Jump to content

User talk:Tariqabjotu/Archive Sixty-One

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

Template:PDFlink has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion atthe template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.Lexein (talk) 12:57, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 April 2013

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to you let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You do not need to participate however, you are invited to help find a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Cavann (talk) 18:41, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Request for clarification regarding Jerusalem RFC

A request for clarification has been submitted regarding the ArbCom mandated Jerusalem RFC process. Callanecc (talk • contribs •logs) 01:32, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

note

hi there. thanks very much for your note at the Arbcomm page. I appreciate your insights.

I think things may go on as before. However, I think it is good we opened up this discussion. I think the moderator truly has made every effort to make this process go well. However, I think a different structure needs to be used for this sort of process. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 19:55, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

just letting you know, some more questions have been posted by the moderator at Talk:Jerusalem/2013 RfC discussion. you can see some of my replies there as well. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 17:00, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I did notice. Thanks. -- tariqabjotu 17:07, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Out of curiosity, why are you still participating in that charade? It's pretty obvious Strad is going to let an activist group so tightly control the RfC that they might as well just decide amongst themselves what the article should say and edit accordingly. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 23:49, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Note - I've left a comment at User talk:No More Mr Nice Guy#Comment on Tariqabjotu's talk page about the post above. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 09:15, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
For weighing arguments, not merely counting votes, and explaining your rationaleat ITN It does seem like a novel concept at times :-) —Bagumba (talk) 00:24, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
I was just coming here to commend you for that as well. A simple counting of votes does not replace the work of actually sorting through the merits of the various arguments. Kudos. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:48, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

ITN

Hi. You really should learn more about what is a consensus and how it is reached through a discussion. This is not the first time you post an item with no consensus at all and in the most recent case with Jason Collins there is even majority of users who are against it. This is an extreme violation of the rights and responsibilities of an admin and please, trust me, your subjective opinion why to post it doesn't and shouldn't weight more than all of the others who have spent many hours to discuss the issue. Sorry but your recent behaviour has definitely crossed the red line and it fully encourages me to take the issue further (first level, second level). Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:45, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

If you feel so inclined, do that. Don't threaten me. -- tariqabjotu14:57, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
This is not a threat, only an information. I will need some time to prepare the request and will let you know again. Best.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:04, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
That is extreme and doesn't help the situation. I felt the posting was inconsistent in regards to similar nominations (France and New Zealand, as mentioned), but this shouldn't be blamed on User:Tariqabjotu who AFAIK didn't violate any WP policy. Thanks,201.9.228.193 (talk) 14:33, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment. I think the main responsibility for the decision whether to post an item or not falls on the admin who uses his authority to mediate in the process and conclude the discussion. In this case, his decision is far from being neutral and provokes the use of some measures to stop it in the future cases (Note: This is not the first time his decision to deviate from neutrality.). Having an admin from the United States to resolve an issue that unfortunately saw a fierce dispute between those claiming it's a US-centric topic and others that have used other means to deny it is not what we're waiting for; not every admin on the English Wikipedia comes from the United States and I know some of them who edit the ITN section and could have been easily called to resolve this issue in a more proper way. The only policy that was heavily violated in this case is the neutrality statement that any admin should adhere to in order to remain impartial. I will need some time to decide what kind of admin review to pursue though. Best.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:36, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Good luck. -- tariqabjotu 22:56, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 April 2013

Jerusalem RfC discussion: finalising drafts

Hello. We have almost finished step three of the Jerusalem RfC discussion, but before we move on to step four I would like to make sure that all the participants are happy with the drafts that we have chosen. The content of the drafts are likely to dictate what ends up in the actual article, after all, so I want to make sure that we get them right.

So far, there hasn't been much interest in the process of choosing which drafts to present to the community, and only three editors out of twenty submitted a drafts statement. I have used these three statements to pick a selection of drafts to present, but we still need more input from other participants to make sure that the statements are representative of all participants' wishes. I have started discussions about this underquestion seven and question eight on the RfC discussion page, and I would be grateful for your input there.

Also, there have been complaints that this process has been moving too slowly, so I am going to implement a deadline. If there haven't been any significant objections to the current selection of drafts by the end of Wednesday, 8 May, then I will move on to step four. Questions or comments are welcome on the discussion page or on my talk page. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:57, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

DC meetup & dinner on Saturday, May 11!

Please join Wikimedia DC for a social meetup and dinner at Vapiano (near Farragut North/Farragut West) on Saturday, May 11 at 5:30 PM. All Wikipedia/Wikimedia and free knowledge/culture enthusiasts, regardless of editing experience, are welcome to attend! All ages welcome!

For more information and to sign up, please see the meetup page. Hope to see you there! Kirill [talk] 23:16, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

In the News Post

Your post of the Jason Collins ItN was greatly disturbing, to put it very, very mildly. You wrote:

It's far from unanimous, but I don't find the reasons for opposing to be stronger than those supporting

completely ignoring concensus in favor of your own reasoning. While discussions are not votes, saying "I understand there are some people who believe this should not have been a big deal, but, for better or worse, it was/is a big story" is like saying "I understand there are some people who believe my religion/ideology/... is wrong, but, for better or worse, it's right" and then placing it on the main page.

Furthermore, and just as problematic, you did not in any way discount severely POV comments, such as:

  • Support Milestone in breaking down homophobia and definition of "masculinity" in male team sports
  • Support as a major milestone of societal change
  • Strong support; my support has everything to do with me being an LGBT ally
  • Oppose. I am a vocal supporter of human rights [with the implication that LGBT issues constitutes human rights]

to quote some of most egregious examples The overwhelming majority of such POV statements came from the Support camp. If you had properly ignored such !votes, there would have been clear consensus not to post.

This is a very serious issue, featuring a disregarding of NPOV and Consensus, to influence the content that millions of readers saw. I notice others have complained about your ItN decisions; while I do not know the details and will therefore refrain from judging those cases, consistent abuse of your adminhood would lead me to pursue higher-level channels of discussion. -- Ypnypn (talk) 02:37, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

As I said to Kiril Simeonovski above, if you would like to air your grievances about my "greatly disturbing" action in some official channel, feel free to do so. However, don't threaten me. -- tariqabjotu 07:39, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
If you insist... ANI discussion.

Unacceptable behaviour

I cannot stand reading this without reaction :

Don't ask me to "drop" anything, because I have nothing to drop; you created an argument where there was none before. I am tired of this game (all too familiar on Israel-Palestine topics) where you insert pithy remarks intended to do nothing more than stir the pot, then play innocent, insult others' intelligence, and ask that others cool down when someone points out your irrelevance and hostility. -- tariqabjotu 14:13, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

If we place this in the context of the behaviour that you adopted, as well as NMMNG due to the way Mr Stradivarius closed Question 5, we could wonder if the accusation against Nishidani should not target yourself. It is obvious and not discussable that the use of a dictionnary here is WP:SYNHT and Mr Stradivarisu closed the question the right way. There are official and reliable sources that state that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and they should be used to support the point instead of attacking other contributors who underlined the unadequation of the "dictionnary reasonning" with Wikipedia principles. Pluto2012 (talk) 18:23, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

As your comment demonstrates, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about, so I suggest you stay out of this. -- tariqabjotu 18:44, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Tariqabjotu,
I ask you to stop making pressure on the Mr Stradivarius because this RfC does not go to the direction that you want;
You are uncivil and do not respect WP:AGF on this talk page in accusing other not to respect this on their side.
Pluto2012 (talk) 17:04, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Oh please. Get off your high horse. There was nothing inappropriate about my comment to Mr. S. If you have nothing to contribute to the RfC discussion other than your holier-than-thou attitude, don't participate at all. Further remarks on my talk page about the RfC and the discussion will be categorically reverted. -- tariqabjotu 18:09, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Why was my name brought up here? No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 22:11, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Well Done - Sachein91 - Talk Page - 22:27, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Jerusalem RfC discussion: step four

Hello everyone. We are now at step four of the Jerusalem RfC discussion, where we will decide the details of the RfC implementation. This is the home stretch - the RfC proper will begin as soon as we have finished this step. Step four is also less complicated than the previous steps, as it is mostly about procedural issues. This means it should be over with a lot more quickly than the previous steps. There are some new questions for you to answer at the discussion page, and you can see how the RfC is shaping up at the RfC draft page. Also, when I say that this step should be over with a lot quicker than the previous steps, I mean it: I have set a provisional deadline of Monday, 20th May for responses. I'm looking forward to seeing your input. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 12:56, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

DC WikiSalon on May 24

Wikimedia DC invites you to join us for our next DC WikiSalon, which will be held on the evening of May 24 at our K Street office.

The WikiSalon an informal gathering of Wikimedia enthusiasts, who come together to discuss the Wikimedia projects and collaboratively edit. There's no set agenda, and guests are welcome to recommend articles for the group to edit or edit on their own. Light refreshments will be provided.

We look forward to seeing you there! Kirill [talk] 18:30, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Istanbul Infobox Image

Hello. I have modified my suggestion in light of your input (see: Talk:Istanbul#Istanbul_Infobox_Image). I think it addresses your concerns.Cavann (talk) 19:22, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposal at TAFI talk

A discussion that may interest you is occurring at Wikiproject TAFI's talk page at: Proposal: use Theo's Little Bot to automate the schedule and queue. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:06, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Jerusalem RfC discussion: final countdown

Hello again, everyone. I have now closed all the questions for step four, and updated the RfC draft. We are scheduled to start the Jerusalem RfC at 09:00, 23 May 2013 (UTC). Before then, I would like you to check the draft page, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jerusalem, and see if there are any errors or anything that you would like to improve. If it's a small matter of copy editing, then you can edit the page directly. If it's anything that might be contentious, then please start a discussion at Talk:Jerusalem/2013 RfC discussion#The final countdown. I'll check through everything and then set the RfC in motion on Thursday. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 16:11, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2013

Jerusalem RfC has started

Hello again everyone. We have finally made it - the RfC is now open, and a few editors have chimed in already. The discussion is located atWikipedia:Requests for comment/Jerusalem. I'm sure you don't actually need me to tell you this, but please go over there and leave your comments. :) You are the editors most familiar with the Jerusalem lead dispute on Wikipedia, so it would be very useful for the other participants to see what you have to say. And again, thank you for all your hard work in the discussions leading up to this. We shall reconvene after the results of the RfC have been announced, so that we can work out any next steps we need to take, if necessary. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 13:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Webinar / edit-a-thon at the National Library of Medicine (NLM)

Join us at the NLM next week, either in person or online, to learn about NLM resources, hear some great speakers, and do some editing!

organized by Wiki Project Med
On Tuesday, 28 May there will be a community Wikipedia meeting at the United States National Library of Medicine in Bethesda, Maryland - with a second on Thursday, 30 May for those who can't make it on Tuesday. You can participate either in-person, or via an online webinar. If you attend in person, USB sticks (but not external drives) are ok to use.

Please go to the event page to get more information, including a detailed program schedule.

If you are interested in participating, please register by sending an email to pmhmeet@gmail.com. Please indicate if you are coming in person or if you will be joining us via the webinar. After registering, you will receive additional information about how to get to our campus (if coming in-person) and details about how to join the webinar. Klortho (talk) 00:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 May 2013

DC WikiSalon on June 6

Wikimedia DC invites you to join us for our next DC WikiSalon, which will be held on the evening of Thursday, June 6 at our K Street office.

The WikiSalon an informal gathering of Wikimedia enthusiasts, who come together to discuss the Wikimedia projects and collaboratively edit. There's no set agenda, and guests are welcome to recommend articles for the group to edit or edit on their own. Light refreshments will be provided.

We look forward to seeing you there! Kirill [talk] 12:01, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Have time on Saturday?

I'm sorry for the last-minute notice, but on Saturday, June 8, from 3 to 6 PM, Wikimedia DC and the Cato Institute are hosting aLegislative Data Meetup. We will discuss the work done so far by WikiProject U.S. Federal Government Legislative Data to put data from Congress onto Wikipedia, as well as what more needs to be done. If you have ideas you'd like to contribute, or if you're just curious and feel like meeting up with other Wikipedians, you are welcome to come! Be sure toRSVP here if you're interested.

I hope to see you there!

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for D.C.-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Harej (talk) 04:33, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 June 2013

DC meetup & dinner on Saturday, June 15!

Please join Wikimedia DC for a social meetup and dinner at Vapiano (near Farragut North/Farragut West) on Saturday, June 15 at 5:30 PM. All Wikipedia/Wikimedia and free knowledge/culture enthusiasts, regardless of editing experience, are welcome to attend! All ages welcome!

For more information and to sign up, please see the meetup page. Hope to see you there! Kirill [talk] 20:06, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 June 2013

Join us this Sunday for the Great American Wiknic!

Great American Wiknic DC at Meridian Hill Park
You are invited to the Great American Wiknic DC at the James Buchanan Memorial at Meridian Hill Park. We would love to see you there, so sign up and bring something fun for the potluck! :)

Boilerplate message generously borrowed from Wikimedia NYC. To unsubscribe from future DC area event notifications, remove your name fromthis list.

Harej (talk) 15:58, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tariqabjotu/Archive_Sixty-One&oldid=1168308666"