User talk:Kudpung/Archive Aug 2012

Article: Zumtobel Group

I have updated the references against page deletion proposal and also deleted promotional text.. please check and respond, else i will provide more citations or reomve whole parts of page. Kindly help me fix this page, I am newbie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SabihZ (talk • contribs) 22:21, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Article: Black The Ripper

The article Black The Ripper will be experiencing some additional information to it over the week. Please give it some time before you have a discussion on deleting it. Thank You - JoyRider —Preceding undated comment added 18:49, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, already done. A week at AfD should be enough to provide the necessary refs anyway. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:52, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your comment on User talk:Etalsnart2. Have a WikiCookie from me. -- KTC (talk) 08:33, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Abels Decker Kuhfuss & Partner

Dear Kudpung,

you have recently suggested that the article "Abels Decker Kuhfuss & Partner" about a law firm I have been trying to upload, to be deleted. I have changed the article every time to cohere with the suggestions by the wikipedia editors.

I have one question, what is the difference between the article I am trying to upload and this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linklaters has over 16 sources among which many appear to be reliable (and there are many more similar ones)

Am I missing something in my article or am I not understanding something?

Your advice would be appreciated.

GG123 (talk) 09:59, 2 August 2012 (UTC) GG123

It is quite possible that the firm of Abels Decker Kuhfuss & Partneris is notable. However, the sources provided do not comply with our own Wkipedia requirements for notability. They appear to be mainly directory listings and sources that otherwise do not contribute in scope, depth, and number for notability per our criteria for companies and organisations at WP:ORG. All sources must themselves conform to our requirements for reliability at WP:RS. I think you will find that the people at the Articles for Creation department would have already checked for possible sources before rejecting the article. There may well be similar articles on Wikipedia that have escaped our scrutiny - please see WP:OTHERSTUFF. That said, Linklaters is an old established company and has 16 sources among which a sufficient number appear to be reliable mentions in national newspapers and the established business press. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:13, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Dear Kudpung,

Thank you for your feedback!

GG123 (talk) 13:16, 2 August 2012 (UTC)GG123

RFB

Hi Kudpung! I was looking over your RFA criteria and based on all of your work on adminship, such as WP:RFAADVICE, I strongly suggest that you have an RFB soon. You are known on here as one of the most experienced admins in the area of RFAs. I think that the project would only gain from you becoming a bureaucrat. Your thoughts? Electric Catfish 00:34, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your confidence EC, however there are also several areas of Wikipedia where crats are expected to have in-depth knowledge but where I have never worked. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:54, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

As I found out the hard way, crats are expected to be very, very boring as well. That's not you. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:59, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, and that's where I would fail most ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:08, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I have no interest to become a crat. I deal with anti-vandalism and new page patrolling, although I do venture into other things here. You, on the other hand, would seem like a great candidate for the job. You have an excellent understanding of the RFA process, know the username policy well (renames), and I have no idea about your experience with bots (BRFA). I'd suggest you go for it! Electric Catfish 01:56, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I think you'll find that where I lack demonstrable experience is on closures of debates (of all kinds). It's not that I avoid doing it, but I am so busy in other areas and development projects, especially in looking for ways to improve NPP, that I never seem to get round to it. And Beeblebrox also makes a salient point: being a busy admin also accumulates a lot of enemies, and unfortunately, that's all part of the job. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:11, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Heads-Up

I passed your name on to a person who might enroll in our academy. Dan653 (talk) 22:07, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

NYU-Poly page

Hi,

I edited the NYU-Poly page yesterday and I see that you reverted it back. I read the talk page and I see people complaining about advertisement like language.

Extended content

I put the word "distinguished" because it existed in the page for many years before someone messed up the page. Besides Poly does have distinguished history in polymer chemistry(In 1946, Herman Mark established the Polymer Research Institute at Brooklyn Polytechnic, the first research facility in the United States dedicated to polymer research. Mark is also recognized as a pioneer in establishing curriculum and pedagogy for the field of polymer science.[6] In 1950, the POLY division of the American Chemical Society was formed, and has since grown to the second-largest division in this association with nearly 8,000 members. The American Chemical Society designated the Polymer Research Institute as a National Historic Chemical Landmark on September 3, 2003). In electrical engineering, Rober G. Brown (class of 1868) designed and developed the first telephone system in Paris, France. Among his other innovations were the "French Telephone," with its separate hand piece (carrying the speaker and microphone) which rested in a cradle, and the hiring of women to work as telephone operators. Weber Research Institute was internationally regarded as one of the foremost centers of research on microwave field theory in the world. According to a 1968 inquiry by the journal MicroWaves, microwave engineers named by a wide margin the Polytechnic Institute as the school from which they had received their training. Poly had been the site for earlier work in 1840 by Samuel F. B. Morse and Alfred Vail on a recording telegraph. Gordon Gould invented laser, Mark Cuadillo invented RFID, Dibner inventor first solderless electrical connector etc. Many IEEE presidents including the current president elect is a Poly alumnus. Poly produced two Nasa astronauts- Charles Camarda(NASA scientist and mission specialist on the Return to Flight voyage of the shuttle Discovery) and Paolo A. Nespoli(Italian astronaut, mission specialist at STS-120 Space Shuttle mission.) and one Chief Engineer of NASA Johnson Space Center-Jay Greene. Stevens Institute of Technology- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevens_Institute_of_Technology under their research section put Stevens partnered with Parsons The New School for Design and Milano School of International Affairs, Management and Urban Policy to design an affordable green home as part of the 2011 Solar Decathlon.[47] The team partnered with Habitat for Humanity of Washington, DC to provide the home to a low-income family in the Deanwood section of Washington at the conclusion of the competition.[47] The U.S. Department of Energy selected Stevens as one of 20 teams to compete in the 2013 Solar Decathlon to be held at Orange County Great Park in Irvine, California, the first time the competition has been held outside of Washington, D.C.[48] that is why I included Sae aero competition and shell eco competition in NYU-Poly's page Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute included in their alumni section all companies founded by their alumni http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rensselaer_Polytechnic_Institute#Notable_alumni In addition to NVIDIA, RPI graduates have also gone on to found or co-found major companies such as John Wiley and Sons, Texas Instruments, Fairchild Semiconductor, PSINet, MapInfo, Adelphia Communications, Level 3 Communications, Garmin, and Bugle Boy. Several RPI graduates have played a part in the U.S. space program: George Low (B.Eng. 1948, M.S. 1950) was manager of the Apollo 11 project and served as president of RPI, and astronauts John L. Swigert Jr., Richard Mastracchio, Gregory R. Wiseman, and space tourist Dennis Tito are alumni. ALSO INVENTIONS Many RPI graduates have made important inventions, including Allen B. DuMont ('24),[130] creator of the first commercial television; Keith D. Millis ('38),[131] inventor of ductile iron; Ted Hoff ('58),[132] father of the microprocessor; Raymond Tomlinson ('63),[133] often credited with the invention of e-mail; inventor of the digital camera Steven Sasson[134] and Curtis Priem ('82), designer of the first video graphics processor and co-founder of NVIDIA.

Thanks mangoeater1000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mangoeater1000 (talk • contribs) 02:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanations. In view of your recent editing history, and your knowing that the article is protected for the very reasons of preventing promotional language and the insertion of unsourced content, the total of your many edits was rolled back without further ado. Apart from keeping the article free of advertising, promotion, and puffery within the policies and guidelines of this encyclopedia I have no interest in the article whatsoever or its subject. The repeat of your article talk page message above is therefore not required on my talk page, and I suggest you await a discussion by the community of editors who are knowledgeable about the subject and our guidelines, and who will decide on the relevance, tone, and notability of the requested edit(s). You are welcome to join that discussion, and according to whatever is decided, an admin will make or restore any required edits. And please also remember to sign your posts both here and there. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:44, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for reading my explanation. I just wanted to add that I put up the names of all the major companies founded by Poly alumni because I saw that Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute did. Thanks again

My article was deleted last night.

Why did you delete my article "Inkjet refill instruction" last night? There was no any copyright infringements. I am the author of this article and and I am the owner of http://lazybuyer.com For your references: http://www.statscrop.com/whois/lazybuyer.com The reason why I placed this article and expected to add some more is an education of people in the inkjet refill technology. I am asking the reconsideration of your decision, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vkuklin (talk • contribs) 14:13, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately we cannot include this article in our encyclopedia because the content was copied from another website, it is a violation of our no-advertising policy, Wkipedia is not an instruction manual, you are writing about products you manufacture or sell yourself, and we already have an article on this subject at Inkjet refill kit. Please see these pages for more details: WP:COPYVIO, WP:ADVERT, WP:NOTHOWTO, and WP:COI. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:54, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Response

Evening Kudpung. I'd already noticed HelloWorldTestAccount's latest response and decided that in all probability someone wanted feeding, so I followed standard practice. Anyway, I appreciate being informed. Cheers, Meph^talk 00:55, 5 August 2012 (UTC).

Yeah, I hate spoon feeding editors who are too lazy to find things out for themselves, but in cases like this I generally tend to AGF and give them some liks direct to standard tutorial pages. You can rest assured that if I think they are trolling, sooner or later they'll feel the consequences of my tools ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:02, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello how are you

I do not understand the message you left me.-- Bradford • 02:41, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Please see User talk:DJMalik#Some essential reading for you:. Please note also that your signature is confusing, it does not reflect your user name, and it does not contain a link to your talk page. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:48, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I still do not understand what you mean with the message you left me, and my firm is very well I see you have problems.-- Bradford • 20:25, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Berkley Normal Middle School

I am sorry for reverting the redirect page for berkley normal middle school as I didn't know th reason on why it was being reverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabriel Pan Ing Kai (talk • contribs) 03:51, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Then please revert the article back to a redirect as requested, and if you don't know how to do it, please don't hesitate to ask. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:55, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Wiki607045

I see you've declined Wiki607045's request to be confirmed because he doesn't need it to edit the encyclopaedia; from reading his rationale, it seems that he wants to edit Deaths in 2012 which, as a semi-protected page, does of course require a user to be confirmed :). Ironholds (talk) 06:09, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Look at the request more closely, look at my response on their talk page, override my action if your wish. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:38, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, his request seems to be that he wants confirmed to add Jimmy Jones (singer) to our "list of notable deaths" - in this case, Deaths in 2012, which as a semi-protected page he needs confirmed to access. Your response was "You do not require this advanced user right to start editing the encyclopedia" which I assume he already knows because he has 12 edits. But I'll follow up with him and confirm what his intention was. Ironholds (talk) 06:46, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually '12' was a typo - he had made just 1 edit - the one to WP:PERM. I could,'t understand what he wanted, besides which, we have a prescribed method for requesting edits, and a bunch (too many) of help desks. Note that in order to provide some personal help I have asked him already what his intention was, and in what I (at least) consider to be a friendly and helpful manner. No templates... --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

That makes more sense, then. It was kinda a non-specific offer, but we'll see what he says :). Ironholds (talk) 07:03, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Not got your email, btw :). Ironholds (talk) 07:05, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

' kind of ' (I think you see one of my points - perhaps there is a generation gap, but there are a lot of old fogies my age here). --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:11, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, we'll agree to disagree on that, then. I don't think "kinda" rather than "kind of" (or words to that effect) does any harm, and don't think we should be trying to socially restrict patrollers by what term they prefer to use. Anyway; waiting on that email. Ironholds (talk) 07:32, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, for some reason you generally disagree with me. My position on language is that if the Wikipedia and its movement is to be taken seriously, the maturity of communication with those who are not necessarily laid-back individuals from the alternative 'cool' scene, should reflect Wikipedia's own 'maturity', especially when, explaining CSD, PROD, and AfD to older, educated people who don't understand our rules. But I am a teacher, amongst other things of communication for business and management, and hence pedantic. That said, I still nevertheless find many of our uw templates terse and unwelcoming. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:45, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I think it's clear by now that we're being taken seriously. We've been going for over a decade, we're regularly relied on by the media, there are a whole host of academic works about us - we're taken seriously :). And I'd put your argument right back at you; there will be people who are less comfortable with more informal language. Similarly, there will be people who are made uncomfortable by formal language. Both groups have a place on Wikipedia, and given that we can't discern who prefers what approach in advance, it seems to make sense to let both formal and informal communicators take part in speaking to new editors. Stopping informal communicators from doing it just doesn't work - particularly when, given the results of the template A/B testing, it seems clear that those who prefer informal communication outweigh those who prefer formal communication in our new editor population. If that wasn't the case, switching to informal language would have decreased the efficacy of the messages; instead, it increased them. Ironholds (talk) 07:55, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I rely on my own empirical experience with users. As my talk page messages will demonstrate, I prefer to discern and make the distinction in my communications, and particulmarly with those who are not native English speakers. I'm neither too formal with less mature users, nor terse or impolite with older, or educated members of society who simply don't understand our rules - and that's one of the reasons why I do not understand why Wikipedia after its decade of existence, still can't provide a proper landing page for new users. If we ever get one, I just hope its terminology will take a middle ground. I, for sure, won't be wasting my time contributing to its development. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:09, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

That's certainly your right. Let me know when I can expect the email, btw. Ironholds (talk) 08:20, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

We are indeed an encyclopedia and one of the largest websites in the world, but we're not MySpace, FaceBook, or Twitter either, although some less mature users think it is. There are however occasionally enough negative reports that send shockwaves round even the quality press (whether they get their facts right or not). Let's not underestimate the criticisms even if the Britannica has gone out of print and can't compete with us on numbers. My contributions to WP may be considered insignificant by some, particularly my meta work, but we can discern who prefers what approach, and it would be possible to semi-automate them, but in the meantime I will prefer to write my communications my way in the satisfaction that a well tailored personal touch can't be wrong, and if one multiplies a similar effort by several 1,000 editors, it would be more than a drop in the ocean. That leads to user retention - a project which I believe you are a part of. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:44, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

A couple of things

Hi Kudpung. I was looking at your message on my page, regarding the guidance for RFA being a year old... Not sure what you were wondering though... Sorry I keep catching the good candidates, I guess I've just got lucky a few times. I nearly nominated Mlpearc, based on the editor review, but SoWhy had beaten me by 24 hours. Worth looking through the ER category, with this summer of love thing going on, good candidates who may have said no before appear to be willing to say yes. In fact, I might go back and re-ask those who said no before - might be worth you doing the same!
Also, on a totally separate note, I noticed this. Now I'm not disagreeing that the user is a problem but I just wanted to remind you what Wp:CIR is for... It's advice for the people who have to deal with the issue, not for the cause of the issue. Just as we shouldn't link NOTNOW to experienced users, or call dicks a meta:dick, we shouldn't suggest to an editor that they need to gain more competence. It's an essay that really bugs me, I went on about it in one of my Arbcom questions. I've seen how demoralised people can get based on the essay and attitude of the people that use it which often amounts to "you don't get it, you never will, we will never want you here" - horribly unwelcoming to say the least. Worm^TT(talk) 06:45, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I thought you would have twigged what I meant with 'I wonder if...' I was alluding to the advice page I created, when I created it, and the number and kind of RfAs we've had since. That page has received around 2,500 hits, and my thoughts were in fact whether it is in fact doing a good, or a bad job! You may be right about CIR. I'll bear it in mind - I'm not one not to take advice from a friend. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

That makes sense. I do think our work at RFA 2011 did actually make a difference, even if we didn't propose anything formally. Requestnom, your guide and the notice pointing to the guide really have helped. Notnows have dropped, obviounit inappropriate noms have slowed, the whole environment is less toxic. Now with a BBC article behind us and no recent fiascos the attitude is slowly changing, and I think it reached tipping point, meaning we got a wave of excellent candidates. Those inspired more good candidates, and so on. The onus is on people like us to find an nominate those candidates when we see them, and with this more positive atmosphere, they may even say yes. Have you noticed an upswing on the number of requests for nomination? I've had 3-4 I the past week. Worm^TT(talk) 08:12, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, I still plug away with occasional emails to people I think could use the bit, but most of them aren't interested. Those who were, you beat me too it! Those who come to me for nomination just aren't ready for it, but I let them down as gently as possible. I believe in fact some of them have come to you for mentoring. I've never actually nominated anyone yet, and that's kind of a relief anyway because I'm probably too well known for all the turmoil I caused about the state of RfA. Let's hope the toxic environment of RfA really is something of the past, but it will probably take another couple of months to be sure, and we need to be on our mettle to nip any nonsense in the bud. It's rather ironic that now things appear to have stabilised, there is a renewed focus on making desysopping easier. The recent wave of Arbcom desysoppings have left the community split. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:57, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Linked to Berkley Normal Middle School

Hey Kudpung,

I've reverted the Berkley Normal Middle School article as it seems from the editors comments above that they now understand why it's not appropriate (although I definitely won't revert it again as then it would be an edit war!). However I was having a look at List of schools in the Waikato Region and in my opinion it violates WP:PURPLIST due to the large number of red links - "any lists which exist primarily for development or maintenance purposes (such as a list that consists primarily of red links) should be in project or user space, not the main space." - so what do you think, should it just be left? or altered someway such as combining the school names into the town articles rather than having one for the entire region? Thanks Glanis^Talk 08:30, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that. If the user abides by his understanding, we can lift the page protection. I've just been looking at the List of schools in the Waikato Region and on the fly, I in fact blanked one nn primary school and redirected it to the list. You are right about WP:PURPLIST. At least all the redlinked primary and middle schools should be delinked, and any primary or middle schools that have pages but are not notable should be blanked and redirected too (remembering to delink them on the list). I actually do quite a lot of all this, but on long lists it's a lot of work, particularly when it is not evident from the redlinked names if the schools are primary and/or middle schools; it means looking up each one on the web to find out what they are. You're welcome to have a go at it. If you redirect any schools, please remember to add this: {{R from school}} to the redirect page, it will automatically update the cat, and help us track reverted redirects. Let me know how you get on, and if you get stuck don't hesitate to ask.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:22, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Please review

Yo bro, someone has placed a banner on my article that "This biographical article is written like a résumé", can you please tell me what should I do? And there are 2 I.P addresses messing with the article for no reason, first i.p changed a lot of things in the article which took me 30 minutes to re-edit, now another one is writing things like the article is opinionated etc etc. Please do checkout this new reference on Sanki King - http://tribune.com.pk/story/415014/sanki-kings-graffiti-knows-no-boundaries/, and tell me what should I do. Thanks - SameStruggle (talk) 17:01, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Bro most of the stuff that you have given "citation needed" tag on, is mentioned in my references already, especially the most recent one, I have already given you the link above, so should I re-post the references again and again? SameStruggle (talk) 17:29, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

And what is "CE"? SameStruggle (talk) 17:30, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)You've worked hard on that article and I've made some minor clean ups to the style of language, and removed the résumé template. The a&rticle looks OK now, but the claims in sections Milestones and Appearances in Media still need sourcing, otherwise there is no proof that they happened and they would have to be cut out. 'CE' simply means Copy Edit. If the references you supplied also confirm statements and claims in several parts of the text, you should use them again. To see how to do this, go to WP:CITE and see Repeated citations about halfway down the page. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:35, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Bro kindly come to my talk page and say a few words to this person who has ruined my 2 hours of editing. SameStruggle (talk) 23:27, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Have added multiple citations, removed Milestones and the appearances in the media thing and now trying to get valid resources of all that stuff, actually the resources are all in pictures and videos on youtube so thats the problem. Thanks for your co-operation again and telling me about the multiple citations thing. God bless you. SameStruggle (talk) 23:45, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

For you?0!

	The WP:PERM award
	Good work at PERMS today. Chip123456 20:11, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I don't think it really needs an award - it's just a routine job that admins do. But thank you anyway :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:14, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Um, yes it does! There is always a backlog there, so having someone step up to the job is a real relief, I take it you are very level-headed, but editors who make an effort need a pat on the back. I don't get a lot of time to reward editors, but seen as today I've reverted a lot of vandalism, I've given myself time off to things like this. Also, thanks for your help with CVUA, your comments are always appreciated ;)--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 20:21, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

You deserve a far greater pat on the back for your counter-vandalism work ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:23, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Haha, thanks! The only problem is, during my reverting stages, I accidentally reported to established editors to AIV, as I say, we all make mistakes :). Also, another thing to pat you on the back for is helping new editors to NPP, so well done for that as well!--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 20:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

afc

I have finally decided to challenge the standards at the AfC project. See [1] DGG ( talk ) 21:16, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

It seems to be an almost identical problem to the one with NPP, although I must say that NPP appears to have gotten slightly better recently. If the powers that be were more acutely aware of these issues, perhaps they would find a way to step up development of the long promised landing page for new users. It would address these issues in one swoop. I'm afraid that NPP will get worse again when the new page feed prototype goes live, and everyone starts using it. Although I'm generally against the idea of creating more user rights, it might be the only solution. I'll be curious to see the developments around your challenge. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:36, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

I'd be happy to help. In other news, been doing way too much antivandalism stuff lately. Almost warned you... ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 08:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I don`t need help~

I saw you wrote on my user page.I know many things about Wikipedia and do not need help links anymore.Receptie123 (talk)

Looks like you've been blocked. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:51, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't forget...

...you do need to enact the formal WP:BAN on User:Doughnuthead. That schizophrenic ban discussion really shows how much they're willing to waste time, so the BAN is vital now dangerouspanda 19:03, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that it makes any difference with 23 confirmed socks, and probably more in the pipeline. Thoughts? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:12, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Easier just to formalize it. That way every post from a sock is immediately revertable no matter what. dangerouspanda 19:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

'll put the banned user template on his tp - that's all that is involved. I'm thinking of asking a CU if it's possible to make a range block. Can they do that? I'm sure we've not seen the last of this character. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:26, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Oops! That template should not be used for blocked users. How does one enact otherwise? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

See WP:CBAN and they get added at WP:RESTRICT dangerouspanda 19:48, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Seen all that. Actually it goes here. Any ideas on the possibility of a block? Should I ask a CU?Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:12, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Youreallycan

Re your comment here, what alternatives do you envisage? I'm having a hard time thinking of anything that hasn't already been tried. Prioryman (talk) 20:33, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't envisage any at the moment other than what's already been proposed by others. I'm just pointing out the purpose of the RFC/U. I do however think most things have already been tried. RFC/U is not a pleasant place, but it's less nasty than Arbcom. In fact, if he is given another chance, the RFC can recommend and reach a consensus on the RfC talk page for recommended conditions to be imposed. If they are not adhered to , then the user can be summarily blocked by any admin, or a quick community decision at AN/I can even impose a permanent site ban (I closed one today) . The passage to Arbcom is by no means mandatory. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:15, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Stop right there, please. See Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct/Guidance#The nature of RfC/U. The RfC/U will not be imposing anything. RfC/U is about seeking voluntary agreements, and YRC is not participating with that end in mind. That's quite clear. The proper venue for an imposed outcome is an ANI thread (tried, many times), a deal struck in an AN ComBan discussion, or at RFAR. This doggie needs to move along to one of those venues. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 08:32, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, in principle, but there are two things that give me pause for thought. The first is that community processes have completely failed to deal with YRC's conduct. Any time limited bans or restrictions have been proposed on AN/I, they have been shot down by a faction of editors who seem to want to protect him from the consequences of his actions because they admire his BLP contributions. You can see something of this nature going on at the moment in the RfC/U with JN466 and Collect's bogus complaints about "canvassing". (Both have been prominent defenders of YRC on AN/I.) The second is that YRC's conduct during the RfC/U has been quite simply appalling. I don't think I've ever before seen someone behaving so badly in their own RfC/U. He seems to have spent the last 24+ hours in a constant frenzy of rage, making personal attack after personal attack against a string of editors. Unless there's a drastic change in the situation - and I can't imagine that happening - I think this is inevitably going to go to Arbcom. Prioryman (talk) 21:46, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, yes, nepotism is the inescapable evil. You may be right, but wherever the action goes, I don't see YRC getting let off lightly. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:57, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Nor me. It's a pity, because he does do some useful work, but as I've advised him several times before, he can't simply go around edit-warring, making personal attacks and racking up blocks without facing substantial consequences for such behaviour. At some point you just have to say enough is enough. Prioryman (talk) 22:06, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

(Butting in) Technically, either a topic ban or a site ban could be imposed at AN, and that would avoid the Arbcom thing. The problem is that there have been innumerable (and I mean that literally—I wouldn't even try to count them) threads about YRC at ANI—many more than there have been blocks—that have led to nothing other than essentially a push of the "reset" button prior to the cycle reasserting itself. I fear that a ban proposal at AN following this RfC could end up the same way, and I also suspect it would involve rehashing most of what's been said in the RfC. Still, it might be worth a try. I think a broad topic ban plus a final warning (and I do mean final) concerning WP:NPA would allow him to demonstrate that he has what it takes to remain a part of the project. I'd support that, both on humanitarian grounds and because I am sickened at the thought that community consensus cannot deal with a recurrent problem so blatantly disruptive. Rivertorch (talk) 22:51, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Arbcom is not generally known for making decisions within a short time frame and they will certainly rehash everything. The community is always split over Arbcom decisions, but the committee is a necessary evil, but I've met several present and former members and at least the committee is a group of very mature, experienced individuals, which makes it very different from the 'community style' lynch mobs. That said, I find the actual Arbcom process terribly, and unnecessarily complicated, and it needs rethinking. For on thing, I think comments from uninvolved people should be disallowed, and the number of different pages for each case should be rationalised. One of the reasons why it's difficult to get an admin decision at AN/I or AN is because we're afraid of losing the bit even if our decisions are fair, and that is why the community and/or admin decision process is flawed. Again, IMHO, policy should be changed so that only involved parties should be allowed to 'vote'. If this could be changed, there would be many, many more admins participating at AN, and arbcom would only need to chime in if the admins were unable to come to a decision. Every Wikipedia consensus that ends in 'no consensus' is a bad consensus.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:35, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree with your last sentence (or even that I quite understand it), but I think your suggestion about only involved parties commenting is certainly worth consideration. My only qualm there is that the definition of "involved" would necessarily have to be fairly loose or otherwise editors with a legitimate interest in the outcome might be muzzled. For instance, I have been very concerned about YRC's activities for a very long time. I'll spare you the details; suffice it to say that there are areas of Wikipedia I avoid because of him, but complete avoidance is impossible, and it's stressful walking on eggshells. Whether through trying extra hard or just dumb luck, I've managed never to get caught up in a prolonged or ugly dispute with him, and in fact most of our infrequent interactions have been entirely civil. (Civil ≠ pleasant or constructive, of course.) In other words, his behavior has had a significant impact on my activities at Wikipedia, but I don't have the diffs to prove it. Does that make me uninvolved? I hope not.

Regarding Arbcom, while I have reservations about several decisions they've made this year, I generally agree with you about the quality of the sitting members. I don't doubt they'd come to an acceptable decision about YRC, but I'd still rather see it come from the community at large, for the reasons I've stated. Rivertorch (talk) 05:39, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

In principle, it would be preferable for a decision to come from the community rather than Arbcom, but given how badly the community has failed to deal with this problem so far I have little confidence that a fresh discussion would find a successful solution. The fact that the Wikipediocracy brigade is now involved adds to my pessimism, as does the fact that YRC has repeatedly failed to keep his promises. We have to break out of the cycle of YRC getting into trouble, being blocked or brought up at AN/I, making promises and getting unblocked and then breaking said promises and going back to the first step again. Perhaps one option might be to draft but not post an arbitration referral that would be triggered if there is one further block or incident of edit-warring, personal attacks or the other problem behaviours that have brought us to this stage. Not so much the last chance saloon as a gun to the head, with the clear understanding that it's on a hair-trigger. Prioryman (talk) 05:47, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

The hair-trigger is there already - see may latest post to the RfC. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Parramatta logo.gif)

Thanks for uploading File:Parramatta logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:44, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

This file was uploaded with a perfectly legitimate Free use rationale. It it is now no longer being used, there is no reason why it should not be deleted. The above template needs to be reworded to be less aggressive. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

File restored to its article. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

NPP

Hi, I just saw your comments on someone's talk about your desire to improve NPP. I'd like to help give ideas to you, but first, what do you personally think is wrong with it? Ps, I think it needs improving as well ;)--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 20:13, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for offering to help out. Several admins, including me, have been researching the problems with NPP for nearly 2 years, and over the past 12 months some senior staff at the Foundation have come up with some excellent new tools for patrollers that will e released soon. Evidence seems to point to only two things wrong with NPP. One is that that there are far too few people doing it (around only 10 or so at any given timle to cope with around 1,500 new pages received every 24 hours. This is exacerbated of course during the hours when America is asleep). The other issue is that NPP, like many other maintenance areas, including CVU and WP:AfC, attracts a lot of new and/or inexperienced users to the job. We don't necessarily want to create a hierarchy and bureaucracy around NPP, but we are looking for solutions to attract more editors with the right kind of knowledge to the task. Because much of the work on NPP, if it is done properly, concerns deletion and doing many background checks for WP:SOCK, WP:COPYVIO, and WP:COI, it needs a near-admin level of experience and/or knowledge of policies and guidelines. Any suggestions you have would be most welcome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:11, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Kudpung, I totally agree with you. It's a relatively simple task, but many newbies get it wrong. That's understandable, though, but it complicates the situation. I've seen so many bad CSD tags that I've installed the CSD Helper script (and I recommend you do, too). It allows non-admins to contest CSD tags or change them to PRODs, and it allows admins to decline CSD tags, change them to PRODs, or delete the article. Contrary to popular belief (and as you said above), it requires a lot more than putting CSD tags. You have to google every article to check for Copy-vios, you need to copyedit, Wikify, Clean-Up, add Ref-links and citation needed templates. Also, most articles don't need to be CSD tagged. Many newbies put a CSD tag on an article that should be PROD-ed. As you said, it requires a lot of knowledge of policies here. I find WP: WIHSD to be the easiest to understand CSD policy essay. Best, Electric Catfish 00:49, 8 August 2012 (UTC).

A good knowledge of policies and working through the tutorial at WP:NPP is essential. What is needed are suggestions for getting people to acquire that knowledge first, and reading the NPP page and fully understanding it. CVU/A is a step in the right direction, but they should still not jump immediately to patrolling new pages or semi-admin areas - it's a different ball game. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:05, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

What do you think about having some kind of mentoring program? Also, how about adding some tutorials where users can test out adding CSD tags to articles (sort of like the New Admin School). Also, regarding WP: PERM, non-admins aren't needed in most areas there, but most requests for confirmed do not require an admin's attention and are often dealt with by non-admins helping there. Electric Catfish 01:12, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I like the idea of having a sandbox for NPP'ers to test out, sort of like the NAS. I'd love to help and I'm sure my mentor, Worm That Turned would be interested as well. Best, Electric Catfish 01:18, 8 August 2012 (UTC).

Worm is right on the ball with these issues - we work together on them ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

Thanks! The Simple English Wikipedia has a patroller right which combines the autopatrolled right with the right the patrol pages (autoconfirmed). Anyways, I'll speak to Worm about it tomorrow. Good night (here in the US)! Electric Catfish 01:34, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, the 'patroller' right is a right which I have on the Simple English Wiki. I, personally think that its a good idea. I don't think that if the right were to be created here it should be a mixture in with Autopatrolled, but a separate user right available for all users in good standing. That's an idea, but we want to try and keep the 'titles' as minimal as possible. Maybe it could be something in another user right, which is more accessible, ie reviewer. --Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 06:44, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

As I have previously mentioned above or elsewhere, I also believe that an NPP right could be incorporated into reviewer. Over 5,000 reviewer rights were created 2 years ago indiscriminately by a database search based on a set of criteria. What such searches do not provide of course, is a measure of competency. I'm not sure if all those editors with the right are still around today, but perhaps during that time they have gained sufficient experience if they didn't have it then. The other snag is however, that to create a technical user right for NPP would involve some complex tweaking to the site software, and I'm not sure that the developers atthe WMF would entertain the request even if it were reached by consensus, or allocate funds and developer time to do it. The Foundation's director of development has spoken out against the creation of more user rights. I'm not sure either that creating a technical user right is the best solution. I would much prefer to see only experienced and trusted users patrolling new pages and AfC's without the need for a special right. We need to find ways to educate them. We can always topic ban them from patrolling if they persistently get it wrong in spite of help and warnings. It's been done before. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:25, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to agree that an extra right would be out of the question - agree that it would require time and funding to be pulled off. Topic bans seem a good ideas to repeat 'offenders', but I suppose their errors aren't done on purpose, leading me to think that although in some cases topic bans are needed to enforce a user to stop what they are doing, it could damage editor relations and cause undue drama. I like the whole concept of having a 'sandbox' for budding new page patrollers. What I found out when I first used twinkle to CSD something, soon as you click on a criteria, it puts it up for deletion, without offering to show a preview or say, for example 'are you sure you want to tag (x) up for criterion (y)'. That's what confused me when I first used it. But yeah, an NAS type system for new CSD'ers seems a sensible route to take, for the moment.Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 08:19, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

When I suggested topic bans, I didn't mean that the user would have to go through the rigours of a community ban to WP:RESTRICT or anything so humiliating. What we (admins) usually do is suggest that they stop patrolling until they have taken advice and learned how to do it, and warn that if they persist, they may risk being blocked for disruptive editing. Up till now it has always worked, and we've later gotten some good patrolling out of them. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:36, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Admins also make NPP mistakes. See Dimensional Transformology. An admin's alternative account incorrectly tagged it as a G1. Electric Catfish 00:28, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

@Kudpung - yes, I think the whole 'ban' thing would be too humiliating on the narrative. I agree that short blocks are best, after thorough warnings and repeatedly poor tagging. That said, we need to ensure that there is support for these users. @ECF2 - everybody makes mistakes, even admins. Only because they are an admin, it doesn't mean that we have to 'frown' upon them more than what you might do to a reviewer. Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 17:00, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

My RfA

So I took the plunge, as you can see. It went quite as I expected it to, only much nicer than I thought it would be. Despite your advice several months ago, I figured it was worth a shot. I have no regrets and am glad I had that experience. Thank you for your sentiments expressed there as well, I really appreciate it.

Oh, and I completely agree with your comment on my talk page about RfA having "cleaned itself up" in recent times. It's exactly what it should be — a constructive community process aimed at filling the admin ranks with experienced and capable Wikipedians. I still think the standards of today are too high (we can agree to disagree there), but nevertheless the participants sure did provide me some very helpful remarks. I'm quite pleased with how it all turned out.

Take care. =) Master&Expert (Talk) 23:09, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm really pleased that you took the failure of your RfA in good spirit. Our efforts seem also to have got the message across to new and/or inexperienced users that adminship should not be the primary goal of joining Wikipedia, and we are seeing far fewer SNOW and NOTNOW closures. You can now join us in helping other users to understand that. If you are intending to do another run at any time, don't hesitate to ask me for another review of your work. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:35, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Rollback

I agree that rollback is not normally a good idea for unverifiable edits. However, when a user makes a contiguous sequence of 20 edits, all of which are neither referenced nor verifiable, and when compared to a primary source look distinctly wrong, I'm not sure what tool one would use besides some form of rollback. Individually undo-ing a sequence of 20 edits seems like a rather painful way to fix a page edited by an IP address... Pmbma (talk) 01:05, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Rollback is strictly for vandalism edits only (with some minor exceptions). Please see the comments I made at WP:PERM/R and also have a thorough read of WP:RBK. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:15, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Rollback is used for blatant vandalism. Not unsourced content or even BLP violations. Just vandalism. If you want to restore a page to a previous addition (i.e. revert all of the edits by a single IP editor), you can click "Restore this version" on Twinkle. Best, Electric Catfish 20:29, 8 August 2012 (UTC).

CSD tagging

Hey Kudpung! I see that you have a CSD log and you are CSD tagging articles. However, aren't you an admin? Electric Catfish 00:31, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

(answering 2 messages) Yes, Mifter's CSD was a wrong criterion, but admins rarely make mistakes like this (and I've probably made some too). Your error was in declining it, and not doing anything else. It wasn't a test page either and in fact it didn't fit into any CSD criterion at all - splitting CSD criteria is fine, splitting hairs is not. That said, if you do see an admin repeatedly making errors or persistently misbehaving, don't hesitate to point it out gently to them first and if that doesn't work, then by all means bring it up at WP:AN - or preferably discuss it first with another admin you trust, but don't take that as an invitation to start delving systematically into the edits of admins. Try to avoid getting too involved in admin stuff as I have suggested before, because although experience is required to be an admin, posting in some admin areas where it's not strictly needed may well be seen as over eagerness for the bit and go against a future RfA. Yes, I am an admin, as you already know - weadmins generally follow an unwritten etiquette (there's even an essay on it somewhere) that unless something is a blatant attack, hoax, vandalism, or clear-cut housekeeping, we usually just CSD tag a page for another admin to delete rather than summarily deleting a page ourselves. It's a fail-safe, theoretically two admins won't be wrong, and it avoids the risk of losing the bit over a silly but genuine mistake - like Mifter's. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:21, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey Kudpung! First of all, I learn a valuable lesson over Mifter's mistake. When in doubt as to which CSD criterion to use, it's best to PROD it. Dave told me that if I want ot gain experience in admin-related areas, I should comment there, but not make decisions. If you take a look at my recent edits (not reports) to AIV, you'll see that I comment on it (using the (Non-administrator comment) template) and leave the decline one up to the admins. An admin follows and than puts the decline template on. Also, in regards to PERM, there is no need for non-admin involvement except by confirmed, where I will occasionally help out. It's more of a "clerking" role there, as many of the requests don't need an admin's attention. Most of the time, you ask about the copyright status, you deny requests to edit semi-protected pages (instead they can use {{Edit semi-protected}}, and direct people to WP: FFU. It's not so complicated there, and it's not really admin-related work (IMO). Also, I'm working with Wikiproject Umpires to get Joe West (umpire) to GA status and I'd appreciate your help. Lastly, Dave likes the idea of a NAS school for new NPP'ers. I'm going to start it out in my sandbox and after we're done, we'll move it to WP space. However, I don't know what to name it and I'd appreciate your help there. Thanks, Electric Catfish 20:48, 9 August 2012 (UTC).

Also, do you know anything about this new NPP tool called "Page Triage"? Electric Catfish 00:26, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I've found out more about it and encountered a few issues. If you tag an attack page, it gives a friendly note. I think {{uw-attack}} would be more appropriate. Electric Catfish 00:44, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I know all about Page triage - its development was begun with some of my help as a result of an initiative of mine. It is still under development, testing, and review by some experienced users and is not required to be used as a default tool yet, and probably not any time soon. That's why it's not been widely published. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

The difference between you and Ryan

I've never seen you intentionally annoy another user. I've never seen you intentionally inflame a conflict situation. If you want me to I can show you some diffs of Ryan doing exactly that. Arcandam (talk) 05:34, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I should probably make a list of those diffs to ensure he doesn't have a chance in his next attempt at hatcollecting. Arcandam (talk) 05:45, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

You're actually quite right, I do generally try to diffuse situations, and I'm usually quite good at it, but where I see a clear ad hominem on a page I stalk, I feel that I should at least say something. There is no intention to annoy, just to point out what could be interpreted as a borderline PA. Your command of English is native perfect and you could have rephrased that better rather than continue th bickering. Fighting fire with fire doesn't help. I'm sure that there are diffs, but Ryan has learned a lot from his very close-run RfA and there's no reason to suggest in that manner that he doesn't stand a chance of passing another one. Making a list of diffs to make sure he 'doesn't have a chance' sounds to me more like a vengeance call. Cheers, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:52, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot mate! I wish I felt the same way about my command of the English language. To be honest learning English is much easier for Dutch people than, for example, Chinese people and as long as native speakers are still able to tell I am not a native speaker I will keep trying to improve my English. If I speak Dutch I am quite eloquent, I usually know a lot of ways to say the same thing, but when speaking English it is much harder for me to find synonyms. We both know an ad hominem when we see one, no need to disagree there. And yes, you are right, the act of making a list of those diffs would be a form of revenge, but on the other hand it would protect the encyclopedia from yet another noobish admin. So even though the intention may be wrong, it is most likely that making that list would improve Wikipedia. Arcandam (talk) 06:32, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

That said, I was the one on his RfA who expressed concerns of possible hat collecting. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:59, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't really mind the hatcollecting if people are mature enough and suitable for the job. That is obviously not the case here. Arcandam (talk) 06:32, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

You also may wish to reflect before making comments like this, it would almost certainly be brought up on a future RfA and wouldn't make you look very good. RfA is a nasty enough place already. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:22, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I do not understand what you mean. I do not want to be an admin here, and I don't understand how bringing that diff up on a future RfA would make me look bad. That diff contains nothing special AFAIK, but please do explain what you mean. Considering the context it should be kind of obvious I am referring to that. Arcandam (talk) 06:53, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Again you need to be very careful what you say about people in other places. In my opinion it doesn't demonstrate a great deal of maturity either. I do a lot of helping kids around here, but I don't hesitate to tell them when they are acting like the place is FaceBook, Twitter or some run-of-the-mill teenage web forum. I just see a lot of 'I said', 'You said', 'He said' kicking-and-hair-pulling going on here. Perhaps you should stop taking the bait, back off a bit, then there will be no more accusations of trolling all round. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:43, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

You linked to the wrong page. Ignoring that troll means ignoring the problem, it may feel good but the problem doesn't get solved. Making that list is a lot more efficient if I want to actually solve that problem, although it is a bit more timeconsuming. Arcandam (talk) 06:53, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I didn't link to the wrong page, and I wasn't suggesting for a moment that you would be running for adminship. Note that I'm not taking sides here - or making lists of diffs. You know what I used to do in the schoolyard when children stated fighting? I used to separate them, give them both a lecture, and go back to my office. If I saw them fighting again later from my office window, I pretended not to notice and let them get on it. If either of them got hurt then, it was nothing to do with me, and that's what I'm going to do now. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:08, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Good idea. Back when I was in school I did not have my own office. I had a classroom, a smelly one, and I had to share it with about 20 other kids. Arcandam (talk) 07:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

You wouldn't like it here then, classrooms have on average about 55 kids. I can't really remember what my classrooms were like at school - it was nearly 60 years ago - but I think it was OK even if some of the buildings were 500 years old. The kids were pretty well behaved too... Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:28, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think I would be allowed to join a school for kids in Thailand, not just because I am too old, but because even the smallest child there would be fluent in Thai, and I don't know anything about that language. But it would be kind of cool to give it a try, to see how long it would take for me to master the language. Did they beat you? Arcandam (talk) 07:36, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Beat me? I was the director of teacher training and linguistics for a group of 43 private schools and colleges until I retired. I thought you knew that. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:42, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

No, lol, I mean back when you were a kid, did they use corporal punishment? Arcandam (talk) 07:43, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

They didn't beat me - I was a goody-two-shoes - but yes, corporal punishment was still very much in vogue. Even the prefects were allowed to do it. There was also a lot of bullying - a bit like Wikipedia really.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:51, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Block

Hi, I saw your block in an IP's block log. I just thought I'd tell you that WP:VOA doesn't apply to IP'S. If a certain IP persists on vandalising, they get put into a category (can't think if the name of it ;)), but considering it was their 'first offence', it wouldn't apply to them.--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 18:18, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, I know you mean well, but I know exactly what I'm doing. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:36, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't questioning your actions, you are a great admin here. Just thought I'd tell you that the block was not tagged correctly. Cheers.--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 06:46, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

The user made 8 edits in rapid succession at a rate of about one a minute, with one further edit at 22:19 just under an hour later. The IP has not edited since 20 October 2009, so the likelihood of it being used by anyone else is extremely low - it's a static IP and dial-up connection. The five 2009 edits were generally good, mainly minor corrections to punctuation. This should tell us something: perhaps this connection is a single household and the account has been compromised by a young person - certainly the kind of vandalism is not of the kind that would be expected from an adult.

Fearing more to come, I blocked that account smartly within 2 minutes of the last vandalism. What non-admins have probably never seen are the actual tools we have at our disposal (indeed, before I got the bit I had never seen them either). There are a few scripts which can help and one is a Twinkle dropdown. It provides a limited selection of criteria, but there are no API pops ups to say what they actually look like and what messages and templates they are going to produce. What they do however, is fully automate the process. Manual blocking is of course possible, but with my slow connection it can take up to 10 minutes or more to load the manual block page, load pages of templates to choose from, and complete the process. In deference to the guidelines for IP blocks, even though the use was from a single household, I chose the nearest block criterion - VOA, which the current use is/was, and blocked for only 24 hours. I think that was a fair comprimise, sometimes, a quick, short , sharp block is required to stop further disruption.

I appreciate your interest, and I hope this will be of use to you if one of the days you become an admin.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:34, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I think I've seen the blocking sheet on NAS, but not your twinkle options. I understand now that you did it because that was the nearest blocking option! I was just a bit confused when I saw it pop up. Thanks again :)Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 08:37, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Re: NPP

Hey Kudpung! Thanks for notifying me of my errors! Let me just explain my rationales:

• Arcis Wealth Management The article didn't seem totally promotional, but didn't express the notability of the company, so I tagged it as an A7-corp, but it should've been tagged as a G11.
• Awesome folk It didn't seem to be an attack page, but I was probably going to quickly ;). Also, I don't tag attack pages about non-BLPs with the G10 criterion. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but WP: G10 gives me the impression that only BLPs qualify for this tag. I usually tag non-BLPs with the G3 tag. I don't remember the page's content, though. Now I see that it was deleted as an A7.
• Anna Fitch Ferguson This shows that I was working too fast and didn't read that she died in 1942.
• Lego Silver Dimensions At the time that I tagged it, the only content was "Lego Silver Dimensions". The article didn't express notability, but it also qualified for an A3 tag. However, I have found that it is best to wait an hour or so to tag a page as an A1 or as an A3. However, at the time that I tagged it, I thought that it would be best to wait an hour or so for the A3, but apply the A7 now.

Kudpung, I really appreciate all of the help you are giving me with NPP. Thank you so much, Electric Catfish 14:34, 10 August 2012 (UTC).

Re and fix?

Hi Kudpung. I've replied on my talk + I find this name little odd, perhaps do you want it that way or was an error. Cheers buddy! TheSpecialUser ^TSU 06:24, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	Thanks for mentioning that at User talk:Theopolisme. Anderson - What's up? 01:43, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Just doing my job, but I try to stay on the ball :) --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:00, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

So

adopt me then. Support is all very well but..(grins) You have an interesting past. My mother (89) appears to have assembled H2S units in Herts late in the war. I dont believe I have added any dramatics to the discussion. The New Zealanders gross error I believe was a personal and rather gratuitious attack, and added nothing to the moot. By the way im a 61 model myself.Irondome (talk) 07:54, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately I have my hands tied on my work as an admin, a Wikipedia Ambassador, and the development of solutions for New Page Patrol, a reform I co-initiated nearly 2 years ago and which is now well in the hands of the Foundation's programmers. For a list of users willing to adopt new users, please see this list, but be aware that some of them are very young and inexperienced themselves, and some have already been blocked for serious violations of policy. Good luck! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:07, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt and helpful response. Good luck with your ambassadorial role, hopefully it will help in enriching the project further. Regards Irondome (talk) 08:19, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Patrolling statistics

I don't remember where, but I noticed you somewhere talking about the number of pages you patrolled. I could not figure out where to look for the number of pages I patrolled. Is there any tool like edit counter which keeps track of the number of patrols made by a user? --Anbu121 (talk me) 09:44, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I can't remember where it is - you'd have to ask Worm. That said, the number will be in the many 1000s (I've actually deleted nearly 3,000), and many of the pages that were checked won't show up as 'patrolled' because some new pages that are checked by patrolers are not logged as 'patrolled' - technically, patrolled means the pages that were cleared as OK for keeping, not the number of pages that were physically checked. Remember also, that a vast number of the pages I patrol have already been 'patrolled' by patrollers. At a rough guess I would say 30,000 - 40,000. I once cleared out an entire 30-day 'back of list' backlog about 2 years ago, and I seem to remember that that was around 20,000 or so. maybe less, I really have no idea. Why is it important to know? Admins who have patrolled more are probably Ironholds and Blade of the Northern Lights. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:01, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I was just curious to know if there's any way to track the pages that I patrolled (whether they get deleted later or not - just for a measure of my judgement - similar to CSD log ).

Go to your Twinkle toolbar at the top of your talk or user page. User > User logs > Patrols, but remember again that it only shows pages that you 'passed' as OK for keeping, unless they were deleted later for some reason. In which case they will show in red. For pages you listed for CSD and PRD, the special logs are of course more important. if there's a lot of blue, then chances are you're not aiming straight. Of course, there are plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons why some pages you listed for deletion were not deleted, or were restored later. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Here is your patrol log--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 16:02, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Could we possibly work this out between the three of us?

• (Deletion log); 10:35 Kudpung (talk | contribs) deleted page Herbert Fletcher University ‎(G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.hfuniversity.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=88&Itemid=114&lang=en and http://www.adventistworld.org/article/1275/resources/english/issue-2012-1007/news-briefs)
• User talk:Husbandsknr

--Shirt58 (talk) 11:49, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

You nominated it, I found yet another copyvio in it for the rest, and deleted it. The re-created article is just an extremely close paraphrase and hence still not an imporovement. Copyrighted material cannot be userfied, so I see no alternative but to delete it again and let Husbandsknr start over in his user space. It's only a stub and shouldn't be too hard to do with your help as you have suggested. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Yep, completely agree, though without prejudice to help the editor to re-start the article without all the manifestly obvious problems.--Shirt58 (talk) 12:35, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Looks like its already been deleted again. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:39, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Ça plane pour moi. As always, I'll be more than happy to help the new editor out.--Shirt58 (talk) 13:03, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

And up and running again.--Shirt58 (talk) 14:34, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think I'm very keen on all those See Alsos. Very spammy. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Article has been re-started [redacted] [redacted] notwithstanding the provisions [redacted] hereinafter. Moreover, "frothing at the mouth" [redacted], [redacted]. Article up again. To WP:AFD perhaps?--Shirt58 (talk) 14:06, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

G10s

Hey Kudpung! I have two questions for you. First of all, can admins do blocks and deletions using Twinkle, and second of all, does the G10 criterion only apply to BLPs? Thanks, Electric Catfish 16:06, 12 August 2012 (UTC).

There is a Twinkle dropdown available to admins only, yes, ut it only uses and/or operates with a handful of over 100 or so templates that can be used for blocking. The policy at WP:G10 is clear and unambiguous, take a look at it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:53, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Most admins use generic {{uw-block1}} or {{uw-block3}} templates. Electric Catfish 11:23, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't go so far as to suggest 'most'. The advantage with Twinkle is that it does both the blocking and the template on the user's talk page. Otherwise it's two manual operations. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:29, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

CheckUser

Thank you for your prompt investigation into the case. Since you have left your results on the page, I'm wondering now what will happen or if there is any action needed on my behalf. Thanks for any help you may provide -- this is a new endeavor for me! Zepppep (talk) 10:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Well I'm an admin and I could theoretically block the IP myself because it clearly passes a duck test. It took me a bout 45 minutes to do that investigation, but I thought that it would be best to file an SPI so that it in the archives if there is a repeat. That's why I wolud prefer for another admin to review the case and conclude and block as s/he thinks fit. Obviously a block is required. There's clearly no need for a CU. Hope this helps. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:40, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Bella922323

Bella922323 has now begun to make nonsensical edits to project pages such as WP:Redirect and the Article Wizard. A block may be in order since she already received a final warning. Huon (talk) 19:20, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Blocked by User:Boing! said Zebedee.--Anderson - What's up? 03:45, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Bella922323

Just had a problem in AfC here. I see the user page has had numerous CSDs, including deleting warnings, and a final warning. I'd suggest an indef block and blanking of personal details. Do I have to take this up to WP:ANI or can you just deal? --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:20, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

• Scratch that, caught them vandalising - gone to WP:ANI#Bella922323 --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:40, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

And indef-blocked by Boing! said Zebedee. Nothing to be done any more. Huon (talk) 19:49, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick intervention, guys. That was around 02:40 am my time and I had already gone to bed. I tried to be as nice as possible to that kid but it didn't work. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:20, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For all of the help that you have given me recently. I greatly appreciate it and it's great to have you as my co-mentor! Thank you! Electric Catfish 00:12, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I thank you enormously for this. It will be one barnstar I will especially remember because I was actually worried that I may have been too heavy-handed and that you might actually be a bit angry with me. Keep up all your good work! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:17, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Licusoara

Hi Kudpung, you may want to comment on User talk:Mimitica and User talk:Receptie123. I fixed Mimitica's unblock request before realsing that they had both requested it with a couple minutes of each other. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:06, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. They are all blocked. If they make a fuss just refer them to the SPI case. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:18, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

They have both requested an unblock, Mimitica's has been declined, but Receptie123's hasn't (yet). Thanks, will/have done. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:27, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

In order to stay as neutral as possible, blocking admins usually let another admin address unblocks. I've left a message on Receptie's talk page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:45, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Jayemd and mentoring

Hi,
Is there any particular reason you recommended mentoring by Worm That Turned? I'm not sure two mentors would be a good idea (although Worm is awesome, of course). On the other hand, if you think I'm doing a bad job of mentoring, just say so bobrayner (talk) 08:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

No reason at all, Bob. It was just the first name that came to mind because I work so closely together with Worm. I didn't realise you were mentoring Jayemd. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:31, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

No worries. Perhaps mentoring isn't "visible" enough, so I dusted off a couple of templates... bobrayner (talk) 11:13, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed request

Hiya again. I bumped into a piece in the new articles queue today that looked like it was started by somebody who really knows what they're doing editorially: User:Groupuscule. Would you please review a couple of their recent new article starts when you get a chance and green light them for Autoconfirmed status if you feel it is so merited? Thanks. Best, —Tim //// Carrite (talk) 20:04, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Gropuscule is already autoconfirmed. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:05, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Most peculiar. I wonder why Executive Order 10988 went to the New Articles queue for patrolling... Carrite (talk) 00:27, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Do you mean 'autoconfirmed' or autopatrolled? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:35, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

If you mean autopatrolled, gropuscule has only created 12 new afrticles and probably won't be ready for the right until he has created at least 50. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:41, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Whoops, autopatrolled. Carrite (talk) 01:00, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!

I appreciate you kind comments for the RfA. I will take up all your advice on contribute to Wikipedia. I will be needing your help on few things down the line, if you don't mind.
Thanks,
tausif(talk) 20:32, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

NPP NAS

Hey Kudpung! Dave wants to name it "First Steps for New Page Patrollers". I'd like to first get familiar with the page triage tool before starting it in my userspace. There will be no bureaucracy and any help, from an IP to Jimbo would be greatly appreciated. Best, Electric Catfish 21:47, 14 August 2012 (UTC).

Edit warring on blocked user's talk page

A blocked user you were involved with, User:Carthage44, is edit warring on his talk page while improperly WP:BLANKING his page. Should be be blocked from his own talk page at this point?—Bagumba (talk) 02:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

He's not edit warring, he just blanking comments which he is entitled to do. He shouldn't really remove the block notice though. That said, there's been enough said there now by non-admins and he's apparently retired. Watch for new accounts that might spring up soon on the same articles. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:44, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I think the wait-six-months thing might be a little harsh. I'm thinking a month. Although if he socks again, he should be banned. Socking is just about unforgivable. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:13, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

With a record like his, he's not going to get less than six months, and if he asks for an unblock again, he might find his talk page access denied. Retiring like that also demonstrates a possible lack of maturity. As I said, watch for new (White) socks. Even if he uses a new IP, it will be easy to locate. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:20, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I suppose so. Did you watch that cartoon I linked to on his page? FYI, no talkback template needed, as your page is now on my watch list (for the time being). :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:28, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I know the cartoon already ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:30, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Excellent. I dredge that up in situations like this. And, yes, I've been blocked a few times myself. I am not without wiki-sin. :( ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:05, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

No prob with blanking, but edit summary informed him to leave the block notices if he did chose to delete the rest. At any rate, many are aware of his penchant for ignoring others and "hiding" his talk page. Agree about the socks. I'll be looking at the specific IP once it is unblocked in two weeks, esp since it is a static IP. Good day.—Bagumba (talk) 04:16, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Look out for IP ranges too, and any new accounts that start editing those pages. Some socks simply close their ISP and get a new one. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:20, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Rollback

No worries, I found them, I spotted the edits on a STiki javascript, but not to worry, I said I caught on them I couldn't use the the buttons anyway--GoShow (...............) 05:00, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Favor

Hey Kudpung, how are you? I hope you are doing good these days. I need a favor from you... Can you please move Loud (Rihanna album) to Loud (album) cause Loud (Timo Maas album) was moved to Timo Maas article so it's the only Wikipedia album article with the name Loud. Thank you :) — Tomica (talk) 11:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Is there any reason why you shouldn't do this yourself? Just follow the instructions at WP:MOVE. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:35, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I can't cause I don't have administrator privileges, when I try to move it, this message shows to me: The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. Please choose another name, or use Requested moves to ask an administrator to help you with the move. Do not manually move the article by copying and pasting it; the page history must be moved along with the article text. — Tomica (talk) 11:37, 15 August 2012 (UTC

Ah yes, I see. This may not be as simple as it sounds. It looks as if a history merge may also be required, and this is one of the few areas where I as an admin have little experience. Please consider asking another admin or posting your request at WP:Requested moves. Sorry I couldn't be of more help. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:48, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Can you recommend me some admin that is familiar with this? — Tomica (talk) 11:51, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Not offhand, not many admins attempt it, although some are very good at it. Try making the request through Requested Moves first, and suggest there also that it may need admin action to move the history.. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:57, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

What do you think?

Hello!

The great debate is right now going on on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Concert_Tours page. I would be very grateful if you could say something about the topic on this page.

The main question is about numbering the concert tour dates and I would be very interested in your opinion. What do you think? Do you like the idea of numbering the tour dates or not? Please post your reasonable opinion on the above mentioned page.

Thank you! Lassoboy (talk) 15:09, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I have no opinion on this. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:46, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

BLP ban clause

Hi - please note and change your comment if required - Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Youreallycan#YRC_Proposal

I have updated my position -

I think that the civility condition and the one RR restriction would render this BLP discussion clause as unnecessary and extreme punishment - if I cant revert and I cant make a single rude comment without being site banned then as I am not a BLP violator then I can be allowed to comment about living people but not allowed to edit content about such.

Youreallycan 15:08, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm not open to being canvassed in this manner. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:43, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Thmc1's sockpuppeting blocks...REPLY REQUESTED

Kudpung- Concerning the temporary blockage of 74.88.160.244 in Thmc1's investigation, I was hoping it was permanent. Ditto for 96.242.217.91. Thmc was blocked, not for light or moderate sockpuppeting, but excessive sockpuppeting. Just him being able to edit is a violation of that policy. Furthermore, he was still making the same old disruptive edits. Quoting what he wrote during the first investigation, "I will sorely miss editing Wikipedia in the meantime" (See Thmc1 talk page). Unbeknownst to the SysAdmins, he had 96.242.217.91 at his disposal which he used to create the Nyc88 account the day before making that statement! If anything, all of the suspected IPs and the accounts affiliated with them should be permanently blocked. Ditto for any other Fair Lawn related accounts and IPs that you discover from this investigation. This individual will surely take advantage of any IPs left open, as already learned since the last investigation. Based on my own research, I'm definite that these IPs were also used by the same person, and no one else. MBaxter1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:22, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

If you feel it is appropriate, please do not hesitate to add it to the evidence on the SPI case, or if it is closed already, reopen it in the prescribed manner (and let me know if you have). Any IP editing the same pages from the triangle bounded by Fair Lawn and the other two locations is hardly likely to be a coincidence. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:31, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

New editor asking questions at RfA

I left a short note at User talk:Scholarly Breeze#RfA questions, you might want to leave a longer comment. Ryan Vesey 21:32, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I will. I just hope I can do it without being bitey - all these kids everywhere recently are begining to become exasperating. Let's just hope he doesn't discover PERM or AfD yet. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:49, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

He did approach me on my talk page, I haven't mentioned anything about sticking to article space until he gains experience though. Ryan Vesey 22:01, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Done. I hope I haven't been too heavy handed. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:18, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think so, but I'm not sure on the younger editors link. His userpage says he attended or is attending Michigan State. Ryan Vesey 22:22, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Overall, his user age page tell me otherwise. He doesn't know the meaning of the word academic (noun). Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:32, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Note that he did not link the University of Michigan: Go Blue!

Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:03, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello!

I just wanted to make sure that you're reading the same article that I am in your decline of CSDA7 for the article Irfan Bhatt. At the time of this writing, the main text of this article reads:

Irfan Bhatt is a Cinematographer from Kashmir India. He graduated in 'Mass communication and Multimedia' from University of Kashmir in 2010, and started his carrier as Documentary film maker. He further studied Cinematography from a film school in Mumbai.

I'm curious as to what part of A7 this does not meet regarding "An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions." This article has no mention of "...makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines."

Where's the problem, exactly? Keegan (talk) 07:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

The problem is one of my erring on the side of caution. Indeed, it does not make any claims of notability, but as it is not referenced, BLPPROD is, IMHO, a safer solution. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:08, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

There's not a problem there. Caution is good. In the future, though, could you make it a bit more clear to the person that nominated it for CSD that this is not a "clear candidate" for PROD, but just in your opinion on the side of caution? Your message didn't come out as plain as your reply to me did. It's these little things that help us all. Thanks, happy editing to you. Keegan (talk) 07:51, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

If I had thought it were a straight case of A7, I would have deleted it myself. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:08, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

I have checked yet again on this. I do not see either the need or the purpose of your message. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:02, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the deletion of page about Frank L. Lewis

Hello Kudpung,

I just saw that you deleted the article I posted. I understand your reason was due to the lack of information about the significance of the individual, this was a newbie mistake on my part. How should I proceed in getting this article back? I have verified that Professor Lewis is notable according to criteria listed in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:PROF, He is a fellow of the IEEE: http://www.ieee.org/membership_services/membership/fellows/alphabetical/lfellows.html

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.27.90.210 (talk) 07:30, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Please see the required criteria for academics at WP:ACADEMIC. If you feel that an article can meet these criteria, please consider redrafting it at the Articles for Creation department first, where an experienced editor will reviw it before moving it to main space. If you wish, I can email you a copy of the article, but you will need to register an account and enable the email option.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:53, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

I see now that you do in fact have a registered account. Please be sure that you always log in when you edit the encyclopedia or post messages. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:56, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Mac Mountain Lion

Saw your message on the curation talk page. You can get Mountain Lion on a USB stick. It will be released in the next few weeks. You might want to check into getting a VPN service. It allows a secure connection to a point in another country. Your internet traffic will look like you are coming from that country. The three most common uses are... Having you internet traffic secured so the country you are in can't spy on you. You are behind a country's firewall (ie China). You want use services only available in a certain country (watching Hulu or Netflix from Europe or watch BBC from America). VyprVPN, WiTopia, StrongVPN and Ipredator are the common ones. There is also the free tool, Hamachi, which allows a VPN directly to a computer. Use Hamachi to VPN to your daughter's computer in the UK and your internet connection will originate from her computer. Bgwhite (talk) 08:28, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Bg, I appreciate your suggestion, but not everything formac is available here in Thailand, and for obvious reasons I also have no real interest in cloaking my IP address. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:42, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

You don't have to use Hamachi all the time, just when you need to download a Mac update or easily transfer photos to your daughter's computer. Bgwhite (talk) 08:55, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps you mean my granddaughter's computers ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:00, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Wat Khao Wong and Wat Tham Khao Wong.

Please take a look at Wat Khao Wong and Wat Tham Khao Wong. Wat Khao Wong is the only entry in a catalog of places with coordinate problems. Perhaps you can find a fix. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:42, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

The coords are indeed slightly off for Wat Khao Wong, unfortunately I don't know how to make any changes to the Wiki maps. There are several Google results for Wat Tham Khao Wong so I can't be sure. It's also odd to say that it's near Suphan Buri province - it's either in the province, or it isn't. These places are all several 100 miles from where I live.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I have made a change for Wat Khao Wong. It would seem that it is in Hin Wang District, even though the text says Tambon. The infobox makes the map and location from the coordinates in the infobox (lat & long), and those coordinates also appear at the top right of the article, and can be used to go to Google or Bing maps. For United States locations, the satellite views for Google maps are often useful for correcting coordinates, but for Asian locations in general, I have not found them to be particularly useful. After reading the second paragraph of the article, it is clear to me that confusion reigns. If Wat Khao Wong is in Hing Wang District, then it is not also in Uthai Thani Province. I do not know what to do, so the best thing now for me is to sleep on it, and see what is to be done tomorrow, Philadelphia time. --DThomsen8 (talk) 00:52, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the infobox map. BTW, many amphoe (districts) also have a tambon (a lower level of local government) of the same name. It's quite confusing, especially when you're drivig around looking for a address that doesn't state which it is - sometimes they are miles apart, and even the district seat may be a tiny village, whereas the tambon might be a sizable town! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:03, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the infobox map. BTW, many amphoe (districts) also have a tambon (a lower level of local government) of the same name. It's quite confusing, especially when you're drivig around looking for a address that doesn't state which it is - sometimes they are miles apart, and even the district seat may be a tiny village, whereas the tambon might be a sizable town! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:03, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

If I really want to pursue the location, I would go to the map department at the Free Library of Philadelphia, because they just might have a paper map which would help. However, the information in the article is contradictory, so I am not sure what I would look for. Do you have paper maps of Thailand? Are they of any use when looking for something like this? --DThomsen8 (talk) 01:10, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Since GPS became available for cars (for those who can afford it here), no commercially printed maps have been updated. The latest editions go back 10 years or so and were already notoriously inaccurate. I travel up to 60,000 miles a year here and I know the problems well! Unfortunately I do not have access to official Thai government OS maps. They are published by the defense department and also do not contain all the information that would be useful for someone who is travelling. Local research can be done at any province land registry department, but naturally it would take hours, and hours, and hours... Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

It seems like there will not be anything useful at the FLP map department. On this particular subject, time to give up. --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:04, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

You never know, perhaps the FLP might have maps, but perhaps not for every part of the world. Personally, I don't think a journey there would justify your time for this minor issue. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:34, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Academic biographies

I see over and over the difficulties that you mentioned for academics biographies, when we met at Wikimania 2012. Is there anything to be done? --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:42, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Not really, except abide by the policies we have whether we like them or not - or until we can change them, but changing the notabilty criteria is one of the most difficult things to do at Wikipedia. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Wisdom. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:44, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Copper Hills High School

Hey, I was just curious as to why you deleted the "Band Program" section of the Copper Hills High School page. By the way, I just created this account, and until now I've been using Wikipedia through my IP address. I'd like to follow the rules, so if you could explain in detail what was wrong, I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

Jodapop (talk) 02:09, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

PS: I'm a student at Copper Hills High School.

I removed that information with this diff in October last year because it was an unsourced and possibly promotional claim. You can look up the recommendations for school article content at WP:WPSCH, and if you are unsure of anything, please don't hesitate to ask again. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I was refering to this one. You completely removed the "Band Program" paragraph. What should I change about the paragraph so we can still keep it in the article?Jodapop (talk) 05:17, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, these are also unsourced, possibly promotional claims to the school's prowess. You can reinsert the content , but please consider shortening it considerably, reducing the promotional tone. You must also provide Reliable Independent Sources for each and every claim (see for example the places marked 'Citation needed') that you retain. For more information on how to write school articles, please wee WP:SCH/AG. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Jodapop, I'm sorry to hear you attend Copper Hills. Too bad you are unable to attend a half-way decent high school like my alma mater, Alta. Go Hawks!! My wife went to Taylorsville, so you atleast attend something way better than she did. I won't tell you when I graduated as you weren't born yet. Kudpung is right and you should follow his advice. The Deseret News hopefully has information to source your band paragraph. Use Google news to search for Deseret News articles as their own search function is horrible. The Tribune doesn't allow their old stuff to be accessed without money. As I know the area where you live, if you have any more questions, leave them on my talk page. Bgwhite (talk) 06:16, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Paul Staines

I am a prominent sometimes controversial right-of-centre blogger in the UK and have long accepted that as a consequence my Wikipedia entry will be a matter of obsession for left-wingers.

A read of the talk pages will show that for over 5 years I have bitterly complained about the content - without altering it.

I have now changed my policy and am determined to correct falsehoods and prevent it being used to only record negative information about me.

If you look at the talk pages you will see references to various profiles and broadcast documentaries from credible organisations which take a far more balanced view of me.

There is a concerted effort by left-wing bloggers to slant my entry, just Google around and you will find blogs and hundreds tweets about my trying to correct the record.

When the entry has in the past included outlandish claims about me it has eventually been corrected. Why should I have to put up with this ongoing onslaught and considerable delays in correcting the record?

For example I am frankly fed up of having to waste my time forinstance correcting false claims about my nationality repeatedly. Can you lock that down?

As for me threatening legal action, today two people repeatedly made false allegations that I had knocked down a woman. This claim has been made on left-wing blogs in the past. as a result I have gone to the trouble of collecting video evidence of the woman concerned stating otherwise. Now if Wikipedia edits repeatedly and falsely report the opposite what am I supposed to do?

The entry should be locked down in a neutral stable state.

Also it conflates me as a person with the blog brand - which is nowadays mostly written by other people. Please email me your thoughts to guido.fawkes@order-order.com - I do not as a rule watch or understand Wikipedia systems Paul (talk) 19:06, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Paul, if you feel that any content concerning you is improper in any way, please consider reading the page at WP:LIBEL and following the instructions there carefully. My immediate concern is to prevent further disruption to this encyclopedia and any possible violation of its core editing policies. I will not however be making any assessments as to the authenticity of the claims in the article or any other judgement over the content - I will now leave that to others depending on the outcome of any complaint you may wish to make through our official channel. I may attempt to locate what I believe in good faith to be a stable neutral version, revert the article to that point and lock it down Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:40, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Appreciate the locking down for the moment. Haven't noticed any outright libellous comments this morning. What can we do regarding the balance? It seems to me that minor events in my bio have a disproportionate focus. And there is a conflation of me as a person with the blog's brand. Like thinking the CEO of KFC is Colonel Saunders. --Paul (talk) 10:48, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Only admins can edit the article now, and any request to restore any content must have some convincing arguments and be backed up by reliable sources which the admins will check first. Remember that all claims in a biography must be 100% referenced to reliable, independent sources such as the quality press and TV (what's been said about you or shown on TV can be cited), and if it's wrong, you must take it up with them and not with Wikipedia. Anything which is not accurately sourced must be deleted whether it is from you or the other editors of the article. You really only have two option: Either discuss the issues calmly on the article talk page and reach a compromise with the other editors, or take the official route. Please continue the discussion on the article talk page now. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:19, 18 August 2012 (UTC).

Thanks

Thanks for the mentoring. It's been a privilege and a huge learning experience. Hope you won't mind clearing my odd doubt on NPP once in a while Sesamevoila (talk) 08:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

It's been a great pleasure. I'll close it now and archive it. If ever you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask here. If you see one of my standard messages if you get something wrong, I know that you will take them in the very best of good faith. Good luck with your editing! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:09, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Electriccatfish2's talk page.
Message added 11:25, 19 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Electric Catfish 11:25, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback Message added 05:22, 13 June 2012 (UTC) notice from you on my Talk page seems to be missing from yours. --Pawyilee (talk) 12:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

It will be in the archives, but I don't think it was anything important other than to ask you if you were interested in taking part in a meeting to help organise a work group for the Thai Wikipedia. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:18, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Request declined

I took your recommendation to dig deeper but the CheckUser request has been declined at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Strike2216. Zepppep (talk) 12:20, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Without looking at the case page, it was probably declined because a CU will not disclose whether or not there was a match between a user name and an IP user, so to run a CU check, there needs to be either several IPs who may be editing from the same location (such as a mobile device, laptop, or desktop in the same house/office), or at least two named accounts. There are a lot of other checks that can be done though that may provide a 99% duck test. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:29, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmm...well, if you have any other tips to share or research I can perform to provide enough evidence to warrant a check, feel free to fill me in on that. The only other CU I've requested (performed by you, graciously) was to check any possible linkage between a registered user and IP user, so I guess I'm not totally sure what is different about this one (other than the fact in that case the registered used was blocked during the CU request). (It's been sort of frustrating pursuing this issue/editor...invitations to hash it out on the user's talk page went ignored, comments on the article's talk page went ignored, I then pursed WP:3O and it was declined because no other users had chimed in and so the editor who declined 3O recommended I pursue page protection, which was rejected (by you :)) and then it was recommended to me I pursue dispute resolution, to which I made RfC to relevant WikiProject (which thus far has gone ignored)). I have, luckily, got one other editor to chime in on the article's talk page but other than that, the recommendations given to me haven't panned out. So I'm willing to pretty much try anything! Zepppep (talk) 13:18, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm not surprised you didn't get any response from 3O or DR - probably because an SPI can be such a complicated affair that people who did not discover the cases are not too keen on getting involved. If I were you, I'd keep the stuff on your watchlist and keep a personal log of anything suspicious, then ask me what to do if you think you've got enough evidence together. I'll then walk you through it, and then you can reopen the case. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:42, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Banyan merchants

Could you take a look at Banyan merchants and its talk page? It was originally a Redirect page to the Hindu caste Vanika, members of which are also know in English by the same name, but are not related to the group from Gujarati who hsve a more ancient lineage. Note I tagged the article a sociology-related stub, and that Category:International trade is now red-linked. If you are in substantial agreement with the editorial complaints that my edits violate Wiki's policy on "quote farms," I'll bow out and take it off my watch list. As for interest in taking part in a meeting to help organise a work group for the Thai Wikipedia, would that be on line, land, sea or air? As I, myself, am not organized, you might want to reconsider the invitation. --Pawyilee (talk) 13:14, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

There are several things wrong with the article but not much that appears to be your doing. However, don't get near a nascent edit war. If I were you, I'd just take it off your watchlist and bow out as you suggest. I expect the next meeting will also be in BKK. I came back from Wikimania last month in DC with a lot of ideas to get things moving on the Thai Wiki and we had a small meeting already about 3 weeks ago in BKK. What we're hoping to do is get a grant from the WMF to develop some outreach programmes - going into colleges and presenting Wikipedia, etc., and perhaps organise an official Wikipedia-Thailand chapter. The 2013 Wikimania will be in nearby Hong Kong and I'm hoping we'll get some scholarships for Thai editors to go. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:31, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll take three bow-outs: Wikimania, Banyan merchants, and Talk:Thai_alphabet#Consonant.2Fvowel_combinations. --Pawyilee (talk) 13:51, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Question about speedy deletion

Hello Kudpung. I still don't understand that why the speedy deletion takes place on my first article (i.e. Lottery story). Which were the links, I uses were blacklisted or its about the image which I used. Please Tell me so I can keep it in mind for future, because I was working on that from last 4 hours and now the page is gone. What can I do now ? I think I use Low resolution of the image but still it had deleted. Please tell me the cause and guide me for the future.thank you.--Arun sharma 101 (talk) 09:09, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Lottery Story was deleted for still having no content an hour after you started it. If you are going to take a long time to create an article please create it in your sandbox first. If you think the article will not be deleted when it is complete, let me know and I will restore it to your sandbox for you so that you can work on it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:23, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

But please tell me that the image and the references which I used were OK or not ? OR they was deleted for copyright issue ?--Arun sharma 101 (talk) 09:31, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

No such file appears to exist on Wikipedia, and if it was delete, I can't find it with my admin tools. Try uploading it again, but be sure it complies 100% with our copyright usage rules. Read the upload instructions carefully before you press the upload button. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:37, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

The references are only to the book itself. I don't think this article will pass our criteria for books at WP:NBOOK. You will need to find some in-depth coverage about it in the established press. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:32, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Request for rollback

Hi! I'm just asking if you would like to have a look at my request for rollback. Thanks. --Bradshaws1 (talk) 13:31, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I had already responded there before I saw this. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:44, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, thank you! --Bradshaws1 (talk) 14:07, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Deleted page - gayatri nair

Good Morning,

I've created a page yesterday, 20 August 2012 but has been deleted with the reason copyright violation (11:42, 20 August 2012 Kudpung (talk | contribs) deleted page Gayatri nair (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://gayatrinair.com/about-me).

I can confirm that I wrote, own and maintain the website http://gayatrinair.com and whole content for this. If you need any kind of proof to support this please let me know.

Best Regards Sunil

37kellyave (talk) 06:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit: I've read through a lot of articles and understood that I've to contribute the article to wikipedia first. I've done this now by sending an email in the required format, but not sure whether I can create the page again or not.

Sunil Nair 07:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37kellyave (talk • contribs)

Hi Kudpung,

Could you respond to the above please? I understand that I'm new on wikipedia, but trying to learn and obey the strict rules.

As outlined I've sent out the email a day ago declaring the ownership of content and allowing wikipedia to use the same, but no reply so far.

Regards Sunil

Sunil Nair 08:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37kellyave (talk • contribs)

Hi. You seem to have done the right thing but it may take a couple of days for the OTRS team to respond.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:09, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Afd: Woffles Wu

Hi, Kudpung...

Pertaining to the afd for Woffles Wu,

Why was it relisted? There were three keep votes and no deletes except for the nominator's. Just wondering.

Bonkers The Clown (talk) 06:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

And ps. do talkback on my talkpage please.

Done. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:44, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Yet another NPP doubt

I had tagged this page Deepak Kumar Dwivedi as a hoax while on NPP. However, the tag was reverted by User_talk:Yaris678 with the comment "I don't think those reasons apply". So, I was wondering what the page should be tagged as for CSD, or whether it qualifies only for a PROD? P.S. The image put up on the page is a morphed picture of Steve Jobs but I am not quite sure how to report/have it deleted from Commons Sesamevoila (talk) 08:12, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

May or may not be a hoax, hard to say. You may wish to chime in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deepak Kumar Dwivedi where it is now. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:07, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

I just wanted to clarify whether CSD G3 was applicable in this case before I made a fool of myself again since the tutorials are not clear whether the hoax tags apply to fake BLPs. The user who removed my tag also did not elaborate beyond saying "I don't think those reasons apply" hence, my confusion.I've already weighed in at the articles for deletion page and also launched an SPI at [2] some six hours back though there's been no movement on it. I did not request CU since the instructions there said that this was to be requested for only in the rarest of cases and this is my first request for SPI Sesamevoila (talk) 17:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

A hoax tag can be applied to anything that is an obvious hoax. In fact you did better than I did at recognising this one as such. You did well to open a SPI. A CU probably won't be necessary because it seems they all pass the WP:DUCK test, but a CU can be asked for later if anything else proves incoclusive or if the presumed socks claim their innocence. Be sure to have notified the reported editors on their talk pages using the SPI warning template. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, glad to have that cleared up. I think I could catch on to the hoax at first glance because this was done by a local kid and I could place the page in context much more easily than the other patrollers:-) 2 more socks have made their appearance in the meantime..can/should I add those to the SPI page, and also give a link to the Afd discussion-is that allowed? Sesamevoila (talk) 18:32, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Add any more users who you are reasonably sure are socks. Add any' information that you think will help the investigation, and which will reduce the workload for the case reviewer. If a CU data search becomes necessary, the CU will say either 'confirmed' or 'likely', or 'inconclusive', but will not reveal their IP addresses. If two or more users have mentioned anywhere on Wiki where they live, then that would also be a good indication, but it would need to be close, such as for example in the Malcha Marg area of Delhi, or a smallish town somewhere. If an IP starts editing, use 'geolocate' in the user contribs page, note the ISP, and zoom in on the Google map location. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:59, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at WP:PERM/C#User:Anderson (Public).
You can remove this notice at any time.

Could you please confirm my account as an alt. account of Anderson used to log on at less secure public internet facilities.--Anderson (Public) (talk) 03:52, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Done. But there really is no need to ask admins on their talk pages - plenty of us are watching the perm pages :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:14, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Verifying accounts

Hi, Kudpung! I saw the other day you granted the confirmed right on User:Anderson's public account here (I've seen the pub tb above)The thing is, you didn't ask them to verify that this was their alternative account, they did verify it was for their RB request, but that was at 5:00, you accepted the request at 4:12. If I have missed the verification, or if it was done privately, I apologise, but I couldn't see any dialogue between you and him about this. Also, thanks for the tps comment on my talk th other day. Thanks.--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 10:50, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, I tell a lie. There is a way where you can verify, without asking, but I'm keen to see if you know it!--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 11:11, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The decision to grant minor rights (and autoconfirmed is not a right, it is a technicality) is based on admin discretion. I'm beginning to find that these persistent inquisitions from new users - especially those involved with the catastrophic CVU, and those who are determined to patrol admin areas as self-appointed clerks - over admin decisions are no longer constructive and do not demonstrate good faith. Note that while admin Franamax already gave some advice to Anderson, he did not see the need to question my action. If there is some particular motive for it, please spit it out - perhaps we can hack it out together. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:17, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Um, I'm a bit confused here. What I'm trying to say is - you do need to verify, before granting, no matter if it's a minor right, or rollback, or whatever it is. I really don't know what this has to do with non-ad clerking, perhaps enlighten me. :)--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 11:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Special:Log/Anderson verifies it. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 11:27, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes Chip, there definitely is a need to verify claims of alternate accounts. As TAP links, the account creation log does the job (something I myself forgot to check) and I presume that Kudpung did make that verification. If the log entry wasn't there and Kudpung had just blindly granted rights to a potential spoofing account rather than spotting and blocking it, you can bet I would be right up his nose here. And Kudpung, it would have been better if you'd been the one to ask Anderson to cross-post publicly, even though "confirmed" itself is the smallest of small deals. But it's no big deal either way, and maybe I'm more paranoid than some. :) Franamax (talk) 11:44, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

The log was the thing I was checking to see if Kudung saw! As you say, really no big deal, but it's always best to check! --Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 11:52, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm a very paranoid admin - it's what gets me a bad name ;) I do all the checks, and them some that non-admins don't have access to. My recent comment on Anderson's tp will explain. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I knew you would if done the checks, but I just like to make sure. Being paranoid is fine, at least you don't do stupid things :)--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 12:17, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Kudpung, you're a very well-respected admin. Your brilliant essay, WP: RFAADVICE has caused you to earn much respect on WP. Also, I've decided not to put the {{not done}} templates, as per Worm's request and wait for an admin to close it. Anderson has closed the requests that I have commented on himself. I'm not going to make a big deal out of it, but I just wanted to let you know. Best, Electric Catfish 20:06, 23 August 2012 (UTC).

Mailcall

Hello, Kudpung. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Worm^TT(talk) 11:46, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Kudpung. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 12:30, 23 August 2012 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

When you've got a chance, your reply would be appreciated :6 Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 12:30, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

+1Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 15:56, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

RE: Rollback

Kudpung,

I saw that you turned me down for rollback. I understand rollback is a privellege and not a right, so no, I'm not going to stomp around on your page and demand it. I checked the links you used as reasoning, The first one was my block lock. The last one I had was more than a year ago (the most recent two were actualyl in error, noted so by the sysop, who put it on then took it off ) The second link was to a a message left on my page by Tarc. I'd removed uncvil stuff on his page per the policy WP:Removeuncivil. Don't worry, I'm not going to lawyer about it, I get that the block log looks bad. I also get that as there's no hard and fast criteria for what a user has to have in order to expect rollback to be granted, that it's left up to the interpretation of the granter. Again, no problem.

I will point at that per WP:ROLLBACK I do have a history that shows an ability to distinguish good edits from vandalism and even test edits from vandalism, so I disagree with your assesment that I don't understand the rules and am curious as to which rules you think I didn't understand. Your second diff, in fact, shows that I undestand removeuncvil and was acting on it. I look forward to hearing back from you. "....We are all Kosh...."  <-Babylon-5-> 13:05, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi! First of all, Rollback is not a privilege nor a right. It's an extra button that is given to trusted users who can identify vandalism. Having edit warring blocks in your block log is a issue, as rollback should never be used in an edit war. Once you lose rollback for edit warring, it is much harder to get it back. Many experienced users ahve found this out the hard way. Anyways, I'll have Kudpung explain the rest. Electric Catfish 14:35, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Wrong, rollback is neither a privilege, nor even a 'right' (although that is the name we use for various user groups - it's kind of geek speak for different user access levels to software programmes and web sites). It's a tool that is accorded to users who have demonstrated that they can use them competently, and have the trust of the community to understand and respect our other rules. We don't 'award' rights for good work. In my decline I mentioned there are other issues too, and one is your use of edit summaries. I'm not strictly saying that there is much wrong with your actual counter-vandalism, but an argument with a vandal can quickly develop into an unorthodox exchange. Fluffenfutter has spoken very recently on your talk page on other issues, and she's one of our most respected admins. 'I also get that as there's no hard and fast criteria for what a user has to have in order to expect rollback to be granted, that it's left up to the interpretation of the granter. Again, no problem' is really a bit of a contradiction to 'I disagree with your assessment that I don't understand the rules' Your are welcome to ask another admin for a second opinion. S/he must however discuss it with me, and I don't think your are ready for it for at least another couple of months of editing without a single complaint. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:47, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, EC, obviously your connection is faster than mine. Interesting that we seem to have used the same words. I'm reassured in the thought that as an old, old hand here, I'm still on the right track;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:52, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

@Kosh: BTW, if you ,are going to get involved with maintenance tasks that will bring you in contact with a lot of people who are not regulars here, you may wish to get a signature that demonstrates the maturity of the job you wish to do, provides the expected links, and more accurately reflects your user name. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

Kudpung, no, I'm not challenging your decision. Your decision was a "no" and I accept it, no, I don't agree that I don't understand the rules, but no I don't seek to challenge it in any fashion. I'm seeking to "see it with your eyes".

So far, you've given me two links, one to a block log ( a year old ) and an exchange where WP:Removeuncivil was used. I've commented on both, so no need to bring it back up again. My edit summaries are terse to be sure, however, be aware, they used to be longer but I was told that was improper, even though the exact reason of the revert was specific, so I began using terse summaries, and yes, sometimes I put a goofy summary in. Oddly enough, I got a few complaints that me edit summaries are now too short. Bottom line, a complaint's gonna happen either way, so I choose to keep them terse and to the point. None of this shows a mis-understanding of the rules. You brought up my signature, it's below the max length and contains no images, no links to "sign my guestbook", it contains my name and a link to my talk page, as required (and yes, "Kosh" is short for KoshVorlon). So far, nothing you've said shows that I don't understand the rules here.

Intersting that you mentioned Fluffernutter, yes, she put a note on my page about Tarc's edit notice. Notice that she doesn't disagree with my judgement on that edit notice ? Her request was that I start a discussion on it, that's it.

Also, how realistic is to ask a vandal fighter to generate no complaints ? It isn't , if you think about it. A vandal fighter's gonna get complaints, it's all part of removing vandalism. See you around. "....We are all Kosh...."  <-Babylon-5-> 16:17, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi! First of all, I'd love to mentor you on anti-vandalism, if you want. However, I cannot and will not guarantee rollback. Putting a goofy summary doesn't gain you any respect here. Since you don't appear to use any anti-vandalism tools, the reviewing admin (Kudpung, in this case) had to look at your edit summaries to look at your vandalism reversions to see if they were correct or not. Lastly, Rollback is really nothing. Some people make a big deal about it, but it's just a button that undoes the edit without having to save the page. In other words, you just click the rollback button and it reverts the edits. Best, Electric Catfish 20:02, 23 August 2012 (UTC).

FYI: Batch Upload on Commons

FYI: I left a msg. on your Commons talk page. Regards, --Hedwig in Washington ^(TALK) 00:37, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Mntwest

You recently PRODed an article by this user. See User talk:Moonriddengirl#CCI?. Ryan Vesey 03:18, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Anderson's talk page.
Message added 03:40, 24 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Done Anderson - What's up? 03:40, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Commons

Hello,
could you help me in commons? Appearently administrators there (Herbythyme & Jameslwoodward) have a Grudge against me [3]. All files uploaded by me have been nominated for deletion. --Ne0 (talk) 04:49, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately I am not an admin on Commons and have no special experience there. That said, please assume good faith - the nominations are for a community decision whether the images will be kept or deleted. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:56, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Word to the wise

Next time you find an article crammed full of recently added copyvio content, I suggest that you check the page history before you mistakenly castigate the user who created the article as a stub 4 years ago. Not everybody accepts other people's mistakes with equanimity. --Orlady (talk) 11:54, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps you could moderate your tone - we've spoken about the way you communicate before. Leave the exaggerations and PA for the newbies. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:16, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at WP:PERM/RW.
Message added 23:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Anderson - What's up? 23:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

As there is a possibility that Pending Changes will be delayed, and as it is not known how and if a user right will be implemented, I am no longer according or declining Reviewer rights. There is therefore no urgency, but other admins are watching the Reviewer requests page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:28, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Re: User talk:Chutznik

Xe'd originally placed a helpme request, which I re-purposed [4], as ordinary editors are unable to address the issue; whether that's still abuse, I don't know, but didn't feel that it should just be reverted or ignored until an admin chanced to review help requests. I've done so in the past, but if it's anyone's fault, I think that would be mine. Not much into my user page, but trout me if necessary. Xe has enough that I wouldn't want my action to pile on. Cheers. Dru of Id (talk) 03:41, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Perfectly alright in this case. It's now moot anyway - he's finally decided that his kind or argument won't endear him to admins. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:52, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok. :D Carrying on, then. Dru of Id (talk) 04:42, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Hanley_Castle_High_School/GA1

It is live :) TheSpecialUser ^TSU 15:44, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Noted, thanks. BTW, it is midnight here. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:48, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

New Page Patrol

Thanks for deleting Rk šibenik. I knew it was eastern European, but that's as far as I got. I've been playing with the NewPagesFeed, and getting into New Page Patrol on an occasional basis. The new tool makes it much easier for me to face into the firehose stream of information on Recent Changes. I've been watching what a lot of others do, but may need to ask some questions from time to time. In most cases the course of action seems clear, but in others not so. So far I've been following the guides on New Page Patrol, adding cats and stubsort tags, providing project banners on redlinked talk pages, tagging as speedy in the rare cases I see such needed. (As an aside, I've adopted BrokenRedirects as a place where I can get experience with CSD tagging.) Is there a simple criteria for marking as patrolled? How much time does the average patroller give to an individual article? I'll watch here for response. BusterD (talk) 16:01, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Well done! I'm a very experienced patroller and unless an article is 100% OK (and they rarely are), I do all the checks listed at WP:NPP (I co-authored that current tutorial) so I usually take anything from 5 minutes to 20 minutes. The thing about doing NPP properly is that it often leads to unraveling COPYVIO, COI, and even leading to the discovery of sockpuppets, so sometimes it can even take an hour or so. Pages should only be marked as patrolled if they only require very minor attention, and those are things the patroller can usually do themselves, such as adding cats and stub templates etc. bear in mind that the NewPagesFeed is a very new tool and is still very much under development. Compare with Special:NewPages. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:13, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Appreciate your response. Based on what you've said, the NewPagesFeed tools might make it TOO easy for an inexperienced patroller to mark a page as patrolled. For example, I'm not generally a fan of driveby tagging, and when using the feed tool, I find myself doing that often. (I annoyed a longtime editor this morning with such tagging, but I was shocked that editor wasn't autopatrolled, having 90K+ edits.) I do like something about the way the Feed tool provides me information about the contributor; it makes it easy to choose low-hanging fruit. I suppose the best way for me to learn to do this better is to keep the NPP checklist next to me while I'm looking through new contributions. The more I do it the less I'll need the list. I go through phases when I'd rather be reactive, and when I'd rather farm my own pagespace. Patrolling new pages gives me one more reactive task which is somewhat pleasant (because of the serendipity involved). Thanks again. BusterD (talk) 16:38, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

BTW, is there a script which makes stubsorting easier? BusterD (talk) 16:39, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Keeping the NPP checklist open is a very good idea and one that I recommend. However, a cmpletely new tutorial is in the pipeline. I'm not aware of a script for stubsorting, but I do know that something similar is under consideration by the developers of the NewPagesFeed. Whether we get it or not remains to be seen. One of the dangers with this new, NewPagesFeed is that when it is finally released, it's such a cool tool that it will attract a lot of new and inexperienced users. To ensure that it is used correctly a user right for NPP may eventually have to be introduced, which will also be a problem because user rights attract hat-collectors. We'll have to see how it goes. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:47, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

WP:PERM/RW

I noticed you declined my request. How long do you think i should wait before re-requesting?--Anderson (Public) (talk) 03:01, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I am asking for admins to consider a moratorium on all requests for reviewer. None of the rights at PERM are ever urgent, and this is the lease urgent of all. IMHO, some the preemptive requests for Reviewer are beginning to look like hat-collecting. I believe it would be best for users to wait and see what the community decides will be the required experience level, and until this decision is reached there is also a possibility that the implementation of PC will be further delayed. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:08, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

PERM

Hi Kudpung! I think that it would be best if I stopped clerking at PERM for the time being. There is no urgency for user rights, but there is an urgency for NPP, which is often backlogged. I see that other admins, such as yourself have gotten involved at PERM. Also, many inexperienced new users have gotten involved. Just as we don't need RFA clerks, we don't need PERM clerks, too. Getting minor rights is not urgent, and the admins who worked there didn't work there before their RFA. Beforehand, GB fan and BMW were the only admins who worked at confirmed. Anyways, I'd still like to have you teach me in the NPP course how to determine if a user is ready for user rights or not. It's a skill that cannot be taught by just reading policies. Anyways, thanks for all of your help. I'm going back to Special: Newpages. Best, Electric Catfish 15:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC).

I think that's a very wise decision and I hope you will also be able to convince others - with some subtlety - of the same. The pnly reason why I have been busy at PERM lately is to get in there quickly enough to beat the wannabe clerks to it and help them understand that their comments are generally not needed. You know that I am more than open to helping anyone understand the complexities of NPP; for one reason, I hope that we won't need to introduce a user right for it when the new process is finally released for general use. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:18, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. One of the clerks had his rollback removed this morning. A user who is having an SPI asked me to be his NPP mentor. I don't see why we need a user right for NPP. After all, CSD tags are only templates, and to my knowledge, there's no way to restrict the use of templates to a specific user rights group. Best, Electric Catfish 15:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC).

I wouldn't go so far as to say the CSD tags are 'only' templates. Their use can have much more far-reaching consequences than a vandalism revert. Hence although NPP doesn't require a user right (yet), each patrol involves (or should) a lot of background research and arguably requires a lot more clue than most of the minor user rights. Note also that I believe one of the instructors at the CVU has actually been blocked - correct me if I'm wrong. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:02, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, they can cause much damage if incorrectly used, but they are just templates. One of the CVUA instructors was blocked indef. last week for sockpuppetry. Anyways, I'm no longer involved there. Electric Catfish 21:51, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Jennifer Armstrong (writer)

Hi, Kudpung. I was just wondering why you tagged the above article? Everything is sourced (one from her own website, one from Entertainment Weekly, and one from The Huffington Post). Also, she definitely meets the GNG; she is a senior writer for EW and has her own book. In addition, her work has been included in many other magazines/websites. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

She may well be notable but it isn't asserted for Wikipedia by the current sources. her own web site and the Huffington are not WP:RS, and the EW source is just a list of articles that she wrote for that publication. Journalists also try to sneak in with notability by listing their works, but obviously their work will be available on the Internet (or references to it) but it's just a job (see: WP:AUTHOR) - we have the same issue for example with lawyers who try to claim notability by simply listing the cases they have worked on that were reported in the press. To assert notability, BLP must have reliable, independent third party sources. Nevertheless, I have already approved your request. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:49, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I understand what you're saying. I'll try to find more sources to prove her notability. Thanks for approving my request for AP! TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Autopatrol rights

I've had a look at the two bios (Marion Mack and Donald E. Wilkes Jr.) that are tagged with needing more reliable sources and I've added to both. I have to say I surprised that Wilkes was tagged for this - a university faculty biography is a lot more reliable than many publisher's blurb. That said I've taken out the bit about the number of articles published as a) it used the same reference but you can see a full list and b) does sound hagiographic. Instead there is mention of his being the first to apply the concept of New Federalism to the US Criminal Justice system. He wrote three essays on the topic in the 1970s the first of which is cited almost 350 times in other works google scholar result, wasn't sure whether or even how to cite this though. Hope you'll revisit my autopatrol application favourably. NtheP (talk) 17:48, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:56, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Thx. NtheP (talk) 18:49, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

bottom of Special:NewPages

I know that you teach WP:NPP and CSD policy, but I was wondering if you had any advice on what to do with the pages at the back of the unpatrolled policy. I find most pages there to be quite - well, I don't know what to do with them. Any advice there? If I don't see anything wrong and they looked properly tagged (they have {{unsourced}}, {{onesource}} or whaever would be necessary to that article, should I click mark as patrolled? I know there must be some responsibility taken but I'm never quite sure if I should click, because I might be missing something. Mysterytrey 19:57, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Can you give me a couple of links to some example pages? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:23, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I kind of meant any advice in general, as previously, I just kept on thinking "I have no clue what to do", even after I fixed problems I saw. So, assuming I did a minor copyedit on this, and since the previous AfD was withdrawn because the subject was notable, should I click mark as patrolled, or would you have any other advice? Mysterytrey 00:45, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Thmc1 still evading block...REPLY REQUESTED

I am writing to report that 173.63.176.93 is still block evading w/out logging in and editing since you freed up that IP, an action which I disagree with. Same old anti-UK edits, as well as to the same articles he's edited before. Unless you've forgotten, Thmc1 isn't a stale, active account, but a BLOCKED sockmaster since June of 2010. So, what action are you planning next? Hopefully, another investigation won't be necessary. As you can clearly see, he's violated the temporary unblock that you granted him since the IP was freed up on August 18. Check out the logs for yourself. [5]MBaxter1 (talk) 20:31, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I've been doing some more checks and I can't find anything untoward in 173.63.176.934s recent edits. If 173.63.176.93 continues editing after today, please let us know on the SPI case page and drop me a link here in case I miss it on my watchlist. I've also come up with some more interesting information too about a couple of users that have not yet been connected with this case. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:17, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Kudpung- After what's happened, of course he's going to be on his best behavior. Nonetheless, he's still editing as of today! Anyway, I was still able to find at least a couple of classic Thmc1 edits. Here he's made sure to highlight and prop his beloved New York City under BBC America [6], and what appears to be downplaying California's process of counting census data [7]. The suspected IPs, Nyc88, and any other IPs connected to that account should've been blocked in the first place, and that's what I don't understand. This individual is so persistent that he'll find his way back with another IP, so don't feel too bad about blocking him. You'll probably have to investigate him again a couple of weeks after that.MBaxter1 (talk) 20:49, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

* KUDPUNG- 173.63.176.93 is still making edits w/out logging in as of today. That IP & all suspected accounts affiliated with it should be blocked permanently. Likewise with 74.88.160.244 for safe measure.MBaxter1 (talk) 18:05, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I've done all the research I can but I'm not a CheckUser so I've done I am prepared to do within the scope of our blocking policy and my personal interpretation of it and I've moved on. You'll notice that I called for other admins to review the case, but I believe it has now been archived. You are welcome to ask other admins to review it who may feel I have been over cautious in not blocking but I don't see much to be gained at this stage by you worrying yourself too much about it unless the edits are clearly disruptive, edit warring, or vandalism, in which case the best venue would be to take it to WP:AIV or WP:AN/I and perhaps link to any relevant :evidence in the SPI case. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:16, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Is this a bug?

I was on NPP when I came across British Family, added a couple of tags and went back to the page and did a recce of the page history and page creator talk page when the tags were removed. Funny thing is page creator talk page indicates that page was tagged for speedy deletion twice while page history shows no such thing. So, back to the question, am I missing something here? Sesamevoila (talk) 13:34, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Looking...

Go here, try to figure it out for yourself and if you don't come up with the answer, let me know and I'll tell you. I'm really pleased that you are asking questions like this, it shows great thinking that most patrollers don't do. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:03, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, so the page was repeatedly recreated and the only mistake the hoaxer made was to leave the earlier deletion templates on his talk page, is that right? I was so taken in by his earnest requests to leave the page be while he built it up that I only tagged it. What if this page was repeatedly recreated under different userids? Would it have been caught then? Sesamevoila (talk) 04:10, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Correct - well done again :) Yes, whoever recreates the page, it will be caught by anyone who has it on their watch list. This shojuld also awake the suspicion of sockpuppetry or block evasion. I believe I have also fully protected the page, but if it is recreated with a slightly different name (even a change in capitalisation or spacing - a favourite trick), it might be more difficult to catch. When tagging such pages, it is essential to check the page history for previous deletes, and to check the user's talk page for older, deleted warnings. If the user obviously needs to be blocked, there is no need for a lengthy discussion at AN/I, just a message to an admin will suffice. Oh, and if you want to try your hand at some copyvio hunting, you might wish to check this out. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:23, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Parts of it seem to be lifted from here [8].Oops:Didn't relaise pediapress is an offshoot of wiki:-(. On a related note, I couldn't quite figure out the wikipedia policy on copy pasting from one wikipedia article to another. Is it OK so long as there is a link back to the source article? I ask because I had tagged a copy paste tag on Politics of Mizoram since it had content from [History of Mizoram]] and though the page creator removed that section, I was wondering if it was sufficent for him to acknowledge the source or to paraphrase content from the source page. Sesamevoila (talk) 16:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

You might find this helpful, let me know your thoughts on it. For your other question, see Wikipedia:Copy-paste#How about copying and pasting from one Wikipedia article to another?. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:24, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

As in the case of [[American Idiot (musical), pediapress can lead to some confusion because the "published" content, whether in the form of pdf or as a book, ends up differing from the current content on the same topic on wikipedia. It almost seems to me like an invalidation of the idea of wikipedia. Also, the ebook had "copyrighted material" plastered all over it which is what led me to believe the article had been lifted from the book in the first place. Seems to me a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing but that is just my view....

P.S. I've been using the new pages feed and though I find it much easier on the eyes than the old feed, I still find myself reaching for Twinkle when it comes to tagging, probably because one doesn't need to go through different tabs to locate the appropriate tag. The new feed would be even better if it showed the time of new page creation in local time instead of the present GMT? Sesamevoila (talk) 06:54, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Re:Reviewing

Hello. Yes, I had undertaken those checks, and had not found significant copyvios anywhere. Is there a problem regarding this aspect now? ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 16:38, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting that there is anything untoward, but I've lived and worked in India, and I've worked on Wikipedia India projects and I'm aware that the perception of plagiarism and copyright violation may be rather different there. Hence I'm often curious. That said, while it's good to hear that there weren't any significant copyvios, there shouldn't be any at all in Wikipedia articles. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:10, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Your comment about edit summaries.

In your comment about edit summaries on my rollback request section, you mentioned that I should try not to express my thoughts as much in my edit summaries. I realize that I do tend to have a habit of doing that, but I couldn't find that anywhere at the Wikipedia guidelines. Is it because rollbackers are held to a higher standard than others? If you could please elaborate and/or tell me where I can find more information about that, if possible. Thanks. I also realize that you're probably sleeping at the time of this writing, so I'll be patient. Lighthead ^þ 17:12, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) There's no official policy on it, it's just Wikiquette, I guess. Rollbackers are users with a few extra tools to revert vandalism more effectively, and other than edit-warring with rollback or wheel-warring on AFTv5, there are no special policies for rollbackers, as far as I know. Electric Catfish 20:55, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, but I think I'd rather hear it from him. Just kidding. Oh, that makes sense. Thanks. You scared me with that talk page stalker template. I thought you were trying to call me a talk page stalker! Ha. Lighthead ^þ 21:54, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

It's not a 'standard' for rollbackers, everyone should understand the use of edit summaries. Read WP:ES. There is also the fact that most newcomers and vandals (and a lot of more experienced users) don't even know what a page history is and where to find one. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:09, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I didn't understand your point about the experienced users. If they're not even acquainted with page histories, then it's doubtful that they'd ever see an edit summary. Are you trying to say that it wouldn't hurt if people knew more about that kind of stuff, including edit summaries? Lighthead ^þ 23:42, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I sad more experienced users. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:58, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand. I'll try to tone down my edit summaries, though. Thanks. Lighthead ^þ 01:24, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Dan653's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dan653 (talk) 03:18, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Kudpung, I left you a message at Dan's page too, regarding this STiki situation. I do ask that you read it. Worm^TT(talk) 14:39, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

CVUA

Kudpung, I've honestly seen enough, and with this recent STiki incident, I think that it would be best if I left the CVUA. I have title=Wikipedia%3ACounter-Vandalism_Unit%2FAcademy%2FStatus&diff=509604383&oldid=509604280 moved myself to inactive. Electric Catfish 14:04, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I understand perfectly, but it's really the CVU you should be telling this too, otherwise they'll never understand and take the advice they've been given. I believe that with Stiki, the CVU is clearly acting outside its remit and level of responsibility, and put bluntly, is simply getting too big for its boots. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:41, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't want to offend anyone there. Many of the "instructors" there are quite young and I don't want to make anyone feel bad. Also, I think that you should bring this up with DBigXRay, as he is the one who has been giving out STiki to the CVUAers. I think that it is a bit unfair that regular users must get 1,000 mainspace edits before getting access, while users who are in the CVUA get to use it regardless of their edit count. As you've said on Dan's page, every IRC chatting session or coordinator election could have resulted in hundreds of vandalism reversions instead. Also, please keep in mind that I didn't do anything at PERM besides Confirmed. Most of the stuff that Anderson pointed out could have also been caught by any admin, such as not having any vandalism reversions. Also, "clerks" in RL are supposed to be neutral and do not make decisions. In the US, the court clerk ensures that the court runs smoothly and usually does procedural documentation (called "housekeeping" on WP). They do not have the authority to decline cases, and neither do they decide the sentence or the conviction. At SPI and ArbCom, clerks don't decide what the result is (the patrolling admin does at SPI), but rather ensure that the process runs smoothly. I think an example of helpful clerking at PERM would be to archive requests (which Armbrust has been doing for quite a while). I've also downloaded the RFPP clerking script, which allows me to move completed requests so that they can be archived to make the RFPP process run more smoothly. If you're going to comment, you're not acting as a clerk. Since non-admins can't grant permissions, they shouldn't be declining requests, either. I will occasionally offer helpful advice at RFPP and AN/I, but that's commenting, not clerking. Most of the things that I did at confirmed did not need the sysop tools, but I see that GB fan and yourself are willing to do them, so I moved on to helping in other areas that are backlogged. I think that an admin is a trusted editor with extra tools, and the way to demonstrate that you know what you are doing here is by helping out with backlogs, not interfering with admin work. All of the best, Electric Catfish 15:00, 28 August 2012 (UTC).

I think you've got the picture :) Armbrust has stupidly got himself blocked, but I'm sure that when he comes off it he will return to archiving the pages at PERM. In the meantime you are of course most welcome to have a go at it and you can probably contact him for advice if you get stuck - archiving those pages is not something I would want to try! Keep up he good work. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:40, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, Oliver blocked him for 2 weeks so I'll try to help out with the archiving until he gets back. Armbrust gave me a set of instructions when I asked to work at PERM, so I'll have to dig through his archives and find the archiving instructions. Best, Electric Catfish 16:37, 28 August 2012 (UTC).