Jump to content

User talk:Timtrent/Archive 13

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15→Archive 20

A barnstar for you!

The Technical Barnstar
Well earned! Middayexpress (talk) 13:59, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm sure I do not deserve it, but I accept it with pleasure. Fiddle Faddle 14:13, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

AGF

Re this, I'm responding here so as not to clutter up the talk page discussion. Of course you're not required to assume good faith at all times no matter what the circumstances, but the important thing is that you make an effort, i.e. give the benefit of the doubt to your fellow editors. Re-reading my comment about consensus, and noting that I never engaged in any personal attacks or accusations of any kind, I don't think you can say you gave me the benefit of the doubt. Hence I think my reference to AGF was pretty on the mark.

That said I appreciate your change of heart and I hope we can continue to resolve this discussion (and future discussions) in a friendly manner. :-) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 20:14, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

My opinion changed immediately you struck out what was, to me, the text that gave me cause for concern. That is as it should be. I have no issue with you at all. It was one behaviour and one alone that concerned me. That is now already in the past. Let's leave it there. The only thing ever to take personally on Wikipedia is praise. All else is clutter and a distraction. Fiddle Faddle 20:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

V Star Creations

Hi Timtrent,

Thank You for editting my wikipedia article related to V Star Creations and thanks for made in nice. Now I got a message from user:loveoffood007 regarding nomination of V Star Creations for Deletion. I didnt understand why the user loveoffood007 felt like that. Can you please help me to solve this issue. I dont think this article have any issue .Please help me Timtrent. :(

Neenavineeth (talk) 10:51, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

@Neenavineeth: I have no idea what you are referring to, but I will look at the article and consider it. I have not edited this article. It is not on my watch list, as it would be had I edited it. Be aware that I may also consider the article impossible to retain here. I will not help you, but I will help Wikipedia. You see, this is not your article, it is ours. Please see WP:OWN Fiddle Faddle 17:05, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 October 2013

Glann ar Mor Distillery

Hey Tim. Thanks for your {{notability}} tag on the page I newly created, Glann ar Mor distillery! It now links to two pages (Héaux de Bréhat and List of whisky brands, the latter of which did not yet have a French whisky).
I know you are not an admin, but I'll ask your opinion anyway. I'm familiar with {{notability}}, but unsure of how it applies here. I think all existing whisky distilleries would merit a page on Wiki; there are a finite number of distilleries in Scotland and the rest of the world, so I think it is feasible that the majority of links on the list of whisky brands can exist at some point in the future.
There are additionally only seven whisky distilleries in France (see the French Wiki), of which I have translated one page (Glann ar Mor). I was planning on translating the other six, and updating list of whisky brands to include a French section. Let me know what you think, and if I could/should go ahead with this project.
Merci d'avance --(Moshe) מֹשֶׁה‎ 00:08, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Here is the thing. Some Whiskey distilleries are notable, others are not. If I had one in my back garden shed it would not be notable. Those which are notable are discussed in reliable sources, those which are not, are not. It doesn't matter whether the sources are paper, online, TV or radio, what matters is that they have discussed the distillery, not just mentioned it.
So you need to work at finding sources for each article that you create, and in reliable sources. The distillery's own web site is never going to be reliable.
That there are only seven distilleries in France may indicate that whiskey is unimportant to the French? If that is the case, that fact may be notable, but a distillery may not be.
My advice, for what it is worth, is to make this article bomb proof, and then go on to write the remainder. Categorise them as French whiskey distilleries by all means, and, if you feel the list also has merit, create that article also. Fiddle Faddle 00:19, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Kornog (Glann ar Mor) is on Dramming, Whisky Intelligence, and has been featured in Whisky Magazine. I'd say Glann ar Mor meets WP:RS, as far as whisky goes, so I'll remove the {{notability}} tag. I'll check other French whiskies' notability before translating.
Sorry, I meant only seven whisky distilleries in France only seven whisky distilleries in France with Wiki articles in French. There are a lot more than seven.
Whisky is actually very important to French people (http://www.economist.com/node/16412673 ). I'm not sure how many French distilleries themselves are notable, but again, I'll check before translating. Thanks! --(Moshe) מֹשֶׁה‎ 03:34, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
However, you need to look at the references in the article and add some. You are not using anything except the distillery's own web site. Fiddle Faddle 08:36, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

COI

Hi Tim, just realized who cleaned up the mess on Laura Figueroa, and would like to thank you for it. I did however asked user LauraFigueroa333 if she is willing to rather translate some Spanish language references about herself, since copying photos will just get her in trouble and we have a place for notable Wikipedians as far as I know? I think she didn't tried to breach COI she just wanted to add her exhibits neutrally. Correct me if I am wrong though, but all what the article needs is a list of exhibits, and Spanish language links, or translated ones.--Mishae (talk) 00:22, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

As long as she makes her requests on the article talk page there is no problem. Spanish language links are no problem either. She has already made one request on the talk page. I left her a message explaining what she must do on her own talk page, and she seems to understand. Notable WIkipedians, eh? I have no idea about that area! Fiddle Faddle 00:27, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

User Takaisi

You may be interested in a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive818#User Takaisi, second incident notice, since you have taken issue with the user's behavior in the past. Cnilep (talk) 01:47, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

@Cnilep: Wow, that was archived fast. I never realised it had been archived when I responded to it. WHat is the protocol here? I suggest you move/copy it back to the main ANI page? Fiddle Faddle 16:01, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Message from Laura Figueroa

Hello, I am Laura Figueroa. A sculptor from Mexico City. I made the mistake of adding and editing my own page that I did not create. I am new at this and did not think much about editing it. I am sending you some other places where you could check my authenticity, yes? I belong to ArAnimA an artist association in France The Society of Equestrian Artists in England The Centro Cultural Mizrahi in Mexico Art Gallery Archè Arte nel Tempo in Rome, Italy Art Gallery Pini Arte Modernacontemporanea in Pontevico, Italy and The International Equine Artists association in the US

How could I send you photos to add or more information? Or the list of my exhibits. Thank you very much, — Preceding unsigned comment added by LauraFigueroa333 (talk • contribs) 03:32, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hey there. Please note that if you should post messages on the talk page, they must go on the bottom. Regards, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:56, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

@LauraFigueroa333: I'm not at all concerned about your proving who you are to me, Laura. WHat is important is that the article about you carries proof in reliable sources that you exist and that each fact in the article has a citation in a source to show that it is correct. What also matters is notability. I exist. I am a member of a number of excellent organisations, and I have created things, but no-one would ever imagine that I am notable.
Please do not send me pictures, those are the last thing that any article needs. An article on you also does not need pictures of your work. It will, in due course, need a pleasant portrait of you, or perhaps a picture of you at work, to illustrate it, but the basics need to be correct first.
I posted a message on your own talk page containing details of {{Request edit}}, something you can use to alert any editor at the article's talk page that you have a particular edit that you hope will go into the article. Please do use it.
I would also like to see you edit articles that are about other people and things before I place too much important on editing an article about you. I am not keen on people's use of Wikipedia being to promote themselves. I realise that you have been patient, but you may simply not be notable. Fiddle Faddle 08:41, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
I wouldn't say that she is not notable (though its probably my fault that I made her notable), more like not yet notable. Like, I don't know if she have any awards or not, but exhibits do make artists notable.--Mishae (talk) 15:00, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
I don't disagree, but I can find nothing about her anywhere so far. References in Spanish will be fine. Fiddle Faddle 15:49, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, but apparently she trusts us, and at the same time says that your comments were a bit insulting to her about her being not notable. Read my page for more info (so that it wont sound like I am spreading a rumour). As far as Spanish links goes, I don't know Spanish, however there is plenty of Spanish speaking users (considering it is USA second language), there still a chance of refusals for various reasons.--Mishae (talk) 23:56, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Friedrich conde Ulrich de Luxburg

dear user, the page is in the process of correction on my part, thanks or read this message and allow the page is not erased, I ask him to assist in the editing of the same.--Von Luxburg (talk) 13:00, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

@Von Luxburg: Your comments are required on the deletion discussion (linked from the article itself), my friend, where you will find the rationale for deletion and you will be able to make arguments for retention of the article. I appreciate your comment here, however this does not alter my current view on the article.
In addition to commenting there you need to find reliable sources to enter into the article. There is a finte time period to do this, so do it now.
English is not your first language, so this task is harder for you. However unfair it may seem, the English language Wikipedia can not make concessions to those who choose to edit in a language that is not their mother tongue. Fiddle Faddle 13:07, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

and tried to edit the page in question and every time I want something better in the article there is a user who constantly changes mind without explanation.--Von Luxburg (talk) 17:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

@Von Luxburg: It appears that you removed the notice that the article was being discussed for deletion, which is not appropriate. The reversion of that removal caused your other edits to be rolled out as well. Assuming those edits are valid and are cited in reliable sources you are welcome to add them again. Fiddle Faddle 09:27, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Estimated everything I ask user to help solve a problem which is that on several of the file I uploaded to wikipedia appears vilacionde copyright tag, I can tell or help remove.--Von Luxburg (talk) 12:43, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
@Von Luxburg: I do not understand your message to me. Your English in this message is not good enough for me to understand. If you have mistakenly uploaded copyright material you must read WP:COPYRIGHT. There are things which must happen before copyright material is allowed here. Fiddle Faddle 12:56, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
hello, what happens is that you put labels on all my images and and asked permission to another co-author of one of the images, the others are mine and yet also have the label copyright violation since I was the only person autoriad or ownership over them..--Von Luxburg (talk) 13:39, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
I have no idea what you are talking about. Fiddle Faddle 13:47, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Ah, I now understand. Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Von Luxburg is the place. I have done nothing. I have simply endorse the suggestion there that the copyright violations you uploaded there are to be deleted from there. Commons is not the English language Wikipedia. I have no intention of discussing those matters here. Please put your objections there in the deletion discussion. Fiddle Faddle 14:00, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

hola, lo que sucede es que le colocaron etiquetas a todas mis imágenes ya e pedido autorización al otro coautor de una de las imágenes, las otras sin embargo son mías y también tienen las etiqueta de violación de derechos de autor siendo yo la única persona con autoridad o propiedad sobre ellas.--Von Luxburg (talk) 13:39, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Please use English. Fiddle Faddle 13:47, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
this is an example of what is happening: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Grabado_Antiguo_del_escudo_Graf_von_Luxburg.jpg , what would be the way to solve it.--Von Luxburg (talk) 13:56, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Please follow the instructions on that page. It links to the deletion discussion which your tag team editing partner has already found and vandalised. Fiddle Faddle 14:03, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Request for Blocking IP Address 209.129.16.78

This address has a loooooooooooooooooooooong track record. I'm impressed that it still didn't get banned. I don't have permission to block this IP address, can you please do it? Also, I'm not entirely sure how to propose blocking; I'm merely a novice editor on Wikipedia. If I did it improperly (which I'm almost certain I did), then please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks! TheTriple M 18:16, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

pace Piotrus, you should watchlist user talk pages that you post on. Tim isn't an admin (last time I looked), neither am I, thus neither of us can block anything. Also, are you sure the IP isn't a school or a regularly reassigned dynamic IP address? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:56, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
@The Triple M: I am definitely not an admin, nor do I wish to be one, so I cannot block accounts or I addresses. To request that accounts (etc) are blocked, I use Twinkle which, if I remember correctly, is enabled in your user preferences. One can do it manually, but it is a pain. Other eyes then look at the request and determine if my request was reasonable. They accept or reject my request as they see fit. More times than not I get it right. You also have the ability to use Twinkle should you so wish. Fiddle Faddle 09:02, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
@Timtrent: Sorry for assuming. I just thought you were one, based on your productivity. And I've learned how to request blocks properly now, but thanks for your consideration. TheTriple M 17:23, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Never be sorry for asking a question :) I had no idea I was productive. I edit here to alleviate boredom :) Fiddle Faddle 17:36, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

please never use this text again

"WHat is important is that the article about you carries proof in reliable sources that you exist". You understand why I would want you not to do so, right? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:05, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Spoon feed me. I cannot fathom your thinking yet. Fiddle Faddle 08:38, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Proof of existence is not proof of notability. Right? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 08:54, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Indeed it is not. But you seem to have missed the remained of the paragraph: "WHat is important is that the article about you carries proof in reliable sources that you exist and that each fact in the article has a citation in a source to show that it is correct. What also matters is notability. I exist. I am a member of a number of excellent organisations, and I have created things, but no-one would ever imagine that I am notable." This is why I found your thinking hard to fathom. Fiddle Faddle 08:59, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Tim. Sorry that my comments were more than a little vague... unfortunately those of us who help out new editors (especially helping new editors with a COI) are constantly bombarded with "well I proved he/it exists, that's enough right?" ... and it gets tiring. So I am perhaps to eager to stamp out anything which might encourage any thinking along those lines. Sorry if I stamped too hard.
I've not forgotten your interesting query on my talk page, which is now resolved (I think) as an item requiring action, but which does raise some interesting questions to which I will reply when I have more time. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:25, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Your stamp missed me completely. I knew you would note the rest of the paragraph in the end. I rather despise COI editors. I tend to work on the 'enough rope' principle . No feathers were ruffled, but I imagine you can see why I was puzzled, now.
The other item is bizarre indeed. Fiddle Faddle 23:35, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Bisexuality in the Arab world

Hi Fiddle, the article you requested copy-edit for today has only one reference. As it stands, it should really be reduced to a single sentence and stubified, per WP:OR. I've put the request on hold and I'm thinking of declining it but I want to ask whether you plan to work on the article further. If so, we can accept the request when you've finished expanding and referencing it. The GOCE's main mission isn't one of building content and referencing (although I sometimes do so if I can improve or balance an already well-referenced article). Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:05, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Fair answer. I can't find any references that I can search for or understand, so I suggest rejection. I don;t disagree with your analysis. Fiddle Faddle 23:09, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick reply; I'm probably incorrect thinking that it cannot be referenced; WP:OR doesn't demand references, it requires that text is verifiable. Have you tried the BBC? That's where I usually start with this kind of thing. I'm off to do RL stuff for a bit, back in a couple of hours. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:23, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
I'll have a firkle about on the BBC sources tomorrow. Fiddle Faddle 23:27, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
No worries; I've opened a discussion on the Requests page's talk page here. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:59, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
We now have a much improved article, but it is straining at the bounds of its scope. There is a discussion about that on its talk page, a discussion you are most welcome to join. Fiddle Faddle 14:30, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm glad you had the time to find some references; it's now looking much more like a WP article. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 14:53, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello Fiddle Faddle

Thank you very much for your speedy reply to my request and your offer to help me. Thank you also for welcoming me to Wikipedia.

Thank you for your advice on my previous request falling into the WP:TLDR. I will try to keep my requests short from now on. Thank you. Here are the answers to the 3 questions you have asked me.

1) I wish to create a redirect from the 'Learning Disabilty' Wikipedia article.

2) The redirect I wish to create is 'Learning Disability Future Care.'

3) I have created the redirect in Articles for creation/Redirects section. However, I have been declined before. Do you mean, why did I not create a new article anyway?

I am new to Wikipedia and would like the help of an experienced user like you. I would appreciate your help and advice. Thank you again Regards Uniulstgrad (talk) 14:39, 8 November 2013 (UTC)Ian

Thank you for your help

Hello Fiddle Faddle

Thank you very much for your speedy reply to my request and your offer to help me. Thank you also for welcoming me to Wikipedia.

Thank you for your advice on my previous request falling into the WP:TLDR. I will try to keep my requests short from now on. Thank you. Here are the answers to the 3 questions you have asked me.

1) I wish to create a redirect from the 'Learning Disabilty' Wikipedia article.

2) The redirect I wish to create is 'Learning Disability Future Care.'

3) I have created the redirect in Articles for creation/Redirects section. However, I have been declined before. Do you mean, why did I not create a new article anyway?

I am new to Wikipedia and would like the help of an experienced user like you. I would appreciate your help and advice. Thank you again Regards Uniulstgrad (talk) 14:57, 8 November 2013 (UTC)Ian

Replying on your own talk page. Fiddle Faddle 17:26, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your help earlier. I will follow your advice about an insert. Please see my talk page. Thanks again Fiddle Faddle. Uniulstgrad (talk) 22:17, 8 November 2013 (UTC)Ian

The Signpost: 06 November 2013

Insert draft completed and in sandbox

Hello Fiddle Faddle

I have completed my draft 'insert' and placed it in my sandbox. Please see my talk page.

When you have looked at my draft and given me advice on it, I would also be grateful if you could advise me how to insert an emotive quote from a elderly carer as an image in a box with a colored background, if you feel that this would add any value to my article.

Thanks again Uniulstgrad (talk) 13:54, 10 November 2013 (UTC)Ian

Hi Fiddle Faddle Thank you for reading my draft and replying to me so quickly. Please see my talk page. Regards Uniulstgrad (talk) 18:25, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again for your quick reply. Your ongoing help is very much appreciated. Thank you.Uniulstgrad (talk) 18:37, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 November 2013

we seek the holy grail

"In the event that what you seek is not here then it is archived (0.9 probability)."

Nay! Having searched yon archives, well and truly, no grails were discovered. Our steeds are weary! What say ye?  :-) 74.192.84.101 (talk) 13:19, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

You probably found the Spanish Inquisition hiding behind the coal bunker, though. I say that I am snatching brief periods online on a borrowed and shared computer because I poured tea into my keyboard, and it is at the menders. So I will help when I can guarantee I have time to do so. Fiddle Faddle 13:47, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
No one expects... oh nevermind. Sorry about your keyboard, maybe you should look at the note I left for MONGO, they were getting teased about Bishzilla's keyboard-the-size-of-Montana-or-something, so I recommended a snazzy replacement. As for Duromac, no worries, I'll see if I can get Clover into the AfC queue, and leave a note on their talkpage with the pointer thereto; drop in when you have time. Danke. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 15:20, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

2nd Draft

2nd draft completed and suggested changes made. Please see my talk page. Thank you Uniulstgrad (talk) 21:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Fiddle Faddle Please see the message on my talkpage. Thank you, regards Uniulstgrad (talk) 18:54, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again

Hi Fiddle Faddle

Thanks again for replying to me with a good suggestion. I will follow your advice. Please see my talk page. RegardsUniulstgrad (talk) 16:28, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Bullying discussion, again

The RFC has only a couple of users (just us) supporting some proposals. Do you think we could ask around and see what can be done here? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:19, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

I suspect it has proved that no-one is interested except those who are. Asking around (eg) those who made serious contributions to the main article might bear fruit, though Fiddle Faddle 09:50, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Link? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 13:13, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Try Template talk:Bullying. Fiddle Faddle 13:48, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
On an irrelevant note, back in June, Fladrif unfortunately returned as 75.7.198.193 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) to continue his personal attacks and evade his block, but was blocked and his talk page access was disabled. I just want to make you aware of what happened with Fladrif, since you did have discussions with him. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:27, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
All I know about F is from personal experience. Mine was compatible with his being a decent WP editor. The world is full of unusual people, it seems. Fiddle Faddle 08:21, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
I understand where you're coming from. It's kind of upsetting that there's abuse around here on Wikipedia. And of course, Fladrif unfortunately does have a long history of chronic disruptive behavior dating all the way back to 2009. He received a one year NPA restriction from WP:ARBCOM, but continued to be abusive nonetheless. After all, indef blocked users are volunteers and people too. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:27, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
What a list! All the more reason to treat him as an irrelevance. How odd that I saw the tame version. Or maybe I exude "do not mess with me" vibes ~giggles~ Fiddle Faddle 08:37, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
XD. What a list, indeed. Anyway, onto the bullying topic, I think we should create sections for links in the RfC and discuss which should be kept or removed. I think we should notify the Medicine WikiProject, the LGBT studies WikiProject, the UK WikiProject and some other projects as well. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:42, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
I don't see why not. But we have tried RFC before with no appreciable result. Project notifications sometimes succeed. I have limited time at present. Borrowed shared computer. I will contribute what I can. I still suspect that leaving it to the general hurly burly of editing is the pragmatic approach. Fiddle Faddle 08:46, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Notice on Wiki-PR editing of Wikipedia

Hello, I would like to inform you that a requested move proposal has been started on the Wiki-PR editing of Wikipedia talk page. I have sent you this message since you are a user who has participated in one or more of these discussions. Thank you for reading this message. --Super Goku V (talk) 06:27, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I also replied over there, mostly arguing with you.  :-)   My BLP-foo is not the strongest; can I canvas and invite User:David_in_DC to check over my logic? They have been a BLP specialist since 2006 or something like that, you know, old-school from back when Jimbo still rode around on a dinosaur. I don't know David's position on paid-editing, though he has a dim view of using wikipedia as a spam-channel, and might on that basis be against WikiPR having their homepage/founders/etc mentioned in a dedicated or semi-dedicated article. Anyhoo, methinks the merge suggested by Ninja is the best pathway; are you against that idea? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 13:51, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
I proposed a merge initially, see the talk page of the target article. The idea gained no traction. Fiddle Faddle 14:23, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, maybe it can gain traction now, we shall see. But even now the page is written like a corporation-page, with the corporation-infobox, and the first sentence talking about the company, and so on. By contrast, the current title is referring to the overall Morning277 socking-saga (which is a really fun phrase to say btw), and that simply must involve some conflation going on, the dates don't match up. Anyways, I actually have an editor-window open with a Kinder Gentler Rewrite in progress. There is no way to soften the blows here, but we can be sure to elaborate on the larger context, i.e. there are plenty of paid editors, PR industry is a valued part of the larger world outside wikipedia, wikiPR is neither the first nor the last corporation to allegedly cross Jimbo's Bright Line, and so on.
  But my duck-whiskers-sense of the thing is that there is not actually any clearcut chain of evidence from Founder&CEO to paid-staffer to named-socks to specific-articles about specific-clients who specifically-admitted-to-paying-wikiPR-to-pay-somebody-to-whitewash-their-article. Failing that, from a *very* reliable source, using no WP:SYNTH at all, we are treading on thin BLP ice methinks. The four random anonymous email-replies that DailyDot managed, from *thousands* of candidates, do not convince me much. There is a huge difference between checkuser being used for wikiJustice such as Mstant == PrincessK, where mistakes do not actually result in any possibility of real-world defamation, and the much more complex assertions that Priceline == client of WikiPR == paid wikiPR to cheat == Founder X is a cheater == employees were ordered to cheat == sockpuppets A/B/C were proven in a court of law to be paid cheating eeps of WikiPR shilling for Priceline. (Nobody is explicitly making any such claims... but the connotations are definitely there, and that is BadThing.)
  More pragmatically, methinks we are engaging inadvertently in WP:SPIP for the stupid firm... prolly the Morning277 incident is the best thing to ever happen to WikiPR, in terms of free advertising.  :-/   Anyhoo, hope we get the dedicated article nixed, that will in and of itself help wider-world-contextualize and more crucially de-personalize-in-BLP-terms the content. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 16:23, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Fiddle, I would rather the content on the article as it is be ported over to COI and have the Wiki-PR focus on both things. If the article does get AFD, I would like to support a proposal on the COI article about adding the article into COI as it stood. I just feel that the article should exist as it does, but it a different format.  :) --Super Goku V (talk) 02:29, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm not 100% sure what you are saying to me. My view is that the article as it stands is (now becoming) increasingly notable, but that Wiki-PR is a flea bite non notable organisation as an organisation. Fiddle Faddle 07:54, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Article sent and Review waiting

Hi Fiddle Faddle Please see my talk page. Thanks again Uniulstgrad (talk) 21:59, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Fiddle Faddle Thank you for everything Fiddle Faddle! You have been a really great mentor. Please see my talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uniulstgrad (talk • contribs) 13:16, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

You did all the heavy lifting. my friend. Fiddle Faddle 13:18, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for ensuring all of the hard work was successful. You are a great mentor for new editors. I was very lucky to have had your expert guidance. Thank you. Uniulstgrad (talk) 13:21, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Fiddle Faddle I will take your advice re future editing. Thanks again for everything :) Uniulstgrad (talk) 22:45, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Washing a hog

Hogwash
I'm just stopping by to say that I really appreciated your humour in this comment. Carry on. - MrX 21:30, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 November 2013

Request for Notice remove

Hello sir please remove speedy deletion notice — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indian Fellow (talk • contribs) 14:15, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

The article is entirely substandard. It is not going to happen. Fiddle Faddle 14:27, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

SPI reports

Hello Tim. With Amalthea's help, I have flicked the switch, so that Twinkle will add SPI report pages to the reporter's watchlist by default.

Thank you for your contributions on WT:TW; your calm and sage voice is always appreciated. — This, that and the other (talk) 07:37, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Gosh, calm and sage! Wow! Though some ofd those who post are somewhat "me, me, look at me!" aren;t they! THanks for flicking the switch. Fiddle Faddle 08:12, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Dear WP:RFD regular

Hello Timtrent,

I just wanted to let you know that it looks like DumbBOT, the bot that creates the new WP:RFD subpages, as well as posting the link onto Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion, is not functioning. This bot has not made any edits since November 23. I recently had to transclude Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 November 24 and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 November 25 onto WP:RFD; they were never there until I added their transclusions. Also, the bot usually creates the subpages a few days in advance, and has not been doing that either; I went ahead and created the subpages up until December 1st.

I let the bot's owner, User:Tizio, know about DumbBOT's malfunctioning. It looks like it might have been shut off, but I cannot be for certain. Either way, I wanted to give you this "heads-up" in case the daily pages might need to be created and transcluded manually. Steel1943 (talk) 08:26, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. That bot has failed before. Doubtless it will fail again. Fiddle Faddle 08:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Duromac language-barrier

Hello, thanks for dropping in to help Clover with the Duromac thing. My current presumption is that reliable sources exist, but in Malaysian newspapers and governmental reports, which presumably are going to be in Malay-language, some dialect of the Chinese-language-superfamily, or the Tamil dialect from India. Do you know somebody quadrilingual?  :-)   74.192.84.101 (talk) 13:51, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Regrettably no-one. A relevant wikiproject member may be of some use? All I could do for Clover was banal stuff, I fear. Better than nothing, but not a huge amount. Fiddle Faddle 13:54, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Same boat for myself. But the large crowd trying to template-spam Clover-fka-Duromac's talkpages ... ironically as a way to drive off a presumed mainspace spammer ... is unlikely to accept Clover's say-so that there is a specific article in the offline-only Malay-language-only 1998 regional newspaper. Clover can email somebody pics of the pages, but unless we can read the pics, we cannot verify Notability. Passing mention does not count for WP:N ... just for WP:NOTEWORTHY ... so merely being able to see that "duromac" gets mentioned, which you and I could do, is not good enough. You can call me 74, think of it as my jersey-number... but, are you Tim, or do you prefer Faddle, or what exactly?  :-)   I'll ask at the teahouse where to rustle up translator-types. Thanks for improving wikipedia. — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:37, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
I even answer to "Oi! You!!" I'm happy to be called whatever you wish. Google will find the real me. I'm one of those who cocked up his initial registration here and couldn't be bothered to fight MediaWiki software, a suite I detest a despise!
If Clover cites the paper with a full {{cite news}} then the template crew cannot do anything except find someone who can read the source. But a great piece of advice for Clover is to do a LOAD of edits on other and unrelated articles before plunging in again with a big new article. "He" needs to learn his trade before publishing an article of that scale. Fiddle Faddle 16:08, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Oi! You! Wrongo!  :-)   That sure learned ya good, eh? Seriously, though, I do most strongly disagree with you. Most folks that are newly-registered editors, show up here to create an article on their company, their band, their famous gramma, or whatever. We need to encourage that behavior. We used to have ~40k active editors. That has fallen to 31k, and is still falling, and one of the big reasons is because anybody that shows up here to write what they know -- which is *natural* and obvious and in many ways a good thing -- gets template spammed and AfD'd and WP:BITE'd. Most of them give up. This is a loss for wikipedia, and for wikipedians.
  Clover is made of sterner stuff, thankfully, and took their case straight to ArbCom (by way of the AGW talkpage). And they are correct: Duromac is notable, albeit only enough for a paragraph or two, probably, at this point in time. But the real question is, who will maintain the Duromac article, during the next decade? Who will maintain the Sami Vellu article? Who will maintain the article about the Southeast Expressway? Not me. Wikipedia *needs* Clover.
  But as you point out, Clover needs our help, there is no way that Clover can source the article alone, and especially, no way they can achieve NPOV and WP:TONE. Please see -- User_talk:74.192.84.101#DUROMAC_article So far, I've found enough sources to make me believe WP:N is satisfied, or at least, will be satisfied by the time the rewritten article is done; if you'd care to take a stab at drafting an initial article, or even better, walking Clover through the AfC process, so that *they* learn some skills, that would be WP:REQUIRED. Umm... huh... okay, I just read wp:required thing again, it says you can do whatever you wish.  :-)   Do you wish to walk Clover through AfC, so that we all can start drafting the new&improved Duromac article, free from wp:copyvio and with neutral wp:tone? Let me know, thanks for improving wikipedia. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 13:13, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
I have limited time at present, I fear. Fiddle Faddle 19:39, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
I hear that!  :-)   Long weekend. Clover has managed to get through the initial AfC themselves, and stuck to a couple sentences. We currently have two solid sources, and several WP:NOTEWORTHY ones, so acceptability is borderline. I will try and ping some AfC folks that I know, to give it an informal once-over. Take it easy, and see you around. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 22:20, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

references

Hey, thank you for your feedback. I changed the references in my InEnArt article to secondary sources - do you think now the references are fine? thank you!NoraSophie (talk) 13:45, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Pretty much. One can always improve referencing. I'm still confused about what InEnArt actually is though. Fiddle Faddle 13:47, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

thank you very much for your quick responses. i changed the article to make it more coherent and hopefully better understandable. what do you think?NoraSophie (talk) 15:00, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

It may be me, but I still can't fathom why it is notable. Is it some sort of web site? I am lost, I'm afraid. Fiddle Faddle 18:05, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Happy Hanukkah!

To you and yours! Cheers from Irondome (talk) 07:22, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
I admit to getting so confused with various celebrations. Thank you. Fiddle Faddle 08:48, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Request For an article Protection

Please Protect My article Nenjam Marappathillai — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indian Fellow (talk • contribs) 15:00, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

  1. There is no reason to protect this article. There is nothing about it that requires protection
  2. It is not your article. Please read, again, WP:OWN
  3. I am not an administrator. I have no power to protect anything
  4. I have told you about this before on your own talk page, now I am telling you on mine
  5. Please learn your trade properly Fiddle Faddle 15:08, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello Indian Fellow, saw your request, I have left you a message here -- User_talk:Indian Fellow. Thanks for adding new information to wikipedia, we appreciate it. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 18:03, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

@Indian Fellow: Please listen to what is written by "74" on your talk page. Please have a conversation with them. Fiddle Faddle 18:07, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Uh... whoa. There are a lot of, um, usernames involved here. Tim, do you have a brief listing of the involved uids/IPs, so that I can put a quick pointer-message on the talkpages of all of them, and see if we can give our new friend a hard shove towards the Indian_Fellow talkpage? Seems a shame to repeat my usual long-winded spiel on *all* the talkpages in question.  :-)   Danke. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:33, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
It looks as if IF is a sockpuppet and is to be blocked, if he has not been. Presumably he is a doorknob? Fiddle Faddle 18:40, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure, I hear that's a serious insult in some parts.  :-)   But yeah, that Indian_Fellow account was blocked before I got there, or maybe shortly thereafter, a bunch of the others are blocked, and everywhere I looked more accounts kept popping up. Talk about a trail of woe. I'm not sure if that is the language-barrier, or a determined effort to knowingly bypass the blocks, or what exactly. Anyways, there does seem to be just the one single humanoid involved, based on linguistic patterns at least; do they ever engage in talkpage discussion, or do they just pop in to beg for page-protection-against-non-auto-confirmed-users-from-time-to-time-including-myself-though-I-prolly-do-not-realize-that-fact-yet? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:38, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
The puppetmaster seemed to have limited command of English and of common sense. He exposed his family's details including his minor child, online. Fiddle Faddle 20:34, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

"That" redirect discussion

Hello Tim. I'm the editor who created that redirect. As I mentioned in the discussion, I had no idea it would create such debate. I recall that it seemed to be useful at the time because I was doing a lot of work on find-a-grave links, usually involving Medal of Honor awardees. The "Fag" as opposed to "FAG" seemed to work just fine, and I did not see a need to do all CAPS. (And for two years nobody said anything.) To let you know, I greatly appreciate your WP:VOTE template on the discussion. Now, IMO, if someone could just please decide the matter, and perhaps convert the redirect to CAPS, I'd quite happy. – S. Rich (talk) 21:13, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

It's intriguing, isn't it, how this is allowed to run, and run, and run, until it has amassed so much complexity that no-one dares to close it. I'm sure the unpleasant epithet was far from your mind when you created the redirect. It only raised eyebrows during a discussion of WP:CUM on our esteemed founder's talk page.
Have you noticed how the discussion on WP:QUEER is not filled with angst and hostility, but Fag is vitriol filled? I wonder about those who are the most angst ridden whether they might not be like those who despise homosexuals and are then found to be renting pretty and svelte young gentlemen to be their personal assistants. There is something slightly odd here, exemplified by the two parallel discussions and their entirely different conduct.
Words hurt, unfortunately. The words per se don't hurt, nor, probably, does the redirect itself, though people are trying to work against the misuse of certain words. [I am unsure about FAG, by the way, but will reach a conclusion at some point]. If you call someone a doorknob with enough venom, being called a doorknob will hurt. The problem here is the venom with which the less worldly wise people have filled the words Fag and Faggot.
Here in England it was, probably is, normal to ask a friend "Can I bum a fag off you, mate?" [I wonder if you would lend me a cigarette?]. Ropes have fag-ends, we eat a comestible made from offal known for all time as a faggot, we are fagged out when we are tired, and we can't be fagged when we can't be arsed (interesting!). At school I was a fag (I had chores to do), and some boys paid fags to do chores for them (a position much prized that also had certain privileges). The word itself is harmless until some halfwit hurls it as a javelin.
Much of that RfD is people hurling javelins, have you noticed?
I wonder what would happen if you as the creator deployed {{db-author}} on WP:Fag! After all, you have made that suggestion in the discussion! .
Good to meet you, by the way! Fiddle Faddle 21:36, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
I've run it up the fagpole – opps – flagpole, to see if anyone salutes. – S. Rich (talk) 00:27, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
I bet what happens is an argument! What do you reckon? If it;s all the same to you I will nail nothing to my f(l)agpole. Fiddle Faddle 00:30, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
BDD reverted my CSD. Oh well. – S. Rich (talk) 01:54, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Not unexpected. Amusing, but not unexpected. Fiddle Faddle 08:37, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
You DOOrrrkkknnooobbb!11!!! There. Man, that felt good. Did I get the venom thing? Did you sense evil intent? Remember, I'm a beginner at this method-acting stuff, so be gentle in your criticisms. Funny story, about when I first heard the "bum" jargon for borrow, and the "fag" slang for nicotine, and really honestly had WP:NOCLUE what sort of proposal was being put forward, and anticlimactically it turns out that story has no place on wikipedia.  :-)   — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:42, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
I tremble at being called a doorknob, and dub thee a tea tray with tiny carrying handles
Regarding the tale, enquiring minds need to know! Fiddle Faddle 00:09, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Michael D. Fay


Thank you. It was obvious, I think, that I was standing far too close to the article to achieve the rationalisation you have achieved. Much improved. Fiddle Faddle 08:39, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks; yes it's easy to become to attached to articles. Confucius say, "detachment verrrrrrrry important in the search for wiki-nirvana". He also say, "man with hole in pocket feel cocky all day". Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:06, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

It gets depressing when your mother sews up the holes in your pockets regularly. 10:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 December 2013

PrincessKannapolis

STOP SCREWING UP MY ARTICLES! YOU PUT A NOTICE ON SOMEONE'S ARTICLE THAT WAS MENTIONED TWICE ON WIKIPEDIA!!!! ARE YOU INTELLIGENT? GO READ THE ARTICLE SUBMISSIONS I ADDED AND REFERENCED!!! READ IT AND READ IT OVER AGAIN!!!!!!! STOP MAKING FALSE REMARKS ON MY USERNAME AND ACCUSING ME OF SOMETHING THAT IS NOT TRUE. YOU ARE SPREADING MALICIOUS INFORMATION ABOUT MY USERNAME ON WIKIPEDIA TO EVERY ARTICLE I TRY TO HELP ADD WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE MERIT TO BE INCLUDED OR WHO HAVE ALREADY BEEN INCLUDED IN OTHER PEOPLE'S ARTICLES!!!!PrincessKannapolis PrincessKannapolis 06:18, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

It is not I who stated that you are a representative of Kelly Baugher, it was you. This is fully documented. Now, to be clear, these are not your articles. Please read WP:OWN. These are our articles the moment you submit them. You have given me and others strong cause to believe that you are engaged in paid advocacy, and I have now asked for experienced eyes to check on that. Shouting at me does not change yur statement here nor your use of multiple articles to seek to establish the notability of non notable people. We call this WP:VANISPAMCRUFTISEMENT. You were invited to stop on many occasions. You cannot only now cry "Foul!" after carrying on for so long without making a response. If you will be civil and stop typing everything in capital letters I will respond further to you. If not then I am sure you will understand why I have no interest in any further dialogue.
You may wish to read WP:DUCKTEST. It feels very much to me that you are now attacking me because you have been thoroughly found out. All of your edits to date have passed the duck test of Conflict of Interest.
If you wish to continue to edit Wikipedia then I suggest most strongly that you avoid Ms Baugher and her friends, relations and acquaintances, and edit articles where that can be no question of conflict of interest. Remember that you are the perosn who stated that you have this conflict. Prior to that you were just writing poorly referenced, poor quality articles. If you wishj to edit in any area except that containing Ms Baugher (etc) I am more than happy to offer you as much help as I am able to, despite your outburst above, provided you are not engaged in paid advocacy. Fiddle Faddle 14:37, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Tim, I was going to remove this all-caps bit of ungrammatical and unreasonable yelling. I have given the user an NPA warning. Drmies (talk) 14:40, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the thought, Drmies, but I have never minded personal attacks remaining visible. I say so at the head of the page. The editor appears on ANI at present. You may have an opinion to consider there. Fiddle Faddle 14:43, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Sure. I got here by way of the ANI thread and am looking into matters. My main objection to the screed was the grammar; perhaps you can add that to your notice. :) Drmies (talk) 14:50, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
I considered that, but I think everyone is entitled to one outburst. Since this editor is a self declared representative of Kelly Baugher I suspect their job may be under threat becauise of their failure to secure an article here on her employer. That is sufficient to cause anyone stress. I can forgive that behaviour if it ceases.
As an uninvolved editor you might do them the service of reminding them that their own statement on the deletion discussions may be something they might wish to do. Commenting on their own talk page or on mine is useless. Fiddle Faddle 14:54, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Drmies, guess I'll be the one to ask, WHAT GRAMMAR PROB.... whoa, sorry bout that, umm, what grammar problems? I can parse it just fine. "You are spreading malicious information, about my username on wikipedia, to every article I try to help add, with people who have merit to be included, or who have already been in included, in other people's articles (exclamation)." Maybe somebody should explain WP:NOTEWORTHY is a lower bar than WP:N. Plus, just like MONGO, maybe PrincessKannapolis is having keyboard issues. I once had a machine with capslock failing to work... maybe her keyboard has a jammed-down-shift-key from some previous sticky-drink-related-mishap. WP:IMAGINE, right? Anyhoo, I'm an uninvolved editor, so maybe I'll drop in and see about this whole shebang. Thanks for keeping your respective cool(s), folks. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 15:16, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, besides the lack of punctuation, the most glaring thing is in "YOU PUT A NOTICE ON SOMEONE'S ARTICLE THAT WAS MENTIONED TWICE ON WIKIPEDIA!!!!"--"that" has an unclear antecedent. Clearly, what they meant was for "that" to refer to the "someone", but given "someone's article" it can't work that way since "article" is the head noun. Drmies (talk) 17:16, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Agree they are mixing chronology and maybe tenses, certainly the phrasing is awkward, but... if you posit that Kelly B is a newly-created BLP-article, and that there were two existing redlinks to Kelly B elsewhere in wikipedia, then methinks the sentence makes grammatical sense as-written, in at least one conceivable interpretation. Do I win a prize?  :-)     74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:09, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Tim, while I share your feelings concerning naughty abuse of socks... and for that matter, I have an adversarial relationship with shoes... since PrincessK is unclear on the distinction between Noteworthy as opposed to Notable, statistically speaking she will have WP:NOCLUE about sockpuppetry, either. Is your assent to the unblock contingent on her proving she understands WP:PUPPET and promising not do any such thing going forward, or are you taking the hardline stance, that if they did sock, no unblock? (I can rhyme around the clock! Better rhymes are now in stock!) At the moment they are indef'd, so that seems harsh for a first offense. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:09, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, 'indef' means 'without end date', not 'for ever', and is subject to appeal and to review and opinions of folk. On that basis I am taking the hardline stance. Fiddle Faddle 08:46, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 13:52, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
One wery wilful wikiPrincess with a wiki-trail of woe? duck whiskers?? You crack me up.  :-)   Anyways, she is responding well at the moment, and has learned the distinction between noteworthy and WP:N, so that is minor progress. Soon she will have mastered the colon, in addition to the shiftkey.
  Now, at this point I could write up lesson-three-why-one-must-never-be-a-sweatsock-avoida-block. But, per my no-grudges-allowed-stance, perhaps you would like to make a new talkpage-section about WP:PUPPET for PrincessK to prove she understands what went wrong (exactly one mammal per username and exactly one pseudonym-or-anon-per-mammal and no fair calling in your meatbuddies), then see whether she will in fact admit any wrongdoing? As always, WP:REQUIRED, and I don't mind doing it myself of course. I would just prefer to see how she responds to calm advice from her Fiddling Faddlying Nemesis. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 16:06, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
The thing is, she has not considered it worthwhile to work out how to offer an apology for her tirade, above. I tend to believe that such things should come unprompted as a matter of pure human decency, and as part of her hoped for return to editing WIkipedia. Naturally she cannot post here because she is blocked, so she has a conundrum to solve. I am unwilling to offer her help until she has showed to me that she will accept it. You, 74, are more generous than am I. Your help to her is good. MIne? I only offer it when I see no danger of a further tirade. Perhaps you could suggest to her ways of attracting other users to messages for them on her talk page, but without suggesting an apology. I ownder ios she is aware that her words here sit here for all time and for all to see? Fiddle Faddle 10:17, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, I appreciate the compliment, but my 'generosity' is entirely self-centered; I expect cold hard payback, in many years of valuable editing yet to come... or if not that, then a quick descent into further tirades to be followed by uncontested perma-block. Either way, there is little more I can do. The fork in the road is before her, and she will pick one or the other.

some musings on apologies, a sense of humour, willpower, friends, metaphorical fire, and trust-seeking-behavior

  You are correct that she has not apologized, and that is poor behavior... but as you point out, she cannot apologize directly, and prolly has WP:NOCLUE about indirect talkpage template-tranclusion tricks... she's still working on colon-indentation, after all. In fact, she may not even realize that the block is only for editing, as opposed to reading slash viewing; the vague block-messages are way too formal, not FAQ-ish enough by far. I also suspect that she is feeling very emotionally guarded, and is doing her best to say as little as possible, out of fear she will say something wrong. She loosened up a bit today, though, and made a joke. Inappropriate-humor beginning-editor joke-gaffe, of course.  :-)   But progress is progress, and my hunch is she may just turn out okay.

  Point being... I can instruct her in the use of the ping-template, of course, if that will help ease your mind about it. But I'm under the impression that she is full-of-will, as you mentioned earlier, yet simultaneously quite nervous about making Yet Another Mis-Step (yams even has a dedicated article). Suggesting that she should write you some kind of a message, even vaguely, would perhaps be counterproductive. Hard to say. Of course, if she does ever come here, she will see our gossip; hello to PrincessK-of-the-future! We like you!

  When the old people gossip over the backyard fence, spreading mean rumors, nobody is helped. You and myself are PrincessK's B.F.F.'s right now, because we are trying to larn her the wild ways of the wikiverse.  :-)   And I think that what you say in your essay is dead-on the truth. "You may have had a baptism of fire and learnt that it is not a gentle place." She has definitely had fire in her wiki-career so far. Now she is actively seeking trust.

At the end of the day, I suggest WP:ROPE applies; either she failed to become learn'd and will weave a noose, or perhaps the ways of the wiki sank in and she will lasso her wild will, gradually turning that willpower into a strong, intense devotion to the five pillars. Only way to know is unblock her... and see what she does. Sooner or later she will get into an edit-war, or similar dispute, and her temper will catch on fire, and she will come to your talkpage ... AND CALMLY ASK... for your wise advice.  :-)   That is what I hope to see, anyways.

  If she does come, for that reason or for another purpose, she may yet see the early allcaps days when she was a lass, and feel a bit sad, that her behavior was, um, crass. But I hope she does not feel sad long -- that is not what wikipedia is about -- I hope she takes it as a good life-lesson, that we all were beginners once. There are others that will need her advice, if she someday becomes a trusted wikipedian. Hope springs eternal. In any case, do you wish me to attempt to do the ask-without-asking trick (very zen! almost quantum!), and see if I can discover an urge to apologize somewhere within her, or can I ask Yunshui to review her final unblock request, and determine the answer via empirical tests? Ping my talkpage please, when you have a leaning one way or the other. And as always, my thanks for improving wikipedia. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 23:12, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, in the end, when the archive bot gets going again, this will be archived. I do wonder what the delay is in a response to her unblock request. It does make some sense. She may wither on the vine. Fiddle Faddle 08:55, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Suggest the seventh time is prolly less likely to succeed than the first one.  :-)   Next time I will try and be crystal-clear explicit, that folks should listen first, and request unblock second! Of course, better if I were faster to the scene. Is there a wiki-tool to get a triaged list of beginning editors making their first few edits, and getting their first few warnings? Anyhoo, I'll ping Yunshui and see what they say, thanks. But I would not worry about our PrincessK withering; she is not the type to give up. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 04:56, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
She appears to be making the progress one might need in order to unblock her. Me? I;d let her serve out a month, and then allow it to expire. But blocks are mean t to be preventative not punitive, so, probably, the rules suggest she might come back. No tools, no, just instinct when patrolling new pages. Fiddle Faddle 09:00, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Yunshui has agreed to unblock, but is seeking consensus from Secret first (and *they* are busy running for arbcom so might not respond immediately). Her block is indef, and thus cannot expire, but considering her first article was submitted Nov 10th, she has effectively been "blocked" in terms of prevented from moving forward with her editing-goals for 19 days now, not counting the time she spent composing prior to submission, or the time it will take before she gets actually unblocked.
  Anyways, agree that we are taking a bit of a chance with unblocking now, but hey, an encyclopedia that anyone can edit is pretty much an inherently chancy venture, eh?  :-)   If luck is on our side, my optimism will pan out, and PrincessK will become some decent & productive variant of wikiFauna. If not, well, we shall have to see; WP:CRYSTAL applies here, and of course, the subtle form of WP:AGF, which some old guy dubbed trust-but-verify. I'm too new at this to put money where my mouth is, but I feel lucky.
  p.s. Who is the new challenge? You mean Indian_Fellow and Parivaar I am guessing, but is NoraSophie and the InEnArt project also needing some help? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 15:39, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Actually, it was IF, but the other one is worthy of help too. Fiddle Faddle 16:28, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
p.s. She hasn't logged back in yet methinks, presumably because of t-day-related vacation. I thought about collapsing all the badstuff... but decided against it, I want her to read that long list of unblock-requests one last time. Anyways, if you watchlist Ed Asner and also Evan Speigel, you'll prolly notice if she is so disheartened that she only returns as an IP, but methinks she is made of sterner stuff. Yunshui's comment about Handsome Prince Secret cracked me up, btw.  :-)   74.192.84.101 (talk) 16:15, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind that I moved this part to this part. It didn't want to be parted. Fiddle Faddle 17:12, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Part of me agrees that parts should not be parted. Per part of the partitioning of a perniciously peevish person-article, I've learned that people are partly pained by personal fiddling with parts of their page-profundity, but personally ... probably ... perhaps ... presumably partially at least ... I could care less. :-) p.s. I just saw this, you might enjoy it. WP:LIGHTBULB. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 16:31, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Hello sir this is my last chance to create multiple accounts so please do not block my account (Amsaveni Suganya 14:41, 2 December 2013 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amsaveni Suganya (talk • contribs)

You are not allowed to do that. Go away...wikipedia is not the place for you. DMacks (talk) 14:48, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) There are precisely no chances to create accounts that engage in block evasion or sockpuppetry. None. Fiddle Faddle 14:49, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I didn't actually roll on the floor, as the acronym might suggest, but that *was* funny, to me at least.  :-)   Assuming good faith, and acknowledging the ESL barrier, perhaps they meant, this is the last *time* I'll create multiple accounts? Did they go ahead and make another account after "Amsaveni Suganya" had been indef'd? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 21:42, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Timtrent/Archive_13&oldid=1168309103"