User talk:Kudpung/Archive Sep 2013

WP guidelines on protection levels for news articles with high potential controversy

Hello Kudpung! Is there a WP consensus on this amongst admins?. I was surprised by the lack of protection given to the recent 2013 Ghouta attacks article. Should not the basic premise in potentially highly controversial articles that they be given a starting level of semi-protection? Just a query as to what policy says here. Maybe it is not codified. Cheers as always Irondome (talk) 06:05, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Yes, it is codified that articles do not start protected. From Wikipedia:Protection policy#Guidance for administrators: "Semi-protection should not be used as a preemptive measure against vandalism that has not yet occurred..." (emphasis in original) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 06:11, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict):Please see the article protection log. According to Black Kite protection was reduced to semi by consensus, but I believe this to be a consensus between editors rather than admins. For more information I recommend you see the article talk page or contact Black Kite. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:15, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

See also: WP:FULL and WP:PREFER - which may have some bearing on Wifione's original FP. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:20, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

This is an unusual case, in that a barrage of IP edits, exclusively of an unacceptable nature, were thrown at the article, certainly in the period when I was helping out there. I attempted to request SP when things were becoming untenable in terms of coherent WP reversion, talk page to IP user responses, etc, in terms of pressure and time. It was rejected. It seems regular eds were being blamed for the chaos as opposed to the IP surge, and no action was taken. This was due to a perception of edit warring, which may well have been percipitated by stress due to the consistant IP edits the article must have been subject to from the off. Then, a total block was imposed, causing obvious material addition problems that admin User:NickD heroically fielded for nearly 24 hrs. The rules linked above do not seem to cover such an eventuality as this. I would suggest a change to policy that enforces a SP start to news articles of high sensitivity, i.e Syrian civil war, Israel/Palestine and maybe a few others. I would assume Falklands war is pernently SP for example, so related news topics should be similarly protected. Certain categories of news items should have a higher protection level at the outset. It just saves wasted energy. Cheers all Irondome (talk) 06:41, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Actually, the Falklands War article is semi-protected for a year only, which will expire on December 31st. You are free to suggest a policy change, of course, but I doubt it will go anywhere, to be honest; people will see pre-emptive page protection (especially permanent protection) as against the spirit of free editing. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 06:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

There are ways to get highly sensitive articles put under special measures, but it takes weeks to get such sanctions approved by Arbcom. East Germany for example, is an article I haven't hesitated to full protect for several months. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:04, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

I would just suggest that with sensitive topics that are already under protection, news event articles related to them get similar protection. Otherwise we are re-inventing the wheel every time. We are not thinking joined-up here. Yes I would propose it. SP on some news articles is hardly North Korean censorship. If an IP feels that strongly, then they can bloody well register like a man or woman and have their say. Might even increase editor numbers. Cheers! Irondome (talk) 07:08, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

As with all policies, it often seems as if there is a tendency to reinvent the wheel. The cause of that is new editors who are not necessarily aware of the wheels we already have and which generally turn quite smoothly. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:21, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

"A touch Watson. A definite touch!" Very well. Cheers! Irondome (talk) 07:37, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

When I first arrived here many moons ago, you won't belive how many times I went around suggesting things should be changed. But it's only been in the last couple of years or so that I've got some major issues moved! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:42, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Appreciate it, seriously. Cheers as always! Irondome (talk) 07:46, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

I really appreciate your guidance. I think I had better shut my trap for a few weeks and get back to gnoming. Kind regards. Irondome (talk) 17:43, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Do some NPP - we're really short staffed there! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:48, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Rightoh. Irondome (talk) 17:58, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

You'll also find this an enormous help. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:30, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

I have signed up to the newsletter too. Now to absorb. With great appreciation, Irondome (talk) 17:24, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool update

Hey Kudpung. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

2013 Ghouta attacks

Would you be willing to take a look at this article again? Some people are disregarding the 1 revert rule, and there is no cooperation, only POV pushing. See Talk:2013 Ghouta attacks. Thanks! USchick (talk) 22:54, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Vietnamese RfC

Hi. Sorry but there was 100% consensus, apart from a Blocked sockpuppet. I request you self-revert your edits and leave it open for others to comment. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:46, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

There was a request for an administrator to close this 'RfC' - if that was made by an editor in error, then please consider starting another RfC as recommended.

My assessment leading to the closing rationale is that:

• There was too little participation to consider the discussion to be an RfC.
• Antionio Hazard was not blocked at the time of closing the discussion.
• Antonio Hazard's comment did not contribute to the discussion in a manner that congributes to a consensus if there would be any.
• Antonio Hazard's comment was the last edit, and therefore did not influence further dicussion. There was no further discussion.
• Due to the remainig very low participation, the close therefore reflects an opinion of the participants rather than a consensus.

The proposer and/or the participants are free to interpret their collective opinion 'as is', and either act upon it, to start a new, more widely subscribed RfC.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:33, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Claire utomi notification

Just letting you know that I suppressed one of your revisions to User talk:Theno1diva (the one where you notified about Claire utomi speedy deletion) when I was suppressing the article draft you removed from the page in the following edit. If you have an active CSD log or similar somewhere you may want to update that with this revision. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 16:14, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. It was a standard template notification. I don't think it will do any harm staying in my CD log. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:12, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Anthonyhcole said I should point this out to you

He said you were involved in on-ramping newbies. User:Biosthmors/Your first article. I think it's pretty nifty. Biosthmors (talk) 19:12, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Bernstein Crisis Management

Hi Kudpung, I believe Bernstein or his firm do have some notability, so I contested your deletion. If you read through the sources available, he is a quoted expert in his niche. I'd appreciate if your withdrew your speedy deletion nomination. I'd like to further work on the article and properly assert it's importance per your tag. If, after doing that, you don't believe that the company is notable enough for an article, then I'd happily standdown. Thanks for your help. CitizenNeutral (talk) 17:48, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi. This is the second time the article has been nominated for deletion, which means there have been several pairs of expert eyes on it. There are three issues: it's not clear who or what the article is about - is is a biougraphy of a person, or is it about a company. Whichever it is, the article reads like a B2B listing and does not actually make any clear claims to notability. The only claims are that he/they have been cited in the media, which alone does not make him/them notable. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:58, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I agree, there are issues with the subject of article (person versus company). I think those can be addressed, potentially by creating the article on Bernstein himself. You deleted the article the first time as g5 (which is initially how I came across the article in the first place via a user named Rybec's edit log). But now you nominated it again for a different reason. The article was deleted 4 minutes after you nominated it, which makes it hard for anyone of actually contest the deletion. This is frustrating, but I understand there are normals here on how things are done. Can you allow me to see a draft of the deleted article, so I can improve it? Thanks for your help! CitizenNeutral (talk) 18:23, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

CN: You recreated both the Bernstein and the Nathan Finch Ballard article after they were deleted for G5. Is there some reason you are seeking out articles created by banned users to recreate? --Nat Gertler (talk) 00:54, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

I have already noticed this and I'm in the process of carrying out some further research using tools I have access to. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:57, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

RE: Hoaxes

Hello. You have a new message about the AfC mentoring program at User talk:Theonesean's talk page. theonesean 01:59, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

ANI question

Did you vote in this thread? The sigs in that section seem odd, and I wondered if someone is voting on your behalf for some odd reason. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:55, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

I did, but a lot further up in another sub section. There's a group of those unsigned votes but I've been unable to find from the history who added them. Whoever it is, they need to understand that it's not the done thing, and that it's up to closer to untangle any convoluted discussions and find the consensus. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:06, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Copyright

I am the owner copyright holder of the images. RCNET1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rcnet1 (talk • contribs) 08:07, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

If you are not the original creator of the images, you will need to provide documentary evidence that you have permission to use the works. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:22, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Translation request

Hi, could you please translate this into English? I'm writing an article for Christian Scharnweber. Thank you.--Launchballer 10:10, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

I'll do translations of Wikipedia content from one language to another or imoprtant citations foe embedding, but unfortunately not of this kind of thing. You'll probably find a rough Google translation will provide all you need. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:23, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

That's more or less why I'm here - Google Translate hasn't worked. It's part of a Flash document, so it can't translate it.--Launchballer 10:54, 5 September 2013 (UTCjazz

Sorry, then I can't help. As a consolation however, as I see you like Take Five, this very recent may thread may raise a smile - don't get put off by the fact that it starts about jazz.... Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:55, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

-Oh, BTW, here is your Google translation:

translation

J Mellow-D combines in his music as a DJ and a variety of styles into a whole. He combines in his person the authentic variety Projects and Activities and brands are the ¶ rt of the most successful, idiosyncratic and versatile representatives of its kind. Gt by the music of the seventies and eighties such as disco, rock, funk and house homologated ¤, was sparked his interest in electronic music already in her early childhood and thus eventually started his DJ career in 1989 in Hamburg. Repeatedly influenced by new musical trends, gradually developed his unique style he brings in his own productions since 1996. In 1997 he founded the label with Christian Engel EDM, which has since established itself not least through a hub or sub-labels such as cookies and `nÂ'Cream artists like Zombie Nation, Hiver & Hammer or Meteor Seven. In 1999, he landed at Mellow Trax â € žPhuture Vibesâ € œ the techno hit of the year and cemented his standing with other hits such as â € žMystery in SPACEA € œ, â € œ € žOuta SPACEA and his album â € žTechno Vibesâ € œ . In 2000 he was awarded the first Edition Note: Act with the German Dance Award. In addition to his unza ¤ hligen remixes for well-known artists, such as Schiller or camouflage, he acted among others as a part of the â € žTrance Allstarsâ € œ and underlined with his mixing his versatility, he again presented as Mellow Trax in the following years proved â € "he publish ¶ ffentlichte 2004 after intensive Studio work his album â € žHow 2 Rocka € œ. Google Translate for Business:Translator ToolkitWebsite TranslatorGlobal Market Finder

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:03, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

At the top of the page, a message says "This page is in [German]. Would you like to translate it?" and its attempt to translate the page failed. Which website did you get that from?--Launchballer 12:31, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Professional translator's trade secret ;) Now read the thread I linked to and relax :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:36, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

As someone a bit independent, could you grade Amir-John Haddad? I started it and then Dr. Blofeld expanded it considerably.--Launchballer 16:50, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

It's clearly start class. However, 'grading' is not an award system and it's usually done by the project under whose remit it falls. The only distinctions for articles are GA, FA, and FL. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:29, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Quick question

I noticed most rollback permission requests are handled usually within a few hours, but mine seems to have been skipped over and is now over a day old; I was just wondering if perhaps there is a particular reason for this, or if it was perhaps simply overlooked? If there are any questions or concerns regarding my application, I would be more than happy to field them. My thanks both for your time and attention to this message, as well as all the extensive work you have done making the Wikipedia great! besieged^talk 00:24, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

No particular reason. Several admins work on that page and they pick and choose which applications they answer. I'll take another look. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:35, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

 Done. I wouldn't normally accord the tool for such a low number of mainspace edits, but you have clearly demonstrated that you know what vandalism is. Please remember that Rollback may only be used in clear cases of vandalism. Happy editing! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:43, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very kindly sir! Especially after reading your user page, I believe I can safely say that you're a scholar and a gentleman, and I'll do my utmost to ensure you never have cause to regret your decision: I will take great care with the rollback tool, as I usually prefer a more direct or manual engagement in most cases anyway. Huggle, here I come; vandals, look out! besieged^talk 00:57, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

New pages feed and sidebar tool

Hi Kudpung. It took a couple of days for my PC to finally allow me access, but now I am there, I am seriously impressed. It seems an excellent tool, and the sidebar gives amazing directness and flexibility in diagnosing issues, or indeed recommending removal. I think I have the parameters of what I should be looking for understood, and am doing my best so far. Only done 2, but with that tool I could be doing several dozen a day if I concentrated on that. Please track my work if poss, and pull me up if incorrect in any sense. With respect. Irondome (talk) 01:01, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

I won't have time to monitor your work unless I'm doing deletions and come across something your incorrectly tagged for CSD, but don't hesitate to ask if you are unsure of anything. Yes, NPP is a powerful tool - now if only we had something like that for AfC... Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:11, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Ha! :). Thanks for the encouraging words, as always. With respect, Irondome (talk) 01:17, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Question (1)

Can I ask what must you do to get AWB rights, apart from 500 mainspace edits? I have 2000+ total edits, with 800+ mainspace edits. Am I applicable for AWB? Jianhui67 Talk 09:30, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Please apply for use of AWB at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:39, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm asking whether I'm applicable for AWB or not. Can you check my contributions whether I'm applicable for AWB? Jianhui67 Talk 09:40, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

You are applicable to make a request. That still does not mean it will automatically be granted, much depends on the opinion of the admin. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:52, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh and what does edit filter managers do? I'm kind of new in that. Jianhui67 Talk 10:57, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:Edit filter. If you want to know what various user rights do, just go to their pages and read up on it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:30, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

And by the way, I'm actually still in contact with INeverCry on Commons. He is still active as an administrator in Commons. If you need to contact him, you would have to go to his Commons talk page to post a message as he will not be editing on English Wikipedia anymore. Jianhui67 Talk 12:06, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Have you seen the continuation of my thread? Jianhui67 Talk 14:00, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Not sure I understand what you mean. Which thread? KudpungMobile (talk) 10:59, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

My message about INeverCry. Jianhui67 Talk 11:39, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Deleted article request

Could you please provide a copy of Donkey Kong's animal buddies to me? I am a fan of the Donkey Kong series, you see. 76.22.61.64 (talk) 11:57, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately not - that's why it's no longer available for viewing in the encyclopedia. You are welcome to create a new article about it though. If the creator wants it restored to improve it that would be a different request. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

You do revive deleted articles in text format, don't you? It says on your userpage category. 76.22.61.64 (talk) 12:11, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

It actually says "This administrator will consider reasonable requests to provide copies of deleted articles" - So I'm not obliges to. The issue here is that we don't restore articles just because someone wants to read them, if that were the case, they wouldn't have been deleted. Deletionpedia is not supposed to keep copies of deleted Wikpedia material, what they do is up to them - they have anything to do with the Wikimedia Foundation. That said, this might help. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

HI, Kud

Thanks for the deletion. I'd like you to know that I am not thinking about leaving Wikipedia, I just wanted to delete all my personal information for security. Thank you. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 13:31, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm relieved to hear that, I was wondering :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:34, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry, there will be Miss Bono for a long time, unless I feel uncomfortable with my stay here. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 13:47, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

I must ask, is there any way that someone can see the information that has been deleted form my page? Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 14:02, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Any admin can still see it. The only way to rectify that is to get it oversighted. Technical 13 (talk) 14:16, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

How can I do that? Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 14:32, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

WP:OS should be able to help you. Technical 13 (talk) 14:42, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You will need to send an email to the oversight team (oversight-en-wp@wikipedia.org) to request your user page to be suppressed. Jianhui67 Talk 14:45, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Solo Monk

Terrific stuff.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:07, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

*ding!*

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.

I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 20:27, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Essay advice

I just completed my first draft of an essay I'm calling "Read Wikipedia. I'd just want to get your thoughts - I love your RfA essays and have great respect for you as a writer. Would you mind taking a quick look? Thanks, theonesean 23:52, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Quasimodo (music venue), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jimmy Johnson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

changes to notability guideline on schools

Hi Kudpung -- While I don't disapprove of your edit on the WP:ORG, I haven't seen any discussion on it, and as you know, substantive changes to notability guidelines are supposed to reflect consensus. I'm flagging the change and noting it on the talk page for discussion. --Lquilter (talk) 12:50, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I'm genuinely glad you did that. My edit was quite deliberately BRD/IAR in order to provoke such a reaction which this did not. Please see User talk:Brainy J#Notability schools. As you will see, I have no personal preference one way or the other. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:04, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I'm in-and-out, so I missed the other changes ... I'll post the rest of the history to the talk page. --Lquilter (talk) 19:56, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

CVUA

Hi Kudpung. I was wondering if I could volunteer myself as a CVUA instructor, since I think that the trainers are rather inactive in this period. Do you think I fit as a CVUA instructor? Jianhui67 Talk 15:34, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't see why not, but bearing in mind the notice on your user page, please be sure to have time. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:03, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

wp:REQUESTNOM

Hi, Kudpung. Wikid77 here. I am finally ready to submit an RfA for full adminship, after people fearing too many experienced editors leaving, especially to help with {editprotected} to update templates. If you are too busy, I will ask another on the list in wp:REQUESTNOM. Although I've been here since May 2006, in past years, I was reluctant to become admin, for fear of the time drain, but I see now that admins can pace themselves, and share the workload. The "final straw" of wanting to become admin was a request at the wp:Help_desk about a deleted article, and I realized how another editor (admin) could read that person's deleted page and tell them what was improper inside the deleted page (which I could not see, I could not advise them about contents). I am prepared for all duties, not just templates or Lua script updates or wp:DRV. Anyway, let me know if you have time for this, or I'll ask another admin. There's no rush. -Wikid77 (talk) 21:38, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

yes, but ping me again in another couple of days. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:41, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

I see you have remained busy, so I did a self-nom to reduce your workload. Plus, as expected, I quickly received Oppose comments from editors connected to my topic-ban with the Amanda Knox debates, from 4 years ago(!). Although many people who defended me in the debates have left WP, most of those who fought to ban me are still here (including wp:INVOLVED User:John & arbitrator User:Salvio), with some attacking as if not a day had passed since the topic-ban of June 2011, and you do not need to be targeted amid those issues. -Wikid77 (talk) 20:51, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Rm Edit summary/edit

Hello! Could you remove all edit summaries/edits on User:58.107.0.49 contributions. They include racial slurs, bad words and etc. Thanks! ///EuroCarGT 03:07, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Please ask another admin - I'm really strapped for time now as I'm leaving for a project in the jungle over the next three days. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:40, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of schools in Victoria, Australia may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:52, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

 Done. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Notable alumni

You responded to my edit of George Washington High School's notable alumni section. I didn't add the notable alumni; I added the citation needed part. However, I opted to researched the anonymous editor's edit and found citations. Naugahyde (talk) 12:11, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I realised that afterwards. However, you would have been perfectly justified in removing the names from the list altogether. Thanks for referencing them. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:20, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Okay, that makes sense. Thanks! Naugahyde (talk) 13:07, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

AfDs

Hi, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง, I had a question about closing AfDs. Several that I posted over the summer were closed without consensus (see Juanin Clay as an example). In most of the cases, there was little or no response to them, even when I posted notices on the relevant WikiProject, primarily because the male actors/actresses were not notable and it was difficult to find Editors who had any opinion, positive or negative.

Since "No consensus" is the equivalent of "Keep", is the default decision, in absence of few or no votes beyond the Nominator's, to keep an article? In the future, I think the only articles I'll be suggesting for deletion are obscure actors who don't seem to warrant an article. But if the lack of comments/votes from Editors means that the articles will be kept, I'm not sure if it is worth the time to propose them for deletion.

I'm not posting this question as a criticism, I'm just deciding on the best use of my time on Wikipedia. Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:03, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Liz. What you are talking about are in fact classic examples of where WP:PROD (not to be confused with WP:BLPPROD) would apply. They don't even have to be new or recent articles - the main thing is that while they don't coincide with any of the very narrow CSD criteria, they are most unlikely to meet other guidelines for inclusion and would probably not survive an AfD. That way, they just get quietly deleted after 7 days. Before sticking a PROD, however, care must be taken to ensure they have never been PRODed before, because if they have, they must then be sent to AfD. The danger with AfD, as you have seen, is that the closer must interpret the consensus which may indeed result in them being procedurally kept even if they continue to languish without fully complying with notability rules. You've seen this happen with the AfD at Juanin Clay where the consensus is 1 'delete' (the proposer's), and 1 'weak keep' which equals 'no consensus' to do anything. Hence the default is to keep, and there is no ambiguity about that. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

That is great advice, I had forgotten about WP:PROD! I only tried that once, it was immediately removed and so I just went the AfD route since. But WP:PROD might be appropriate for the articles I was encountering. I think there was an effort on the part of WikiProject Actors and Directors to create articles for close to everyone who appeared in more than a few films in the early eras of movie-making (1910-1950). Looking at these profiles 100 years later, some don't meet our current guidelines of notability. These have been the only type of article I've sent to AfD and maybe I'll move to PRODing them. I assume I can see whether they have been PRODed by looking at the edit summaries? Hopefully, they are accurate.

Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง, for your frank advice and sharing your experience with article deletions. It'll help me make better choices in the future. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:35, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

yes, most people use Twinkle or page Curation to apply a PROD so it automatically leaves an edit summary. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:40, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Please take another look at my sock puppet investigation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Martjoh

Fitbobcat (talk) 18:17, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Rik Fox Bio

Thank you for your help with blocking the person vandalizing the Rik Fox page. MDSanker 07:49, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

My topic ban

Dear Kudpung: I am under a topic ban per User_talk:Jax_0677/Archive_7#Topic_ban_enacted. I have fully complied with this topic ban which expires in November, and I have not royally screwed up a music navbox since April 25, 2013. I have dramatically improved the quality of my navboxes in 2013, and many of the navboxes that were deleted were started in early 2012. --Jax 0677 (talk) 09:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Additionally, I want to clarify a few things here regarding EatsShootsAndLeaves' comment at WP:ANI to avoid filibustering there. I only refused to violate my topic ban. I did not refuse to help to the extent that I am permitted to do so, I was simply taking extra precautions to obey the terms of my ban [1]. Companies err on the side of caution all of the time to avoid legal action. I did not hide any templates. I did not say "unless I have permission from the WMF", what I said was "authorized representative of The Wikimedia Foundation", which includes the closing administrator or any uninvolved administrator. Supporting this is that I asked permission the next time around. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:35, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Larry Carlton

What do you think of this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:35, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Not quite my thing, but very nice. More sort of guitar gymnastics perhaps. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:14, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

The universe may have imploded, Oscar Peterson and Barney Kessel TOGETHER in the same room!!!]♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:27, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

CSD G13

I'm not sure that my talk page is the right place for a discussion, but DGG asked a question, I started responding, and while looking further I saw that you review every single CSD G13 individually. I checked with another admin who didn't even feel it was necessary to check the dates, much less the content, so there is a wide range of opinion about how much review of a G13 is needed. There's some discussion at my talk page. My views in short - with 50,000 in the backlog and almost all garbage (because they've already been reviewed more than once to salvage the decent ones) I feel that very limited review, it any is acceptable. As an aside, I feel bad for Hasteur, between being asked to stop, start, slow down, speed up, change the selection criteria, change the notification process, change the throttle rules, and more, I think my head would be spinning.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 01:25, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) As it should be fairly well known at this point, I'm trying to be on top of the CSD:G13 front. Personally, I do not feel the current process for the bot to nominate solely on the basis of time is appropriate, but it is what the criteria specifically states. As far as the fact that there are tens of thousands of these to review goes, these drafts have been piling up for the last four or so years, and I don't see any reason why anyone should expect it to take less than a year to clean them all out. I have made modifications to multiple templates to make it easier to see who nominated the draft and how long the draft has been idle. I have made and had made modifications to the bot, the AFC helper script, and Twinkle (I think that was done) to use these new parameters in the templates. I would be happy to make whatever other accommodations I can to improve this process. :) Technical 13 (talk) 01:35, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

You'll see my response there. Probably we should copy the discussion to WT:AFC. Hasteur surely knows learn what I have learned, that any proposal here once it gets adopted, can get misused and perverted. Any admjn who does admin work without checking is acting like a bot, and it is very firmly established that bots do not independently do admin tasks, though they can identify things for a human to execute. It's unfortunately always been the case that some admins prefer to do whatever they can get away with. DGG ( talk ) 03:15, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

I do believe that the G13 should be vetted by admins before actual deletion. I know that heir deletion is uncontentious but I have recued a couple an turned them into viable mainspace pages. I am aware that some admins mass delete - on one occasion when working from the cat I refreshd the page a couple of seconds later to find it was blank already, this is obviously faster than one can even read what's on the pages. --KudpungMobile (talk) 02:59, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Hank Von Helvete

The changes i made were only translations from the Norwegian Wiki site. so the source is the Norwegian Wikipedia site for the same person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.145.190.251 (talk) 09:34, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

admin only for Valve Corporation?

I'm not sure why for Valve Corporation a regular "auto-confirmed only" protection (instead of an individual block) is not sufficient; if he socketpuppets with an auto-confirmed username surely it will be easily detectable? Sure, I can do edit requests, but doing that on a Start-level article when quite a bit is happening in Valve's world right now is a bit cumbersome. -Nczempin (talk) 13:54, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and reduced it to just autoconfirmed on the page (knowing that the editor that was initiating the edit war would use multiple user accounts, so if he is still around, they won't be able to disrupt the page). Please revert if you feel this was inappropriate. --MASEM (t) 15:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

OK by me. --KudpungMobile (talk) 02:54, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Commons autopatrol

Hi Kudpung, mind if I nominate you on Commons requests for permissions for the autopatrolled user right? I think you will be promoted to be an autopatroller therefore, given the fact that you are an admin here and an autopatroller on Meta. I think you are sufficiently trustworthy to also have your edits autopatrolled on Commons. Thanks. Jianhui67 Talk 11:15, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Please go ahead. User:Kudpung (editing from WiFi HotSpot IP due to no secure connection here in the jungle for the next few days). --110.77.154.228 (talk) 12:03, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

 Done. You can go and check if your request will be approved there. And by the way, why are you in the jungle? Jianhui67 Talk 13:18, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

 Done I changed your flag to autoparolled. --Hedwig in Washington ^(TALK) 16:38, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. --KudpungMobile (talk) 02:53, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Do you still need anything? I can only nominate people for autopatrol user right. For the file mover and rollback right, you will have to go to commons:COM:RFR to request for them. Jianhui67 Talk 12:01, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

No. But thanks for the offer. I don't actually work at Commons. All I generally do there is upload my own images. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:00, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Talkback from Technical 13

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Technical 13's talk page.
Message added 16:47, 26 September 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Technical 13 (talk) 16:47, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry

Ur right about the membership of the communist party of France — Preceding unsigned comment added by Commie1990 (talk • contribs) 22:42, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion on Article

Please remove the speedy deletion tag from Huzaifa Mazhar it's relevant and we will be inserting more information about this article just in two days... So I request you man remove the tag it's NOT ANY FAKE ARTICLE... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hammas kaleem (talk • contribs) 08:47, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Please see the many messages on your talk page. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:12, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

'Albanians' article vandalism , 3RR , and not respecting consensus and also the talk page of the myriad of people protesting

Hello there , i noticed that you did take the initiative to make the 'albanians' article editable only from autoconfirmed users , that is fine with me . However , please can you take some moments to check the dispute , i would greatly apreciate it . It is crystal clear that user Jingby is vandalizing the albanians article , please go to the edit area of the albanian article and see that he has been changing the figure of the maximal estimation of the albanian population ( there is also a minimal estimation ) disagreeing with more than 8 other people , clearly and in every direction does not like consensus . It seems that he does not like the fact that albanians may be a more than 7,5 milion people , which it should be a minimal estimation , and not as a maximal estimation as it stands now .

The fact is that on the Regions with significant albanian population , on the table below , there are the albanians per country ( native or immmigrants ) , all those figures are sourced and verifiable more than once , the total minimal number of those figures is 7 milion , and the maximal is 10 . His argument is that he has put a link showing 7,5 milion , and then it should be 7,5 , clearly ignoring the fact that the other per country sources suggest otherwise . This is basic mathematical and logical concept and if that user ignores to use them , then he should not be allowed to edit wikipedia .

Albanias population : 3 milion ( source CIA factbook , Instat 2011 etc ) Kosova population : 1,7 (source CIA factbook etc.etc. Macedonia's albanian ethnic population : 525 thousand ( source Cia factbook , Macedonian statistical authority etc ) Greece albanian population : 500,000 ( Source Eurostat, Cia and other myriads of sources as well ) Italy-s albanian population : 500,000 albanian + 50,000 arberesh ( Source Eurostat , Cia world factbook ) Turkey ethnic albanian population : 0,5 -1,5 milion albanians ( variety of sources )

Etc. Etc. You will find this table on the albanians article . Please can you stop Jingiby from vandalizing the albanians article ?!

I would apreciate any promt solution . Thank you in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.70.107.227 (talk) 06:01, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I appreciate your concern, but I already spent an hour investigating several users' of this article, including yours and the other Swedish IP because I was also looking for socks. I'm not concerned with sorting out where the last stable version was, or who is vandalising or not, or chairing a DR - that can be done by the regular editors who are free to discuss it on the article's talk page, warn other editors, or file an AIV. My main concern was to stop the edit warring. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:14, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Request

Hi Kudpung, I was wondering if you can protect my talk page for a while? A few IP users are vandalizing my talk page. I would appreciate if you could protect my talk page for only autoconfirmed users to edit for 3 to 4 days? Thanks. Jianhui67 Talk 14:59, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

 Done. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:07, 30 September 2013 (UTC)