Jump to content

User talk:Rschen7754/Archive 18

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20→Archive 25

The Signpost: 14 January 2013

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is approved

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

  • The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code that was emailed to you.
  • To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
  • If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
  • A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
  • HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
  • Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
  • When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 18:11, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Hi Rschen7754. I recently updated a sockpuppet report for Rodolfootoya12 here, which you reverted. I'm guessing it's because I messed up either in formatting the article, or more likely because I got my IP vandals confused. The vandal I was attempting to link to that article was IP ‎201.198.168.150. I'm not certain that IP got the same block the other socks received. But the block may have expired as the vandalism is starting again. May I please solicit your assistance? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 08:28, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Reblocked. Next time please start a new case, and do not edit the archive. Thanks! --Rschen7754 08:35, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Can do! Glad you told me that, thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:23, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

The Center Line: U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter, Winter 2013

Volume 6, Issue 1 • Winter 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
—EdwardsBot (talk) 19:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Block

Hey Rschen7754. Can you please block User:Railroad Workers United; it's probably a violation of the user name policy. Thanks, CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 03:19, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

It's not a clear-cut violation; I'd rather wait until this guy edits before blocking. --Rschen7754 04:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #41

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 15:54, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Rschen7754

Do you think the User:Pratyya Ghosh/Not teen should be deleted? If why? I don't understand your reason written here.--Pratyya (Hello!) 09:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

There are pedophiles who edit this site and we don't want to make their goals any easier. --Rschen7754 09:26, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

User:Statistics have shown

Hi Rschen7754, regarding User:Statistics have shown, I've changed the template to the sockmaster's version. Hope you don't mind? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:32, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Not a problem, I actually don't know what it's called. I tried a few times but couldn't figure it out so I left it. --Rschen7754 08:33, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
I've added a link to DQ's post on his talk page in case anyone is looking for the evidence. However the sockpuppet template doesn't allow for it so can't do that one, not that it matters that much. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:53, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Suresh Elangovan

I'm not really experienced with sockpuppet investigations; I am not clear on what more is needed. Rahuljain2307 (talk · contribs) nominates an article at GAC, then seemingly creates a sock to promote it before making up some dubious story about coincidental IP addresses. If the sock is unrelated to Suresh Elangovan (talk · contribs), then that's fine; I have no reason to believe that Suresh Elangovan and Rahuljain2307 are the same person. J Milburn (talk) 21:17, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Basically, you need to be able to give diffs to show someone who hasn't been following the contributions that there are grounds to do a CU, which reveals private information to the CU. Justification is needed per the WMF privacy policy. If it turns out that an improper CU was done, then the CU is on the hook for it, not any of the clerks or the filer, so the CUs really want to make sure that a check is justified. --Rschen7754 21:34, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

IP range(s) from Taipei continuing to harass me

Remember this bloke? You may wish to take a look at this. GotR Talk 02:27, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I've responded at ANI. --Rschen7754 02:51, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Dostoyevsky

Hello,

that an article must be a good article before being featued is clearly incorrect. And I have resolved the issues long time ago. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 11:43, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

The article clearly cannot meet the GA standard, and you have a record of inappropriate GA and FA renominations. --Rschen7754 18:46, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
You don't know what you write. If you clearly don't think it does not even meet the GA criteria, feel free to explain. Your oppose is inappropriate, and your response suggests that you did not even read the article and simply made a WP:POINT oppose. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 16:50, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
And it seems like you confused WP:GA with WP:FA.--Tomcat (7) 16:51, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Considering that I have 15 GAs and 3 FAs, I doubt that I have the two confused. --Rschen7754 19:35, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Per your comment, you clearly confused GA with FA. You have made a WP:POINT comment; you did not even review the article, but instead are trying to WP:WIKIHOUND because you did not like my frequent nominations on a different topic. All your comments are silly, considering that I am nominating the article on a different page (FAC, not GAN), and then you note that I should stop nominating it at GAN. You are forcing to stop nominating that article at all. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 11:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
I find your pointy oppose more than embarassing. Many users put their effort to help improving the article, and you simply oppose because of a minor past event. I suggest you strike out your vote. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 11:57, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
You still don't understand. You are the one who are bitching around. Your poor complaints don't improve the article. Your pointless oppose is simply based on WP:POINT and WP:WIKIHOUND. You are crying like a little child about something unrelated. This is more than poor judgement. I hope you finally understood what I am trying to say. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 11:00, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 January 2013

Thanks

Thanks for reverting that blanking. I appreciate it. Go Phightins! 13:07, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #42

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Development
    • Updated demo system
    • Improved design of sites code in core
    • Fixed SQLite compatibility
    • Worked on implementing references handling in statements user interface
    • Useful error messages will be shown in statements user interface in case of data value mismatches
    • Switched the demo system to Labs’ puppet
    • Selenium tests for length constraint, claim edit-conflicts
    • Setting up dispatcher script on internal test machine
    • More work on wikibase.getEntities() function for Scribunto/Lua-Templates
    • AbuseFilter is now working with Wikibase
    • The change dispatcher script is now ready for use on the WMF cluster
    • Initial implementation of {{#property}} parser function for the client
    • Created a widget for the client to connect a page to a Wikidata item and add interwiki language links to a page
    • Preparing a page to list unconnected pages on the clients
  • Discussions/Press
  • Events
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
  • Open Tasks for You
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 14:55, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Revision Deletion at Mitosis

You redacted a number of versions. I had undone one (Old revision of Mitosis) accidentally , which you might want to get for sake of completeness.Novangelis (talk) 15:00, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

That one's more or less fine, looking at it, for revdel purposes - I only redacted all the vandalism diffs because I didn't want to take the time and check every single diff, and I doubted that people would miss them anyway. --Rschen7754 20:54, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Re:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JoshuSasori

Hi! I actually already know about dynamic IPs, but that's not the problem. The accusation of sockpuppetry was that JoshuSasori (who has been banned for being disruptive in the same way as these IPs) is now evading that ban by editing under a dynamic IP. I never intended to imply that there was anything wrong with the IPs all being the same user -- he/she has been completely open about that. The problem is that these IPs are the same user and that user is using the IPs to evade his own recent ban. They all suddenly appeared right after JoshuSasori stopped trying in vain to appeal his ban, and less than two days after the ban itself, and started making the exact same ridiculous move requests as the banned user in question. elvenscout742 (talk) 01:45, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Yeah, my comment was meant to indicate that there was nothing wrong with the IPs editing, save for the fact that it was obviously the same user who was banned. In other words, it should be treated as if only one IP was editing. --Rschen7754 01:49, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
For all your work in seeking to protect the identities of users, particularly minors, on the project, I hereby award you this barnstar of diligence. Thank you for helping to make Wikipedia a free encyclopedia that anyone can safely edit. Go Phightins! 02:04, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
You're welcome! Part of it comes from being an underage editor and admin in my early days, but I appreciate it nonetheless. --Rschen7754 02:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Jonathan Yip

Two new IPs today: User talk:207.62.246.67, User talk:69.174.58.36. Recognizable for insisting El Al doesn't fly to LAX and Korean cannot carry between Sao Paolo and LAX. HkCaGu (talk) 04:11, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Blocked both for 1 month. --Rschen7754 04:27, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Can you keep an eye on it just in case? The same person will probably change IPs and do it again. Also, the IPs are also marking LAX for South American carriers as seasonal when in fact they operate year-round. Snoozlepet (talk) 04:34, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
There's a lot of pages to monitor, but let me know if he starts up again. --Rschen7754 04:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Possibly at this IP again: User:64.95.113.14. Hasn't touched airports. Not in my areas of specialty so far. HkCaGu (talk) 01:26, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Blocked and reverted all. --Rschen7754 01:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

He's here: User:207.62.246.90—--6-month block expired December 2012. HkCaGu (talk) 03:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Blocked for 1 year. --Rschen7754 03:27, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

SPI and IBs

Quick question: if a user suspects that another user with whom they have an IB is socking in order to harass them, are they allowed to name them as a master at SPI, or would this violate said IB? GabeMc (talk|contribs) 02:24, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

As a clerk, I'm not really sure of the procedure here; I also don't generally get involved with interaction bans, unfortunately. --Rschen7754 02:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GoShow

  • Yes I use this to test edit counter vandalism, unit but this was the last one already, but this is the only honest user account I have at least two Checkmeleon and Goblins, respectivley are mine, as well as CVU and all the user for a little while but that was it, the rest I seriously don't know who they are from.

I did have one along time ago back in 2005, but I turned that down, because I didn't want that user name, however I do live in a College area campus where they share at least two computers in a lobby, which they do use Wikipedia as a source. I know there were IPs which have stalked me on my user page and have vandalized Wikipedia around the campus address. I have been editing respectively, I wish still want edit as many other users try to help with additonal accounts but also test, I know my actions, and my mistakes counter testing, however I am trying to help on Wikipedia as you might see, and I hope to still keep this account to further help edit and counter vandalism.--GoShow (............................) 15:44, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

On Today's GA-F

Hello, I saw that you recently failed the GA-nominated article Impalement. If you don't mind, would you post your reasons for failing it, and suggest ways to improve the article before the next GAN? The nominating editor has done alot of work on the article recently, but he's pretty new to Wikipedia. Thanks. Boneyard90 (talk) 15:09, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I already have - many parts of the article are unsourced. --Rschen7754 17:17, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Really? I went to Talk:Impalement, and I didn't see any commentary from the GA-reviewer. Could you provide the link to your comment, or copy & paste it to the article's Talk page; and could you note exactly which sections need to be sourced? With 120+ in-line citations, I could not see which parts, of the many you noticed, are un-sourced. Boneyard90 (talk) 17:51, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Impalement/GA1. I have noticed that the nominator has renominated, and am disappointed that they have not bothered to resolve the issues with the article. I noticed entire paragraphs without citations, and that's an obvious warning sign. --Rschen7754 20:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt reply. Can you point out which paragraph you found to be un-cited? Boneyard90 (talk) 21:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
There were quite a few. Also, you really need to re-read the article and make sure that all assertions are sourced. --Rschen7754 22:41, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Another cryptic response. I was really under the impression that a GA-Reviewer was supposed to assist the nominator (and other contributors) in improving the article by explicitly pointing out deficiencies that need attention. Boneyard90 (talk) 00:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Not under the quick-fail criteria. --Rschen7754 00:49, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
I see. Then I would say it would be a courtesy to do so. Boneyard90 (talk) 12:38, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

California State Route 78

<rant> The first highways article I looked at just now had fourteen dead links. FOURTEEN! Now, if there's a few, I'll fix them myself before scheduling, but I've got better things to do than fix fourteen. So I checked Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/TFA to make sure that I wasn't fouling up somebody's plans for 2017 with my next choice either, and I found California State Route 78, remembering a comment at WP:TFAR recently that recent US articles had concentrated on the east coast (and even my US geography tells me that California isn't on the east coast). Now, which is worse - a TFA with 14 deadlinks to fix in a fortnight before a main page appearance, or a TFA where the principal author says that there's a whole bunch of sources he'd like to add first? If the article is that deficient in sourcing, should someone run it through FAR? </rant> Unscheduled... BencherliteTalk 23:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

(I'd be curious to know what that article is, BTW, so we can address it). SR 78 was an article that I wrote back when I was a freshman in college, and it was my first FA (and first article). I didn't have access to the newspapers database that I do today, and there's some stuff that hasn't made it into the article yet. It's on my todo list to fix - I made a pass through over the holidays and hope to work on it more this spring. Unfortunately, my access to that newspapers database expires on the 11th, and I'm trying to extract all the articles that I need to get the rest of San Diego County highways to GA/FA before then, so I don't think I'll be able to fix it up in time. I'm trying not to have the article go to FAR and then have to re-FAC it later on to avoid the extra hassle.
But yeah, really sorry about that - if you need another article that isn't on the East Coast, CA 56 or 57 are good to go (passed in 2013 and 2012), that I know for sure, and I wasn't planning any dates for those. I-80 IA recently passed but I don't know if Fredddie was planning to do anything with it (and I don't know if you consider that too East Coast). I haven't looked at the ones in Nevada / Utah / Colorado for a while, as those passed around 2009-2011 if memory serves me right. --Rschen7754 23:49, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Don't worry. The article with lots of deadlinks was U.S. Route 50 in Nevada (aka "The Loneliest Road in America", which I thought sounded quite interesting – for a highways article, that is... ;-) ) I went for Interstate 80 Business (West Wendover, Nevada–Wendover, Utah) in the end - the title is about as long as the road! The downside of picking a short FA is that the lead needs to be fleshed out rather than cut to form the TFA blurb... Hey-ho. BencherliteTalk 00:12, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
And maybe as a bonus, we can get the nominator to return to Wikipedia for a bit. --Rschen7754 01:00, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, Yeah. I know I need to find time for Wikipedia these days. I've got Imzadi working on me too. I only owe him a half dozen article reviews or so... =-) Dave (talk) 14:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Earth100

You recently extended User:Earth100's for sockpuppetry as an IP. The user claims that they did not make the indicated edit, even though it's identical to one they made before. Previously, this user was the victim of what I believe was a joe job; User:Earth101 was created, but there was some evidence to suggest it wasn't Earth100. It is possible that this was a second attempt to make Earth100 look bad, with less evidence than before to make the fakery less obvious...or, in fact, the Earth101 was Earth100 and this is the second attempt to evade a block. I'm going to send you an email now with an additional bit of WP:BEANS information. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:22, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Email sent now. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 January 2013

SPI

Bedtime, and I don't think this is going anywhere. --Rschen7754 11:18, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I have not made any claim that the decline was improper, quite the opposite. "...and I accept the reasonable and considered responses by the Clerks at SPI..." diff. While I did respond to your post, once a clerk said decline, I did not continue to comment. I have decided to pursue the canvassing line. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 10:46, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

As you repasted the entire posting of the SPI, and as you further stated "Please, go ahead and start the wailing and the gnashing of the teeth and the desperate cries for salvation from the unfairness that is my presence on wikipedia." in the same diff. --Rschen7754 10:49, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Huh? ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 10:59, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Those actions show me that you are trying to appeal the outcome of the SPI. --Rschen7754 11:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Where is this misunderstanding arising? Because there's a disconnect somewhere. This is the main paragraph:

If the issue for IZAK and Rachack is not sockpuppetry (and I accept the reasonable and considered responses by the Clerks at SPI), then it's indicative of a high level of offwiki canvassing between, at least, those two. TParis was objective enough to note that this is highly suspicious, despite his and my disagreements over the last however long. Besides the RFC/U, I found 46 instances where IZAK and Rachack were in direct agreement with each other that IZAK and Rachack are simply incapable of explaining (without Godwins Law)

˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 11:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
And offwiki canvassing is also a serious allegation to make too. --Rschen7754 11:12, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
And virtually impossible to prove without an admission, yes, I know. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 11:14, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
What I'm seeing from you is a "Well they disagree with me, so they must be breaking some sort of policy, that way we can get them blocked." This is not a good mentality to have, and can WP:BOOMERANG very quickly on you in the future. One of our core policies is WP:AGF - it would be good for you to read. --Rschen7754 11:18, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wikidata weekly summary #43

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Development
    • Deployment on the Hebrew and Italian Wikipedia ([1] [2] [3])
    • Switched the Wikipedias over to a new, more scalable dispatching changes script for propagating changes from the repository to the clients
    • Fixing various deeply buried bugs and a few minor bugs reported after deployment
    • Preparations for next deployment on wikidata.org
    • Working on property parser function for the client
    • Implemented robust serialization of changes for dispatching
    • Resumed work on linked data interface
    • References can now be created, edited and removed on existing statements
    • Several minor user interface fixes
    • Styling of the user interface for statements
    • Selenium tests for references
    • Selenium tests for non-JS SpecialPages
    • Worked on puppet
  • Discussions/Press
  • Events
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
  • Open Tasks for You
    • Test statements on the [demo system before the roll-out to wikidata.org on February 4
    • Hack on one of these
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 13:24, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Re: SPI copy-paste

Sorry about this. I didn't actually copy-paste: the automated procedure for starting a new one tried to create a new page under the exact same title as before, which I figured wasn't good, so I went back and reverted the closure. In the process I forgot to delete your reply, and I apologize. elvenscout742 (talk) 02:44, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Not a problem. It is actually supposed to create a page at the same title. --Rschen7754 02:46, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
But wouldn't that delete the first page? elvenscout742 (talk) 04:10, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
No, because the reports are archived in the /Archive subpage. --Rschen7754 04:12, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Ah okay. Sorry about the misunderstanding. I did the whole thing somewhat hastily. JoshuSasori caused me some loss of sleep with his personal threat and other harassment, so I was relieved when he got blocked, but now someone is doing the exact same thing and apparently getting away with it. That's why I have been in such a hurry to deal with these issues. elvenscout742 (talk) 04:33, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

HiLo48

Would you mind procedurally closing the {{unblock}} with the referral to ANI since it's there now? There's no benefit for discussion in both places. Toddst1 (talk) 03:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

I have had some unpleasant interactions with HiLo48, so I don't think that I am the best person to do so. --Rschen7754 03:51, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 February 2013

92.20.44.181

Please block the above IP editing talk page while blocked privilege as he made PA there. Thanks. Arctic Kangaroo 09:29, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Map

Hi there. I have a featured article candidate open for Penticton Regional Airport and an editor has requested that I create a map. Currently, I am not aware how to develop a map but am attempted to get some ideas together. I noticed that you have developed a number of maps for use on articles you have wrote, so I was wondering if you had any advice on this? Thanks, TBrandley (what's up) 00:19, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

The best way to do this is to create a map with GIS data; see Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Maps task force/Tutorial for a semi-related tutorial. If there's no data available or you are unable to do so, sometimes you can get by in a pinch with using data from OpenStreetMap, as that's freely usable (I think? may want to check on that) and then editing the resulting file. --Rschen7754 02:29, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tony254trill

Can you clarify if just checkuser was declined, or the entire investigation was declined? This seemed like a WP:DUCK to me, even without CU. Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 00:29, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Just CU was declined, as that is technically impossible. CU is just one of the tools that we can have to determine if someone is socking - it is not the only tool. --Rschen7754 00:31, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Is there any difference between your marking as Clerk declined as opposed to Declined or CheckUser declined? I was confused by the different listings at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations#Cases_currently_listed_at_SPI of "declined" vs "cudeclined". (I'm not around SPI that much)—Bagumba (talk) 00:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm only a trainee clerk, so I can't CheckUser decline --Rschen7754 00:47, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Got it. As long as it's not getting closed merely because of CU, I'm OK. BTW, can you elaborate on decline because of "Stale"? Does it mean that information is not retained on old accounts to determine if one is a sock? Feel free to point me to a link if I'm too ignorant to have found it already. Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 00:52, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Correct; the info is deleted after a set period of time. I'm reluctant to say what that period of time is because of WP:BEANS, but a year definitely is past that period of time. --Rschen7754 00:53, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #44

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Development
    • Deployment of the first parts of phase 2 (infoboxes/statements) on wikidata.org done - see it live for example here, here and here
    • Diffs for statement edits can now be shown
    • Started work on query definitions
    • Edit links are now disabled in the interface when the user does not have the rights to edit
    • Edit links are now hidden when viewing old revision
    • Worked on search field for WikibaseSolr
    • More work on Lua templates for Wikibase entities
    • Worked on bugfixes in the statement user interface
    • New features in the statement user interface (references counter/heading)
    • JavaScript editing for table showing labels and description of the same item in different languages
    • Repaired and updated the demo system
    • Resumed work on Linked Data interface
    • Support for enhanced recent changes format in client
    • There are automatic comments for statement edits as well in the history now
    • Special page for unconnected pages, that is pages on the client that are not connected to items on the repository
    • Added permission checks for statements, so a user that can not edit will not be able to edit or that only a group can be allowed to do some changes like creating statements
  • Discussions/Press
  • Events
    • FOSDEM
    • upcoming: office hour (English; German later)
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
  • Open Tasks for You
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 16:09, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Account violate???????

Dear Rschen7754,Please remove the blocked of Kayat941183, because that user would not use anymore. Also this user don't have the will to have any violence in Wikipedia, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. And just the fact some of the edit of Dictators. Some added such as Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser, Anwar Sadat, Hosni Mubarak, Chinese Communist leader Deng Xiaoping and Jiang Zemin, Soviet communist leaders, Argentine President Jorge Rafael Videla, Leopoldo Galtieri, etc. They are real dictators which during their period of regime are in constitutional dictatorships.Marxistfounder (talk) 17:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

No, I will not unblock the account, because you used it to violate our policy on multiple accounts. --Rschen7754 00:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

How to delete the account? I have not done any violate!!!!!!!!!!Marxistfounder (talk) 11:13, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you have violated our policy, and accounts cannot be deleted. --Rschen7754 15:06, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Maturity Issues

Hello Rschen7754. At my request for Global Rollback, you said that I needed more crosswiki experience, which I completely understand. However, you also said that I had maturity issues but didn't explain; do you mind elaborating? Thank you! Vacation9 22:52, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

I've noticed and will be commenting at meta. --Rschen7754 22:55, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Brief wikibreak

I've managed to spend my entire weekend downloading sources for California road articles before my database access expires. I'm sure that I'll break 1000 before I finish here. However, that also means that I'll have worked for 36 hours straight on this, ending tonight at midnight my time.

This also happens to be my midterms week, so I'll have to be studying a lot to make up for the time I didn't have this weekend. So following the Wikidata deployment on Monday except for Wednesday during part of the day for the Wikidata deployment, I'll be offline Monday afternoon through Thursday morning. If you need to reach me urgently, I'll be available by email. I also need a breather from all the time I spent on the computer. Sorry for the inconvenience, but I really need to focus! --Rschen7754 15:22, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

FWIW I also won't be on all 20+ channels that I normally idle in on Monday. --Rschen7754 16:02, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Well, I downloaded 1350 articles this weekend. I didn't get to Imperial County, and I didn't get to finish US 101, or do SR 163 or I-15. My university is still letting me login, but I don't know if that will last through today. I think that between maps, the LA times, and the articles I have, I can at least get the remainder of the articles to GA though. I'm still looking into ways to get the missing articles but we'll see what happens. --Rschen7754 08:36, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
(stalking) I'd advise taking a lengthy break. I've been off SABRE Maps development since last November, and it's done me a world of good not having to think about the ever increasing backlog. Somebody else can always improve the articles. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:13, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
No, I'm not exhausted, I just have more pressing commitments this week that I need to attend to. --Rschen7754 18:00, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Well staying off Wikimedia entirely was a failure, though I haven't been on IRC, which was the main distraction. Still planning to return in full on Thursday. --Rschen7754 04:17, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 February 2013

Dewan357

The OFFER was made after the September 8th incident when Drmies saw my edits and confronted KWW [here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kww#Gota_Work_etc.]. As such I kept my word, the OFFER should still stand. I wrote August by accident. (24.184.37.87 (talk) 16:08, 13 February 2013 (UTC))

Is this the type of "reviews" Wikipedia is proud of???

Here's what I get on the talk page of Impalement "It reads like a penny dreadful at the moment! It's somewhat peripatetic as well."

That this "reviewer" (not you) thinks documenting historical usage all over the world is a "penny dreadful" is his personal opinion. I think this is extremely disrespectful towards me, and totally failing in being a review.Arildnordby (talk) 15:39, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

That was not a review. It was a comment; I agree it could have been more diplomatic, but the article needs help badly. --Rschen7754 18:24, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
If it is not a review, then it is wrong to remove it from nominee place, without any specific arguments. And, it can stand as a nominee, not accepted, with an initiated discussion, as is common.Arildnordby (talk) 18:44, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

–Fredddie™ 16:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll be back in full tomorrow - in danger of failing a class so I need to take some time off. --Rschen7754 18:23, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #45

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Development
    • Deployment to English Wikipedia
    • Fix various minor bugs in client, including watchlist toggle with preference to default to always show Wikidata edits
    • Added the new Baso Minangkabau Wikipedia (min)
    • Fixed wrong revision of statements being shown in diff and old revision view
    • Diff visualization for claims (simple version for main snak)
    • Diff visualization for claims (extended version for references, qualifiers, ranks)
    • Tooltip that notifies about the license your contributions will be covered by while editing (can be disabled by each user)
    • Started with valueview refactoring
    • Started with user interface handling of deleted properties
    • Started with refactoring of local partial entity lookup
    • Started with refactoring of toolbar usage in jQuery.wikibase view widgets
    • Finished improvement on jQuery.wikibase.claimview’s edit mode handling
    • Improved search by using entity selector in search field instead of normal MediaWiki search field
    • More work on Lua-based templates for entities
    • Specified the capabilities of the query language we need
    • Created query object
    • Proper bot-flagging of edits (bugzilla:44857)
    • Use of ID to directly address an item or property
    • Search should give more of the complete matches now
    • Special:ItemByTitle should work for canonical namespaces and later on for local namespaces
    • More robust format for notifications of changes on the repository to the client
    • Started work on refactoring API and autocomments code
    • Started to maintain documentation of configuration options in git
  • Discussions/Press
  • Events
    • Upcoming: Wikipedia Day NYC
    • Upcoming: office hour in English tomorrow
    • Note: changed day of next German office hour to March 8
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
    • We have a time scheduled when Wikidata will be read-only for a database migration. The window for that is Feb 20 19:00 to Feb 21 2:00 UTC.
    • New features and bugfixes on Wikidata are planned to be deployed on Monday (Feb 18). This should among other things include:
      • Showing useful diffs for edits of claims (they’re currently empty)
      • Automatic comments for editing of claims (there are currently none)
      • Ability to add items to claims by their ID
      • Better handling of deleted properties
      • More results in the entity selector (that’s the thing that lets you select properties, items and so on) so you can add everything and not just the first few matches that are shown
    • We’re still working on the issue that sometimes editing of certain parts of items or properties isn’t possible. If you’re running into it try to reload the page and/or change the URL to the www. version or the non-www. version respectively.
    • Deployment on all other Wikipedias is currently planned for March 6 (a note to the Village Pumps of all affected projects will follow soon)
    • Check out a well-done item
  • Open Tasks for You
  • Help expand en:Wikipedia:Wikidata
  • Help expand and translate Wikidata/Deployment Questions
  • Hack on one these
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 21:29, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

DarafshBot

Hi. i was in vacation, i update my bot to pyrev:11073. please unblock it. Thanks Darafsh Kaviyani (Talk)‍ 06:18, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Unblocked. --Rschen7754 06:19, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
I've had to reblock - your bot started changing enwiki links again. --Rschen7754 06:36, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
OK. i will fix it. Darafsh Kaviyani (Talk)‍ 06:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited California State Route 67, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Foster, California (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) 11:15, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

User:Alch Bot

Hello, first of all, i'm sorry for the edits of Alch Bot (talk · contribs), i've used a new pywp install to run my bot, but added the wrong username on en.wp. You can check that it edited during 20 min, and stoped just before my aprouved bot starts editing after a long stop. Is it possible to unlock Alch? Alchimista talk with me 23:56, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I will unblock. However, are you aware about Wikidata being launched on enwp? Is your interwiki bot aware? --Rschen7754 00:06, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Yes, i'm aware fo wikidata implementation on en, i've been wathcing the discussions here to help on the implementation on my homewiki, plus, i got the warning on my home project, about the arrive of wikidata on my homewiki. Alchimista talk with me 16:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

FAC

Hello sir, we would like your suggestions on the fac. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Priyanka Chopra/archive1. Please , review it and represent your thoughts. Thank You.Prashant  ✉  18:40, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I'll see what I have time for - I already have 2 other FACs I'm looking at. :/ --Rschen7754 23:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 February 2013

SPI/FergusM1970

I just wanted to let you know that it appears another sock has popped up (see Createmark's first edit) on the AfD page for Derwick Associates. I added a comment to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/FergusM1970/Archive because it was related so I wasn't sure it necessarily merited a new case. Let me know if this isn't the best course of action and you need me to open up a new thread. Dreambeaver(talk) 22:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

That should be started as a new report. --Rschen7754 22:42, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll get on that. Dreambeaver(talk) 22:43, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #46

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 17:20, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Request

Hi, a page I started Lucian Jayasuriya has been nominated for deletion by a person using an account which has been blocked indefinitely for sock pupetry. To whom should i apply for a decision? I have made a contribution to the discussion page.Liannalianna (talk) 19:59, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I've posted a note with a link to the SPI for the closing admin. I'm pretty sure it will be closed as keep, but that's for them to decide. --Rschen7754 20:51, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

User:MerlIwBot

I've had to reblock this bot. As you seem to have unblocked it yesterday, you might want to have a look at it. Cheers, —Ruud 13:01, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I was assured yesterday by the operator that there were no issues... apparently not. --Rschen7754 21:33, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata and the WP:EN article Enclave and exclave

Hi. I've been experimenting with Wikidata, adding various statements and correcting interwiki links were necessary. But I've come across an issue with the WP:EN article Enclave and exclave, which covers two linked concepts in one article. This makes it very hard to provide links for the Wikidata concepts of enclave and exclave, especially as Wikidata does not appear to let me set up interwiki links pointing at redirect pages. I've discused this further at Talk:Enclave and exclave#Reconsideration of merge of enclave and exclave, mostly from the perspective of whether we should demerge the article. As somebody who seems to be involved in the integration of Wikidata and WP:EN, you may like to comment there. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

It seems that other people have answered this, so I'll leave it to them, but let me know if you have other questions. --Rschen7754 21:36, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Impersonators at RFA

Hi, you've been mentioned (kind of!) at ANI, please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Impersonators at RFA in case you can shed any light...thanks, GiantSnowman 15:41, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

You're being impersonated by Rschxn7754 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 11:01, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Blocked, pages deleted, and locked by the stewards. --Rschen7754 11:04, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey, I thought you or one of your talkpage stalkers should be aware that the user has placed a uw-block notice on his/her talkpage and used that as the basis for an unblock request. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 13:57, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
It was already declined, but blocked the IP that posted. --Rschen7754 14:53, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 February 2013

Re: CA 52

Closing per below. --Rschen7754 20:31, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sure. I just prefer to not use redirects, especially for templates. No harm in replacing WPBS with WikiProjectBannerShell. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:39, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Well specifically, why did you reorder the project tags? --Rschen7754 18:40, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you thought this needed to be "reverted" Rschen7754? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:47, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Because it's the U.S. Roads WikiProject that puts the most work into the article; I'm not even sure the other two should be on there as they do nothing for the article. --Rschen7754 18:48, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Displaying projects in alphabetical order is helpful, as it also displays affiliated categories in alphabetical order. I have been making edits like these forever, for the sake of organization, and have found they are pretty helpful and non-controversial. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:49, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Is there a guideline that suggests we should "revert" a re-ordering of tags? Is there a guideline for ordering of tags? I'm asking simply because I'm not aware of one, but I don't tend to edit tags on talk pages. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:51, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Well they're obviously controversial now, and I see no reason to make those sort of edits per the English Wikipedia's longstanding convention against edits that do nothing to substantially benefit the article, and in this case actually cause problems. And TRM, this is more of a matter of principle, especially since we have had numerous problems with WPUS tagging in the past. --Rschen7754 18:52, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) (Sorry this keeps happening!) To me, displaying projects outside alphabetical order is subjective. I do not think they should be displayed based on certain contributors' preferences based on the amount of work that was put into the article. People can look at an article's history and talk page to determine this. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:53, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
What problems are caused by my edit? --Another Believer (Talk) 18:54, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
The problem is that it redirects people to the wrong projects should an issue come up with the article; furthermore, the article assessment gadget goes off the first class assessment, and in my experience the WPUS assessments are regularly wrong and stale. --Rschen7754 18:56, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm just looking for the guideline which enables an edit to be "reverted" (not even just "undone") because I can't see one. Alphabetical order seems just fine for this kind of thing. If you want a guideline substantiating the "fact" that a particular project has more precedence over an article than any other, then perhaps you can write it, or point me to it? It seems the ordering of projects here is currently a matter of personal preference, or subjective based on a feeling, which is, of course, irrelevant. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:57, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
This is a matter of common sense more than anything; in other states I've even seen the state WikiProject tags entirely removed from the articles. At this point, I am considering doing that myself in California. --Rschen7754 19:00, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
It seems like commons sense to me to associate the article with WikiProject California as well. --Another Believer (Talk) 19:02, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) (I am on a roll today). If there is an issue with an article, I think people can decide which WikiProject to contact on their own. Actually, they are most likely to just leave a note on the talk page, which would be seen by article watchers. --Another Believer (Talk) 19:01, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
...but most of the state WikiProjects have either been redirected to WP:WPUS or are stale. Do we want editors contacting stale WikiProjects? --Rschen7754 19:03, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, there's no "precedence" for a particular project, there's no "ownership" of a particular project over a particular article. Ordering is arbitrary, and so alphabetical is as logical as any other way of presenting it. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:05, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

However, there have been longstanding concerns regarding Kumioko and his repeated tagging of everything even tangentially related to the US, and that is what is being addressed here. --Rschen7754 19:08, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Are we still addressing my edit? I did not add or remove WikiProjects. I simply wrote out the full name of the WPBS template and put the projects in alphabetical order. Personally, I think the California project is relevant, but discussing whether or not it belongs on the talk page is a separate matter from my edit. --Another Believer (Talk) 19:39, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Quite, it would be well worth sticking to the point here and not dragging in issues that may exist that are entirely outside this discussion. Of course, if there's a more central issue, it should be dealt with elsewhere. Another Believer's edit was in good faith, didn't contravene any policy or guideline, didn't deserve to be "reverted" and shouldn't have been treated like vandalism. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:07, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
First of all, that was a misclick - I thought the center Twinkle rollback button allowed me to do an edit summary, but apparently not. And the issues are relevant - for quite a while USRD has been fed up with people insisting that WPUS get deference and moving their banners above ours and tagging all of our articles (or in some cases just our FAs) when they do nothing for them anyway. --Rschen7754 20:12, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Stinks of ownership issues. I suggest you and "USRD" get over it. This is about objective and clear notifications to editors, not about in-fighting, snipey nonsense and "our articles", "our FAs", "they do nothing..." etc. Please re-assess your approach to such discussions, an experienced editor and an admin should realise that this is not the correct path. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:15, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
How do you explain the fact that other editors have complained about similar issues who have nothing to do with USRD? --Rschen7754 20:18, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I think you'll find I don't need to "explain" anything. Your response above shows nothing more than ownership over certain pages, and that is unacceptable from anyone, particularly an experienced editor and admin. How odd you would think otherwise. Neither you nor your "project" own these pages. The edit made by Another Believer was in good faith, and didn't compromise any policy, any guideline or anything else, in fact made good common sense to most of us who exist outside of your project. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:22, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

One of the things that I miss from the 2008-2009 era of editing Wikipedia was the era of the WikiProject. Today we only have 4-5 projects and the rest have faded away. Meanwhile, USRD remains one of the only projects that is actually getting something done. As I've said elsewhere I don't go for all the anti-civility vested contributor brouhaha, but if this is how we treat other actual content contributors who put their heads down and generate actual content, something is greatly wrong with this site. A "strong" WikiProject is not a bad thing. Don't think this is going anywhere, so hatting this. --Rschen7754 20:31, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sulutil

Hi, just a technical question about your mention of sulutil on the arbcom noticeboard talk. I followed the link, because I'd like to know how to make searches like that, but I couldn't get it to show me any other block than the enwiki one. That one came up when I ticked the "Display blocks" option. So I suppose I only saw the one active block? How did you get the others to show up? My son always tells me I have these problems because I lack the "magic finger"; when he does stuff, everything shows up. Was that it in this case? Bishonen | talk 11:09, 1 March 2013 (UTC).

I didn't; I just clicked every contributions link where the contributions were > 10 or so and then clicked the block log button on each. --Rschen7754 11:14, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
No magic finger! OK, thanks. Bishonen | talk 11:43, 1 March 2013 (UTC).

Proposed closing of Morriswa RFC

Hi, Rschen7754. As a person who has commented in the above RFC, your input on a possible closure of the RFC at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Morriswa#Proposal to close would be appreciated. Thank you. --Rschen7754 05:10, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Camoka4

Hi. Could you take a look at this SPI page and tell me if you agree (or not) with my declining a CU request? I'm new at SPI clerking, and I'm a bit concerned that I might be overlooking an opportunity here for a CU to reveal sleepers in this case. If you think I should have endorsed this one, feel free to undo my "decline", and I won't mind. Thanks. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 01:58, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

I usually decline unless there's a history of sleepers, or it's obvious that someone's trying to game autoconfirmed, or anything like that. --Rschen7754 02:04, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
OK, thanks. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 02:36, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
No problem! You should join us on IRC if you get a chance - it makes asking questions a lot easier. --Rschen7754 02:43, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Another "Leandro da silva pereira santos" sock, I believe

I noticed you commenting at a couple of old SSP cases regarding this user. I believe this user is socking as 187.113.197.150 again. The Natalie Portman edits (regarding her nationality) is what caught my attention, and then I noticed the edits to UFC articles and the location of the IP (Brazil) and it sealed the deal for me. What are your thoughts? Nymf talk to me 18:28, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

This should be filed at SPI so that it's on the record, in my opinion. --Rschen7754 18:46, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Regarding Wikidata and redirects

I have listed a discussion on Wikidata in which you might have interest: d:Wikidata:Project chat#Issue pertaining to redirects. I look forward to your input. Steel1943 (talk) 05:23, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Editing by Wondering 55

Hello. It's come to my attention that you have been systematically removing citations to a certain newspaper. This violates our neutral point of view policy, and is clearly against the purpose of creating an encyclopedia. As that is all that you have edited so far, it is clear that you are only here to further an agenda. That makes you a single-purpose account and is grounds for indefinite blocking.

I don't know whether certain aspects of the paper are reliable or not (and frankly, I could care less), but a wholesale removal of all citations to that source because you hate it is not acceptable, and if it continues, you will be blocked indefinitely. --Rschen7754 08:09, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

You have been provided with misleading, false claims by Alansohn, or others that have been unfairly influenced by Alansohn, that are not based on the facts.

Alansohn has been systematically harassing me and publicizing his false claims with others.

I would suggest you check out Alansohn talk page with my responses under the Leanna Brown section and Edit warring Section concerning Alsonsohn's unsubstantiated claims and inappropriate behavior and harassment of me in violation of Wikipedia policies.

Check out Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Scroll down to Alanson's false claim of "Editor with an apparent grudge against a reporter" for my response based on the facts and rational reasons in response to his unsubstantiated claims, conspiracies, and false or misleading information.

I believe the information that you may have used to base your conclusions is simply inaccurate, misleading, incomplete, or false, and cannot be substantiated by the complete facts.

The complete set of facts will show that:

1. I am not systematically removing citations to a certain newspaper

2. I have no other agenda other than to ensure citations are accurate, relevant, or up-to-date. I have checked many other sources besides the cited newspaper and the cited reporter and have found most, but not all of their references to be correct. I have made needed corrections or notified others of needed corrections, as required.

3. I have not removed all articles by the cited reporter or cited newspaper when I determine the cited articles are accurate, up-to-date, or relevant.

4. I do not remove articles because I hate anyone or any source. In fact, I do not hate anything and it does not play any part in my objective reviews to determine if there is misleading, inaccurate, or irrelevant information.

No other reputable encyclopedia that I know would allow misleading, inaccurate, out-of-date, or irrelevant sources for specific articles to be retained. It would not matter if it was one source, or more than one source, that repeatedly violated these principle. They would all be removed and replaced on a case-by-case basis. Allowing any one source to remain in when it can be clearly shown that the cited source is inaccurate, out-of-date, or irrelevant for a specific article, would demonstrate an unacceptable lack of neutrality.

Alansohn has demonstrated a lack of neutrality in retaining cited articles that are inaccurate, out-of-date, or irrelevant.

Alansohn has demonstrated a lack of neutrality in obsessing on every single change that I have made in every single article, even when he is not directly involved in updating an article, and repeatedly Undoing them even after I provide facts and explanations that show the cited articles to be inaccurate, out-of-date, or irrelevant, or superseded by better references.

He appears to be obsessed with Undoing my changes and putting back in unreliable sources to see if I will respond to his unacceptable practices.

If anyone should be blocked it is Alansohn, who has become obsessive in making false claims against me without any basis of facts and repeatedly Undoing every change that I make in disregard of the facts and explanations that I provide to him. This is in disregard to Wikipedia policies to NOT make unsubstantiated denigrating comments about others, NOT repeatedly Undo someone's work without explanation, and treat others with respect and assumption of good faith.

If someone ever went in and started reversing every single change that you made without any basis of facts or asking for your input, I hope that Wikipedia policy would not allow that.

Lets' work together for the the betterment of Wikipedia.

If you could explain your role in this review process, that would be helpful.

Are there Wikipedia supervisors that have more influence than others in resolving issues? How do I determine if someone is just a Wikipedia member, who is commenting, or someone that can assist with deciding and resolving matters. Wondering55 (talk) 12:47, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) We're all equal here. Some editors have access to more tools, but that does not make them more important than anyone else. –Fredddie™ 12:51, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
However, some commenters seem to indicate they will take final action against me. How can that be? I would not be able to say that I am going to block someone or prevent them from using Wikipedia based on my personal decision. Aren't there administrators for conflict resolution? Isn't it true that some type of complaint was filed to an administrator for resolution of the conflict with me? How do I now who is an administrator when they comment to me? We may all feel equal here, but some commenters would seem to carry some more influence based on their experience and having more user contacts so they can more easily publicize their comments. I can be faced with an influential commenter making an irrelevant comment, which I might ignore if not for the fact that everyone else, who knows this influential commenter, will believe them even if it is not true and cannot be substantiated. Any comments on my concerns and questions would be welcomed.Wondering55 (talk) 13:18, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
You may wish to read through WP:ADMIN and WP:NPOV, the two most relevant guidelines here which have been agreed upon by the community. --Rschen7754 18:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Clarification requested

I did not follow your comment at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Image_formatting. What do you mean by Commons file type?--SPhilbrick(Talk) 19:15, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

There is a specific data type for a Commons file - it's not just some unregulated string. --Rschen7754 19:16, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I am not following, but maybe because I am concentrating on how it relates to my suggestion. We have three (at least) ways of formatting an image name in info boxes. I'd like to settle on one and use it everywhere. How does your comment affect my suggestion? Does it mean it would be a bad idea, or impossible or something else? By data type, do you mean data type? If so, it doesn't help me understand. Maybe you mean something else? --SPhilbrick(Talk) 19:42, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes, that's what I mean. You can expect whatever is generated by the Wikibase (Wikidata) extension to always have a consistent format, as the interface will match a specific file to the item, not just a random string. --Rschen7754 19:44, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes, that is obvious. Perhaps I phrased my proposal poorly, as both you and Andy thought I was commenting on Wikidata. My proposal was not aimed at changing anything in Wikidata. It was aimed at changing a flaw in the way Infoboxes are designed. If someone is going to edit the infoboxes to use data from Wikidata, at the same time they are making that edit, I would like them to fix the image=parameter. I doubt that image names will be stored in Wikidata in the near future.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 20:45, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Rschen7754. You have new messages at ༆'s talk page.
Message added 14:22, 7 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 14:22, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 March 2013

Thanks

For some reason I had My76Strat's talk page on my watchlist and I saw that Go Phightins! had edited it (didn't see the hrdr or whatever it was after it) and I was confused that maybe I had been hacked. Luckily I wasn't, and I thank you for your vigilance in this. Go Phightins! 02:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem, someone actually alerted me to it. --Rschen7754 02:33, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Shirt58 just notified me on my talk (though I'd already seen it). I guess if someone wants to impersonate me, I have done something right! (or just am nuts) Go Phightins! 02:35, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rschen7754/Archive_18&oldid=1143275469"