Jump to content

User talk:PhilKnight/Archive88

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

Mediation for Mata Amritanandamayi Dispute

Hi Phil, Thanks for volunteering to mediate this dispute. Since this is my first time participating in a mediated case, I just wanted to ask about the mediation process. I noticed that you said that the mediation will take place on the talk page of the mediation request. How does it begin? Do you begin the discussion? Or are we supposed to? Thanks for your time. JamesRoberts (talk) 00:07, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi James, I'll begin the discussion. PhilKnight (talk) 00:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Phil. I'm still a little unclear on the process of the mediation. So please forgive my ignorance. Is this a good time for me to post a rebuttal? Or should I wait for Abhayakara to respond to your request? Thanks JamesRoberts (talk) 02:37, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi James, if it's ok with you, I'd prefer if we waited to see what Abhayakara comes up with. PhilKnight (talk) 18:07, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, no problem. JamesRoberts (talk) 18:55, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RC4WD Block

Hi, i've been working on this page, and to my surprise it was blocked from 2009. Could you please take a look at my sandbox and tell me if you could lift the block? Thanks in advance mate! Here it is---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Loschung_itos/sandbox Loschung itos (talk) 18:45, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've unprotected RC4WD. PhilKnight (talk) 18:23, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Belated thanks

I know this is late but I wanted to take a moment to thank you for your participation at my RfA. I was very inspired by the many that supported me and it’s that feeling of friendship and camaraderie that keeps me coming back to the project. So, thank you for your support and for your continued sense of fairness and compassion in all areas of WP. I look forward to the opportunity to work together in the days to come. Best wishes, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 19:14, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Excessive listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Excessive. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Excessive redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD (talk) 23:01, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kuru Kururu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgetown (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) 08:55, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you notice.

Hi PhilKnight: Recently while looking at the Ukraine page, I had noticed your good edit there. Did you notice that it was deleted by someone there. I was about to restore your edit when I noticed that the same editor had gone to the "Russia" page as well with the same large deletion and paragraph blanking, and thought to mention this situation. The diff for the "Ukraine" page deletion is below. My understanding was that there was supposed to be some reciprocal and supporting edits for this subsection on both of these related pages. Here is the diff deletion for "Ukraine":

21:29, 30 April 2014‎ Everg... (talk | contribs)‎ . . (247,705 bytes) (-10,542)‎


Could you glance at this? FelixRosch (talk) 15:02, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Felix, yes I'll watchlist those articles. I think my initial concern was that of a pro-Rusian bias, which is why I edited the Ukraine article to try and bring it back to a more neutral stance. I think EvergreenFir's concern was more along the lines of recentism, which is why s/he trimmed the section. Anyway, I'll continue to monitor those articles, and thanks for letting me know. PhilKnight (talk) 20:11, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi PhilKnight; Your edits last night were all appreciated and I noticed that, after your edits, that the Ukraine page version was including mention of the international 2014 Geneva Pact, while the Russia page parallel version was excluding this mention, so I added it on the Russia page version to keep both Pages reciprocal and consistent. As soon as I did it, User:Mo xy felt differently and immediately reverted apparently opposed to it and wanting to exclude it from the Russia page version while including on the Ukraine page version. (That same user also refers to some variant form of "copy-paste" complaint as apparently his/her misunderstanding of a fully cited quote about Russia I give from Joe Biden in the Economist magazine.) Anyway, it seems to me that if you can think of a neutral way to phrase the inclusion of the international 2014 Geneva Pact on the Russia page then this would keep the Ukraine page reciprocal and consistent with the Russia page. It seems like it should be mentioned in both places. Could you look at this. FelixRosch (talk) 14:48, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kiko4564 unblock discussion

Hello Phil, sorry to trouble you, but Kiko4564 (a user you have previously blocked, changed the block settings for, or unblocked) has requested to be unblocked. There is a discussion at ANI which so far has attracted no interest, if you wish to leave a comment, you can find the discussion at Wikipedia:ANI#Unblock_request_by_User:Kiko4564. Nick (talk) 17:32, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick, thanks for letting me know about the discussion. PhilKnight (talk) 22:52, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment after your recent visit

Hi PhilK; From your past thoroughness perhaps you already looked at the Ukraine page after your recent visit there. At present, the respective subsections on Ukraine and the Russia Pages on Wikipedia dealing with Crimea, etc seem to be beautifully written and edited as if they had a bow tied around them. Then I found this collection of NY TIMES headlines from the last two months collected by the NY Times as their quick summary of events in the region over the last two months, and it looked like it had almost nothing in common with the Wikipedia version (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/02/27/world/europe/ukraine-divisions-crimea.html?_r=0). Is it possible that the NPOV of Wikipedia and the NYTimes can be so different from one another. Wikipedia editors have made a pretty version of the events with a bow tied on it, while the NYTimes and London Times for 3 months are describing armed violence and civil unrest. Is this an NPOV conflict between the NYTIMES and Wikipedia, or is Wikipedia creating a simplified, "parliamentary" version of tensions in the eastern Ukraine in an attempt to avoid edit warring? I am only writing if this is a Wikipedia NPOV issue, if not just let me know. FelixRosch (talk) 20:04, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help with an image file, used in Hosea Williams, involved in a discussion for deletion which you closed

On 7 December 2013, I uploaded this image, and used it in this article. On 20 January 2014, User:Stefan2 nominated the image for deletion. There was a discussion here which you closed as keep. Now, 12 May 2014, User:Sfan00 IMG has placed a tag on the same image file asking for clarification of copyright status or listing for deletion. During the course of the earlier discussion, User:Peripitus replaced the Non-free fair use in tag with the PD-Pre1978 tag. I don't know how to follow up this new attempt to restrict the use of the image. Could you either explain to me what course I should follow (or do it yourself, as that might be easier). I am completely willing to do the work, and to learn the procedures. To me, as a new editor, this seems to be restriction by attrition, but I assume good faith. As I did when I uploaded the image, still think the image materially improves this article, and could improve the rather weak commons collection of images from the African-American Civil Rights Movement; my preference would be to keep the PD-Pre1978 tag. - Neonorange (talk) 18:51, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please read what the tag says, if it's a free image, it doesn't need an NFUR :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:53, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I can read the sentence, I just am not sure what it means. So I am asking for explanations and help. Do you mean that the entire block of description and rationales can be removed, or is a new template, with parameter, necessary? And if so, which template? - Neonorange (talk) 19:00, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see that Peripitus has transferred the file to the Commons and added the necessary tags based on his understanding of the copyright situation. Obviously, if Stefan2 considers this understanding to be incorrect, then he can open a discussion about this. PhilKnight (talk) 22:35, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the follow-up. I now understand the process a bit better. You, User:Sfan00 IMG, and User:Peripitus have been very helpful; my questions have been answered. I'll work to further understand the process, and not be just a bystander. - Neonorange (talk) 23:06, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation board question

Hello, I have a question about an open mediation board [1]. As I'm one of the parties involved, I'm trying to reach out and get a bit of information as to the status of the discussion; to this date the mediator was not able to initiate the process, and the topic was accepted by the board on April 11th. I understand that real world things might have prevented the mediator form proceeding with the discussion, and if that's the case can a new editor take over the duties and start the process? It's been over a month now with no progress in the dispute, but since I'm new to the process I'm not sure what to expect in terms of the mediation process, for all I know they may take this long on average, but I would hate to have this dispute close due to inactivity. Thank you for your assistance. --COD T 3 (talk) 16:34, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi COD T 3, following discussion with my colleagues, I've agreed to take over the case. PhilKnight (talk) 06:07, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, many thanks for taking over the discussion. At this point I'm ready to proceed forward, we only need to inform Faustian of the new developments in the process, and hopefully he's also available to start. --COD T 3 (talk) 16:21, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. Someone let me know and place the link to the discussion on my talk page.Faustian (talk) 21:29, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, the mediation will be on Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Blue Army (Poland). PhilKnight (talk) 00:01, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Valencia Assembly Plant

Hello. I am requesting help for expanding the article for the Ford Motor Company Valencia Assembly Plant in Valencia, Venezuela. The article is very short and does not have sufficient content. There are some confusing portions of the article. It doesn't support with enough references. I am requesting your help to assist me with restructuring the article. I am requesting contributions, guidance, references, information, and if possible, other users who are willing to help restructure the article. Thank you very much!--67.54.191.225 (talk) 14:59, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, unfortunately, I don't know anything about this assembly plant. Do you know if there are any sources we could use to expand the article? PhilKnight (talk) 22:32, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have two links so far. Here:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/06/us-ford-venezuela-idUSBREA4500K20140506 http://www.autointell.com/nao_companies/ford/ford-manufacturing/ford-mfg-lamo-plants.htm --67.54.191.225 (talk) 18:22, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nöbdenitz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph (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) 08:58, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:LibDutch, continued editing warring and sock puppet investigation

You recently warned User:LibDutch regarding his edit warring on the Syrian Presidential election 2014. Not only is LibDutch continuing to edit war on a different article (Syrian Civil War) with a different user [2], he appears to have started editing the same articles with a similarily titled new Username/sockpuppet; User:ArabUAE [3]. This user is becoming a serious problem on Syria related articles. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.197.121.94 (talk) 18:02, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. PhilKnight (talk) 19:27, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

8-) --Lysozym (talk) 21:30, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Saladin1987

Can you please run a quick CU on Saladin1987 (talk · contribs) to determine if whether or not he is sock of User:Mar4d (also known as User:Drspaz)? These 2 diffs by Saladin1987 and Mar4d prove something very interesting [4] [5]. I'm 100% sure he had used this IP, which will help you to establish their location. In addition, both behave the same, editing the same particular articles with same knowledge and same anti-Afghan/anti-Indian mentality. Him deleting this report suggests that he's socking. [6] The vandal sock is constantly POV pushing, deliberately falsifying sourced material and edit-warring (See few examples, [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13]), while using his main 2 accounts for legitimate edits in order to be recognized as productive contributors. Admin Herbythyme had wrote on Mar4d's talk page: "From a CU perspective it seems highly likely that you have abused multiple accounts - as such I am happy that this block stands". [14] I will greatly appreciate if you do a CU on this disruptive editor. Thank you.--39.41.195.73 (talk) 15:02, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you file a report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet Investigations. PhilKnight (talk) 22:46, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Adminship nomination

Hi, I'm A.Minkowiski. I'm fighting against vandalism and my main focus is to revert vandal edits and reporting them. I would be very happy if I become an admin to fight against vandals directly. First I was an long term IP editor and now, few months before I created my account and started fighting against vandalism. I have requested same message to others if some one look at my work. I hope to hear from you soon. Plus, I'm familiar with blocking policy and other policies too. Thank you.A.Minkowiski _Lets t@lk 16:30, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'd suggest leaving it a while, and getting some more experience. As a logged in user you have been active for only 2 months, and you have less than 250 edits to articles. On the other hand, you've made plenty of reports to WP:AIV, which is good. Overall, I think you should get some more experience before running for adminship. PhilKnight (talk) 18:42, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion of Reading Futsal Club

Hi PhilKnight,

I would like to create an article for Reading Futsal Club, After I created the article it was deleted by you, Please let me know what was the reason for this.

Thank you.

Edward — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edwardz777 (talk • contribs) 15:16, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Edward, the deletion log is here:
and the reason given is Wikipedia:CSD#A7, which is 'No indication of importance'. In other words, at the time I deleted the article, there was no explanation as to why its subject is important or significant. PhilKnight (talk) 17:13, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RfM for Schiller Institute

Hi Phil, did I understand you correctly that you were going to take this one? I pinged the participants a couple of days ago here. Looks like they are ready to proceed. Sunray (talk) 17:38, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, sorry, I'm busy in real life at the moment. PhilKnight (talk) 18:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I thought that you were saying you could take a case but see that you had referred specifically to Oscar López Rivera. Real life needs some of one's attention all of the time and all of one's attention some of the time. Take care. Sunray (talk) 08:46, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Appreciate your assistance today - thank you sir. Anastrophe (talk) 20:00, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Hey man, thanks for the barnstar! Lexicon (talk) 20:27, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for my Wikilove

My first one! Acts like a motivator. :D Best wishes! AntiqueReader (talk) 09:13, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rolf Harris

Please add a link Rolf Harris sentencing: Live updates. Replace "the University of East London removed his honorary doctorate" on "The University of East London's governing board removed his honorary doctorate", because scientists do not participate in the trial.

and add a section

Hi Efemeral, you need to post this on Talk:Rolf Harris. PhilKnight (talk) 10:54, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Rolf Harris also closed. So I asked you without lengthy discussion. Efemeral (talk) 12:42, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The article and talk page are semi-protected. After you become auto-confirmed, you can edit these pages. PhilKnight (talk) 22:02, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
You have a potentially good article here on Gehoon kheri, keep up the good work. bpage (talk) 21:26, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:PhilKnight/Archive88&oldid=625634599"