (talk) 07:59, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Klemens Murańka

Hello HJ Mitchell, could you post a copy of a recently deleted article to my sub-page? Yes, there is always one lone voice out there never satisfied :-). The article Klemens Murańka was recently deleted through consensus at a AFD, as shown by the previous supplied link. I believe, in the near future, we will be able to bring this piece up to the standards required under notability guidelines. Thanks for your help. Regards. ShoesssS Talk 18:26, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Certainly, give me a moment. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:28, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
May I help you? KzKrann (talk) 22:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks appreciate the quick respone....and of course....all help is welcome....This is Wikipedia :-). ShoesssS Talk 02:02, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

IP Vandal

Thank you for blocking User:88.26.26.159 User:80.31.248.45 User:83.39.9.248 User:79.146.111.65 User:83.59.244.54. He is quite persistent. Can you do more please? Eg semi protect Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. Kittybrewster ☎ 14:08, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure that's such a great idea considering he's not causing that much disruption and there are constructive IP edits to that article (it's actually on my watchlist and I've not seen very much of this guy). I can give you rollback if you like to make reverting him easier, but for now I think we should go with revert, block, ignore. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:16, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I have rollback thank you. I don't know how to slap him with an "only warning" sticker. Whenever I see your name I think RJ Mitchell of Spitfire fame. Kittybrewster ☎ 14:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Not according to my checks (yes, I stalk everyone who posts here!). You have autoreviewer, but not rollback. I can rectify that in three clicks if you want. As to "only warnings", if he's just IP hopping, there's probably not much point. If he get really annoying, I'll plat whack-a-mole with a series of short blocks. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:33, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Oh. Then yes please. Kittybrewster ☎ 14:37, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Done. Just remember, vandalism only, no edit warring, etc etc. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:39, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

IRC

Please pop in #wikinews. Need to talk with you. --Diego Grez let's talk 16:15, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Akkadian Empire

Thank you for your assistance on this.Ploversegg (talk) 16:49, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

File:DF-ST-98-00046 cropped.JPEG

Please be more careful when deleting image files featured (or will be featured) on Main Page. This cropped image has been uploaded to English Wikipedia only, so you shouldn't use the {{C-uploaded}} tag, nor should you delete it, since it is likely to be used for OTD next year as well. --BorgQueen (talk) 16:56, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, but surely it makes more sense to restore it next year if it's used. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:05, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Because? It doesn't do any harm to leave it without deleting it, but it certainly does harm if we forget to restore it next year. --BorgQueen (talk) 17:15, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Sesame Street

Sorry about that. Just another *facepalm* moment. Perhaps I should get a bit more sleep. :)Connormah (talk | contribs) 17:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries! Looks like there is vandalism there but not recently enough for protection to do much good. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I'll keep an eye on it. Connormah (talk | contribs) 17:37, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

AL GA

Hi HJ, just checking in. Was there something else that needed to be done that I missed before you go over the article for GA review? Since last I wrote you, the overlinks were removed and most of the unreliable sources were replaced. There's only one {{fv}} tag left, and I honestly can't find any source for it (Canon Singapore). I've asked for help on the talk page, but little to no response. So we can either leave it or remove it, let me know what you think. Or maybe it won't affect the GA at all. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 18:38, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll have a look in a bit. Obviously it would be nice if we could find a proper source, but if there isn't one available and the information attached to the tag isn't essential, I'd suggest removing it- I can't pass the GAN until it's resolved :(. Anyway, I'll be over there in a bit to take a look. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:52, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Oh! Had I known it would stall the GA, I would've removed the info. I'll do so now. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 22:42, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Okay, info was removed. Although I've no doubt it was added in good faith a long time ago, I spent quite a bit of time, several days ago, looking for a reference, including Google's news archives, and was not able to dig up any information that supported the phrase tagged {{fv}}, so it's now removed. I don't see any other tags, AL doesn't seem to have any hidden categories that make me nervous, several people have trimmed the lede down, and the article has actually remained stable for the most part in the last couple of days; so the article should be 100% ready for your review. Thanks! – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 22:51, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Excellent. I'll take my admin hat off and put my GA reviewer hat on :). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:57, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Template:When

Hi HJ Mitchell, would you mind having a look at Template talk:When? In my opinion the recent change doesn't make sense and breaks numerous existing uses of the template.

Regards, HaeB (talk) 19:02, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Replied at Template talk:When#Edit. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:10, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick reaction!
Regards, HaeB (talk) 19:14, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikinews - Turkey bans Google

i edited and developed the article regarding your comments. i hope you have time to re-check the article.

--78.162.177.220 (talk) 19:51, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Your opinion

Hello, HJ Mitchell. You have new messages at White Shadows's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Just asking for your honest POV on this. Thanks.--White Shadows you're breaking up 20:21, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you!

HJ Mitchell - Thank for your participation and support in my RfA.

I can honestly say that your comments and your trust in me are greatly appreciated.

Please let me know if you ever have any suggestions for me as an editor, or comments based on my admin actions.

Thank you!  7  23:10, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

support

The last option that you mentioned in the RFC lacks your support/oppose. Although I AGF, it appears to be a joke. Perhaps you could add your support to it? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 23:11, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Mail?

Thanks for the user block re Karel Capek and the unblock at The Sydney Morning Herald. Thought you may have been going for an early night 'today' (but you're back!). I have had a late night myself. Did you get my mail? Cuppa?

220.101.28.25 (talk) Contribs 00:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, mail. I haven't seen it- another reason you should get an account- then you can email me via WP's system (and I can confirm you and generally make editing so much easier for you)! I'll check all my various email addresses in case it got lost somewhere! As to the SMH, you're welcome. It had been protected for a while, so I thought unprotection was worth a try. I'm always on around this time- 00:00UTC is switchover time on the Main Page so someone has to check that the TFA is move protected, check the balance of the columns, make sure all the images are protected and have their licensing info! It's not that easy being an admin! Thanks for the cuppa, though (you got anything stronger...?) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:51, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
How about this, some in the tea and It'll help you nod off! Which I need to do a little of even though it is morning! Ah Johhny Walker, I miss him! Have not seen him around recently! <sigh>. I'll have to check that e-mail address, it was the one you gave me in May when you wanted to vent something about the 'peanut gallery', I think it was. Or ping me on my one, I haven't used that exact one since December '09 but I mailed myself to check so apparently it is still working. --220.101 (talk) Contribs-01:13, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, getting closer! ;) In that case, I've probably got it, I'll have to more closely examine the contents of my inbox in the morning (it's currently full of "I tried to advertise on WP and you deleted it" type crap!). While I'm thinking about it, why don't you set up an account, use it for a little while and if you don't think much to it, you can just go back to being 220.101....? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:31, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

← Waddaya want, Black Label? or how about some: ? Account? Hmm,...thinking. --220.101 (talk) Contribs-02:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, I've got a 15 year old bottle of single malt knocking around somewhere, but it's a bit late to be cracking open expensive whisky now! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:16, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Yeh, Keep the cheap(er) stuff for 'sleep enhancement' . Tis' late so I'll let you go for now. By the way Jimbo certainly ain't God, cause I think God works for Jimbo! --220.101 (talk) Contribs-02:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Don't get me wrong, I've no problem with the guy, but the way some people talk about him, if you didn't know better, you'd think they were talking about some mystical deity. As far as I'm concerned, he's just another editor for all intents and purposes. Let me know what conclusion you come to about an account, but for now, I need sleep ;). Even admins need to sleep! Sometimes. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:32, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

An Award!


User:QwerpQwertus/The Puzzle Piece Award

You've been rewarded the Wiki Puzzle Piece Award - Puzzle Piece Six! ~ QwerpQwertus --------------------- Award One
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HJ_Mitchell/Archive_9&oldid=1176950315"