User talk:Tutelary/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Please comment on Talk:Cambodian genocide denial

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Cambodian genocide denial. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Gamergate Arbcom

Please note the instruction for your statement in the Gamergate request for a case:

Without exception, statements (including responses to other statements) must be shorter than 500 words.

Your statement is at 654 words, so is over the limit. I realize it isn't far over, but several statements are over, and I am contacting anyone who is over 500. Please recall that this statement is not intended to be a full exposition of all evidence, which occurs at the next step, but simply a statement requesting a case. Please trim back your statement. For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 20:02, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Understood, thanks. I will be chopping it up and the like to reach under 500 words. I've been stressed and busy for the past couple of days, so sorry for that. Tutelary (talk) 23:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:House of Assembly of Jamaica

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:House of Assembly of Jamaica. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:12, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews

Hello Tutelary. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:In the news

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:In the news. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Link?

Hello Tutelary. I noticed this change you made to Draft:Gamergate controversy with the edit summary Undid revision 634569431 by Aquillion (talk) This was discussed a while back in the archives, this was the result of said compromise. I endorse it and I dissent against your revert of such.

Would you be so kind as to link to the discussion you were referring to as I could not find it in the archives. CIreland (talk) 22:00, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

A precursory look before I have to leave reveals this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gamergate_controversy/Archive_12#GG_Branding But I remember there being a bigger more heated discussion about it. I'll look more thoroughly when I get back home. Tutelary (talk) 22:18, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:15, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:General_sanctions/Gamergate/Requests_for_enforcement

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:General_sanctions/Gamergate/Requests_for_enforcement. about tarc edit war Thanks. Retartist (talk) 03:44, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

8chan

I'm sorry if I came out harsh wasn't my intention, didn't know you added that, right now the article probably needs a descpriptive section, and maybe a background section but there isn't a lot to add. And the criticism should go last as it's common, with a neutral title like "Media response" as in the 4chan article

Also I was wondering if the The David Pakman Show show is RS, I had heard it was https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWDF9WFtro4 Loganmac (talk) 23:12, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

I still believe it's acceptable to mention it in the lead. It's what the sources say its notable for. Also check out my mention on your talk page. It should seriously be moved back to 8chan. Tutelary (talk) 23:13, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Your sources are biased and your article has a big fat citation needed next to the claim that the userbase harasses women. Please fix this.

Please comment on Talk:Confiscated Armenian properties in Turkey

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Confiscated Armenian properties in Turkey. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Alien (creature in Alien franchise)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Alien (creature in Alien franchise). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Block notice

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at ∞chan. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.   Mike V • Talk 23:23, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

@Mike V:, I was not aware that with the vandalism reverts, I was over. I acknowledge and see my reverts now and if I was given an edit warring warning, I would've self reverted my most recent change. I was inappropriate for going over 3RR on said article and if unblocked, will be given a 0RR on the article for the next 48 hours. (Followed to the WP:BANEX exceptions, blatant vandalism. I will be limited solely to the talk page. Tutelary (talk) 23:26, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

The concerning edits were: 1, 2, 3, 4, and though not the same material, a revert nonetheless (5). I would encourage you to request an unblock through the template provided above. Mike V • Talk 23:42, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

As you requested on IRC, I've unblocked you per your agreement to abide by 0RR on ∞chan for the next 2 days. Jackmcbarn (talk) 04:45, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Also part of it was to use reverts sparingly even after that is to be done and discuss edits on talk page. Thank you nonetheless. Tutelary (talk) 04:51, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

How I feel towards 8chan people right now. They being mean to you kouhai, calling you "SJW" and such, which is silly since you got doxxed just for wanting reliably-sourced and neutrally-phrased true shit added to Quinn's bio that other people not like because maybe make Quinn look bad. Silly willies at /gg/ then get mad because you added reliably-sourced and neutrally-phrased true shit to 8chan page because maybe make 8chan look bad. Funny how "uninvolved" admins try to ban you for supposedly being too "pro-GamerGate" yet only blocks are for edits where you were upholding the rules in opposition to GamerGate. Anyway, good you unblocked, since block was silly.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 08:38, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

User:The Devil's Advocate, I am actually a bit shocked at what they've done. I was also viewing on the board /b/ that they were trying to dox me like some other site has done. They didn't get very far, which tells me how really skillful they are, but still, I was just kind of shocked by the whole thing. Obviously I'm not gonna say that '8chan doxed me' but a 'user on 8chan attempted to dox me', yes. I figured that maybe Frederick Brennan, regarding the h8chan remark and the original page being a disambiguation page that any type of page would be beneficial, no matter how negative. (The overwhelming amount of sources are negative.) Now, the content on the page is in need of a huge reform because there's -alot- of original research present in the article now. I mean a lot of it. They euphemized Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn, Brianna Wu even though the vast majority of them are the only ones relating to 8chan. Bleh, I need to make a comprehensive note on the talk about it. I'll probably do that after the name change is done. But thanks for keeping me in the loop and providing cute anime characters for me to giggle at. ^^ Tutelary (talk) 19:21, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

No prob. :^) They just a bit paranoid, which makes sense under the circumstances.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 19:29, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Article already deleted

Hello, I just started creating a page on Wikipedia and saved it. I didn't mean for it to go live or anything... I just wanted to save it as a draft because it's going to take me a few days to finish writing it, but I saw that you already submitted it for deletion. How do I save my Wikipedia page I am working on, as a draft? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clairemckinneypr (talk • contribs) 20:58, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

What was the title of your draft? Tutelary (talk) 20:57, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Ruth W. Crocker. Does clicking 'save page' automatically create it into a live article? I thought it was just for drafts.

It's located here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_W._Crocker Would you like me to move it into the draft space so you can work on it without the threat of deletion? Tutelary (talk) 20:59, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes Please!!!! :) And thank you!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clairemckinneypr (talk • contribs) 21:08, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Looks like Huon has already done such. See Draft:Ruth_W._Crocker. Tutelary (talk) 21:08, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I have edited drag pageantry with citations from websites supporting the listings of the information. These websites are owned and supported by the actual pageant systems. Would these not be constructive?? Please advise, if I'm not responding properly please let me know instead of blocking me. Thanks

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Software

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Software. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:11, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate opened

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 11, 2014, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 22:26, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Topic ban

The following sanction has been imposed on you:

Indefinite topic ban on edits and discussion related to GamerGate, broadly construed. This ban does not include participation on ArbCom pages regarding any relevant case.

You have been sanctioned for long-term disruption

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator as authorised by the community's decision at Wikipedia:General_sanctions/Gamergate, and the procedure described by the general sanctions guidelines. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions for that decision. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction at the administrators' noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Gamaliel (talk) 17:31, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry you got doxxed

I hope nothing bad happens to you. Tensions are high everywhere nowadays. --

DSA510 Pls No Bully 20:46, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, it means a lot. Tutelary (talk) 20:49, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:United States

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:United States. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:11, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Re: Full protection of the GamerGate article for 5 months

Please fix the grammar in this section in your Evidence statement. I can barely figure out what you're trying to say. 76.64.35.209 (talk) 04:04, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks for alerting me. Tutelary (talk) 04:12, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Looks good. 76.64.35.209 (talk) 04:22, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

On warnings, notifications, sanctions etc.

Hello again Tutelary. I noticed your various posts objecting to your topic-ban and that they were, in part, predicated upon the need for a warning prior to the imposition of sanctions.

Unfortunately, the blurb you are quoting from here is the result of a mistaken copy-paste of an old community sanction blurb from elsewhere in the same list. The description of the sanctions regime at WP:GS/GG has the correct text and no warning is required. Of course, a notification is required but, as was relatively recently clarified by ArbCom, notifications and warnings are not the same. Under the current process for ArbCom imposed discretionary sanctions (which the community sanctions attempt to mirror), a warning is a sanction.

Speaking as someone with experience (as an administrator) of both discretionary and community sanctions, your current approach to seeking the removal of your topic ban is unlikely to bear fruit. For good or for ill, such sanctions do not require discussion derived consensus in the usual way and so your suggestion that User:Gamaliel "hijacked" a discussion to to impose sanctions is likely to be interpreted as arising from a misunderstanding of the sanctions regime.

All that being said, I am most definitely wiki-involved in the topic in question and, moreover, I have consistently adopted a perspective on the substantive issues incompatible with your own. Thus, it would be reasonable for you to treat any advice from me with deep caution. CIreland (talk) 20:51, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, due to certain factors, I cannot comment on this lest it be considered a violation of my topic ban. You are free to email me, however. Tutelary (talk) 20:53, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:God the Son

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:God the Son. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:11, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

"Out of process"

You've misinterpreted the general sanctions, and I believe you should rescind your accusations against Gamaliel at the GG case evidence page. Originally, "warnings" and "notifications" were the same thing, meaning that there was no difference between a sanctions notification and a warning. This was deemed to be problematic for a variety of reasons, and hence, what were once called "warnings" became "notifications". This change only happened earlier this year, and there has been some residual usage of the word "warning". Now, there is no such thing as a "warning" of GS apart from a "notification". No "warning" other than the notification is required to sanction an editor. Notifications are required, and they must be logged. Please read WP:AC/DS and WP:GS. Also, please note the text of WP:GS/GG#Remedies. I'll have you know that this type of behaviour is called "Wikilawyering", and is hardly likely to get you anywhere you want to go. RGloucester — ☎ 18:03, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Cannot comment on this due to my topic ban. I'll address it in an edit to the sanctions page. Tutelary (talk) 20:54, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Boletus edulis

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Boletus edulis. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:11, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Standard Limits ArbCom Evidence

The standard limits ArbCom evidence submissions are 1000 words. I count your evidence submission currently at 1459 words (not including Rebuttal). Just thought you might want to know so you can trim it down a bit (or you can request more room). --Obsidi (talk) 06:35, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

@Obsidi:, I'll request an extension for 2000 words. Do you know where I can do that? Tutelary (talk) 20:53, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I would make the request on the evidence talk page. --Obsidi (talk) 08:26, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Curious Question

Would you be interested in joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga? We could always use new good editors such as yourself =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:09, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Sure, if this ArbCom case doesn't drive me off Wikipedia first. Tutelary (talk) 20:53, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

A&M is positively blissful in comparison, but WP:NRHP has 80,000 articles that need work and the editors are all wonderful and I've never seen an edit war because entire states worth of content needs to be created and maintained. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:19, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I am sure you will be around, yeah you can join with WP:NRHP but there are articles that need work im sure on both wikiprojects. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:37, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

IRC

Can't seem to join that chat. Redirects me to ##unavailable. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:20, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Had a typo. Cheers! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:21, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Glad you figured it out. Figured it would be better than leaving the publicly visible diff for all the curious peeps to see. Tutelary (talk) 21:22, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, definitely! Thanks again! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:24, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Evidence limits

Your evidence section is well over the limit of 1000 words. I count 1486 words. You either need explicit permission from one of the drafting arbs, or you need to trim your evidence. (I note above that you asked for an exception. I do not think the arbs have seen it. I will check with them.) Yes, the copy of the GS sanctions count. While I understand why it is helpful to have them on the page, given the count issues, just use a link) For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 22:14, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I just learned that the drafting arbs are thinking through what to do about evidence limits. One possibility is an increase, so feel free to hold off making a change at this time. I hope to have more advice soon.For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 22:36, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping me in the loop. Tutelary (talk) 02:52, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Metacompiler

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Metacompiler. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:09, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

For your assistance at Jimbo's talk page :) 5 albert square (talk) 02:07, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Topic ban

As it concerns your topic ban, conduct on noticeboards regarding a dispute in a topic area is generally within the bounds of general sanctions. I believe you would be better served addressing various other issues with Gamaliel's actions. His effective supervoting on a split discussion, his support for an indefinite topic ban, the fact the basis of the request was a report that did see support for your proposal, and his being involved in the dispute, particularly by previously pushing for you to be topic-banned at ANI. There are various issues you could raise with his topic ban. Whether your ANI request fell within the scope of the general sanctions is not really an issue to raise.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 07:33, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Tutelary (talk) 07:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kosovo War

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kosovo War. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Gamergate evidence limits

The arbs are leaning toward a doubling of the usual limits on evidence for this specific case. I am still waiting for final sign-off, but it seems likely that most participants will not need to trim evidence. Three relevant points:

• Given the substantial increase in limits, the usual acceptance if counts go a bit over will not be granted. Treat the limits as absolute.
• The limits apply to both direct evidence and rebuttal to others.
• Despite the increase, it is highly desirable to be as succinct as possible. For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 17:58, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again. Tutelary (talk) 23:02, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barn, I think this might've been what you meant by something we disagreed about? Specifics tend to fade over time. I'm thinking maybe by focusing on gentle-prodding of articles (clarifying reference-content links seems to be a god step) rather than massive-lump changes may lead to fewer rage-quits on my behalf. Unfortunately if it was GG-related the archives of talk be so mass that it would be an adventure trying to refresh about what it was regarding. Ranze (talk) 08:45, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

GamerGate arbitration case: evidence and workshop

In the interests of making this case more easily manageable, it is likely that we will prune the parties list to limit it to those against whom evidence has been submitted. Therefore, if anyone has anything to add, now is the time to do so.

See the list of parties not included in the evidence as of 8 Dec 14.

Please note that the purpose of the /Evidence page is to provide narrative, context and all the diffs. As diffs can usually be interpreted in various ways, to avoid ambiguity, they should be appended to the allegation that's being made. If the material is private and the detail has been emailed to ArbCom, add [private evidence] instead of diffs.

The /Workshop page builds on evidence. FOFs about individual editors should contain a summary of the allegation made in /Evidence, and diffs to illustrate the allegation. Supplying diffs makes it easier for the subject of the FOF to respond and much easier for arbitrators to see whether your FOF has substance.

No allegations about other editors should be made either in /Evdence or in the /Workshop without supporting diffs. Doing so may expose you to findings of making personal attacks and casting aspersions.

Also, please note that the evidence lengths have been increased from about 1000 words and about 100 diffs for parties and about 500 words and about diffs for non-parties to a maximum of 2000 words and 200 diffs for parties and 1000 words and 100 diffs for non-parties. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:09, 10 December 2014 (UTC) Message delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk)

Please comment on Talk:Phineas and Ferb (season 4)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Phineas and Ferb (season 4). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Re

The reason why I am leaving Wikipedia is my awareness of my complicity in adding content that was highly objectionable, and using transphobic wording in my past, and I would prefer to dissociate myself from this kind of content. So the more accurate thing to say is that Birdo made me leave Wikipedia. You are correct in that Wikipedia does not have guidelines or policies that protect articles such as Birdo or Poison from using transphobic reception, and I don't feel very comfortable with that. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 22:44, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

The community is able to change such things if there is support for it. For this specific, I'm not sure if the community would agree on such things but they may. In any case, I hope that you continue to edit Wikipedia and if you truly do leave, your efforts won't have gone unappreciated. Tutelary (talk) 22:47, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Chandra Levy

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Chandra Levy. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:11, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Spectre (2015 film)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Spectre (2015 film). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2014 hostage rescue operations in Yemen

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2014 hostage rescue operations in Yemen. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:15, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Question

Which "girl" are you referring to in this edit? EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 02:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Myself? Tutelary (talk) 02:31, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Okay. Was unclear if you were referring to another user, Quinn, or yourself. Thank you for clarifying. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 02:36, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

I cannot comment on that topic outside of ArbCom proceedings, but in that edit, I was referring to myself. I'd been holding off on expanding my stuff for a few days until the date culminated and I decided to do it today. 'Me going nuclear' means me giving all these diffs, categorizing, etc. Tutelary (talk) 02:38, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of cases of police brutality in the United States

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of cases of police brutality in the United States. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Kosovo municipalities

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Kosovo municipalities. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:09, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Comment that "wasn't very nice"

I really hope this isn't a case of "calling people homophobes is MEAN!" if so you're just proving the case that wikipedia can be amazingly oppressive. I was right to call people out for pushing heteronormativity, and I Shouldn't be obliged to be "nice" to people who are being homophobic or respect people who erase me from the media. Little Miss Desu (talk) 23:00, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Please read WP:BATTLEGROUND. If you see other editors as your enemies, you're not fit to edit Wikipedia and could be blocked for your behavior. Tutelary (talk) 23:05, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Pinging editor: @Little Miss Desu: Tutelary (talk) 23:06, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Umbrella Movement

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Umbrella Movement. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ulises Heureaux

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ulises Heureaux. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:11, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I was such a jerk

Hi. You apologized to me a couple days ago after I left a rude comment in the teahouse. Just wanted to say thanks but if anyone owes anyone an apology it is me. My response was way over the top. I was having a really awful day that day, I always try to be collaborative and especially so in the tea house for some reason all my frustration about other stuff boiled over. Not that that's an excuse more just explaining and being too long winded as usual, anyway I apologize and thanks for being so nice in response. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:56, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Satyananda Saraswati

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Satyananda Saraswati. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Adblock?

You said something about using adblock on wikipedia. But, why would that be needed?NetworkOP (talk) 19:39, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, I said that in the context of The Teahouse question board where a person asked how to hide the fundraising banner. I was saying that it wasn't needed--you can disable the banner in your preferences. Another user had suggested it and I decided to contest that it was needed. But out of respect, you -can- block the advertising banner with AdBlock without being registered. Tutelary (talk) 19:48, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I posted a request to adblock to block that fundraising banner by default using the "report an ad on this page". It just doesn't seem all the other sites have their ads blocked, but Wikipedia is somehow immune.NetworkOP (talk) 19:57, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

You can disable the banner by going into your preferences: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets 'Suppress display of fundraising banner'. But uh, I'm guessing the reason is because Wikipedia is a non-profit, requires donations to run, is used by pretty much everybody, etc...It's banner is a bit obtrusive, but otherwise I see the need. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tutelary (talk • contribs)

Please comment on Talk:Shooting of Trayvon Martin

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Shooting of Trayvon Martin. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

For you to examine

Much of the information which Cwobeel presented was pulled to be more negative. The vast majority were actually good arguments by good people. User:ChrisGualtieri/sandbox contains two sections which the second is an almost entirely rewritten version of Shooting of Michael Brown#To grand jury process and result and its broken down by type commentary. Is the sandboxed version perfect? Far from it, but it still uses Roger Parloff, Jay Sterling Silver, Jeffrey Toobin, Dan Abrams, Paul Cassell, Michael Smerconish, William Fitzpatrick, Ben Casselman and Harry Bruinius. Of which are all included in the article - but Toobin's use focusing on the unique "personally invested" argument as it relates specifically to this matter. Toobin's article is more on the conflict of interest of police and prosecutor and it is why I actually found the full comment (and not some out of context snippet from the LA Times) and held it up as a proper argument that was not included in the article. I actually like quite a few of the sources for their arguments and conclusions, but this has been little emphasized. Sorry to reply here, but I did not want to clutter ANI up. I hope that helps clarify the issue. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:31, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Struck my statement. I can't deal with this stuff at the moment. Tutelary (talk) 02:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh. You made a good argument, I should have addressed this above point sooner and more directly. It was because I added a source for Toobin... but I understand. Sorry to have contributed to your Wiki-stress on this holiday season. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:45, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countering systemic bias/Gender gap task force

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countering systemic bias/Gender gap task force. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Atlantis

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Atlantis. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of ethnic slurs

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of ethnic slurs. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:09, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Civility

Regarding the discussion at user talk:SqueakBox, I'm not sure I agree with your interpretation of my spiel. The edit[1] at bear (gay culture) got me quite worried. But if you feel it's detrimental to the editing climate overall, I won't object if you redact my comments.

Peter ^Isotalo 08:53, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

@Peter Isotalo:, Bleh. Sorry 'bout that. I guess my main point is that we should absolutely criticize his editing. But leave gender and age out of it. That's the only problem I had with it. Mansplaining brings gender and age into the equation, and I think it'll be much better if we leave it out. I'm not attempting to defend his editing, only to steer it clear of focusing on gender rather than edits in general. There is a time and place to involve gender--The gender gap on Wikipedia for instance, but it strains relationship if people attempt to apply it elsewhere. Tutelary (talk) 18:16, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:U.S. Holidays

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:U.S. Holidays. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tutelary. You have new messages at Talk:Leelah Alcorn.
Message added 20:15, 1 January 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Avono (talk) 20:15, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello!

I was reading through Talk:Death of Leelah Alcorn, having recently brought the somewhat related Murder of Dwayne Jones up to GA status, and noticed your well-reasoned comments. Clicking on your user page, I then came across your "discouraged about Wikipedia" post, and just thought that I'd post a message to say "hello, and don't be too discouraged!". We all do get discouraged with the project from time to time (hell, I've been here nigh on a decade and it's happened to me a lot over that period), particularly when dealing with some of our more stubborn and unpleasant comrades or when faced with the daunting vastness of the work ahead. But those feelings can pass, and I hope that they do for you too. All the best, and happy new year! Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:48, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words and I do hope that it passes for me too. Unfortunately, every time I attempt to criticize what I feel are portions of the project which are what I feel to be out of place I personally get attacked. Not to mention just ugh, there are aspects which I absolutely hate and cannot change, and certain editors who make my editing hell. This is the longest time I've been discouraged about Wikipedia, and I sincerely hope it'll pass too. Tutelary (talk) 17:47, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year Tutelary!

Happy New Year!

Tutelary,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Avono (talk) 21:16, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.

Don't let Arbcom discourage you from editing. Avono (talk) 21:17, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Avono. And sorry about the drama at Leelah's page. Tutelary (talk) 18:20, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hi. I know this is a tough time on Wikipedia with all the harassment and of course ArbCom, but I wanted to let you know your contributions are extremely appreciated. Cheers, --L235 (talk) Ping when replying 17:52, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Lixxx235, the worst has passed and I'm waiting for the rest to pass too. Nonetheless, you are a great contributor as well. Tutelary (talk) 18:20, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

thanks!

	thanks!
	Thanks for your warning about deleting my ChristianCrush.com page I've made some new edits to it. Could you please let me know what else it needs to be worthy of staying on Wikipedia. A related page would be Jdate. Thanks! Wfish (talk) 18:54, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

@Wfish:, the page still doesn't tell me why it's important. Why should I care about 'ChristianCrush.com'? What's its claim to notability? I'm not stating it in that phrasing to be rude, but on every Wikipedia page, it should be obvious why it's notable. I don't see that on ChristianCrush.com's page. Tutelary (talk) 18:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

I really appreciate your feedback. I added some more information. Please let me know what you think. Also, for me to learn from the JDate page, what is considered notable about that one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wfish (talk • contribs) 19:05, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

The difference between Jdate's page is that it has a claim of notability. 'The site won a 2006 Webby award for social networking.[3]' Yours does not. Additionally, please do not insert copyright violations. You blatantly changed two words from http://www.christiancrush.com/ and added it to the page. Those still aren't claims to notability. Tutelary (talk) 19:10, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

I apologize, I own ChristianCrush and wrote the information on the website that I included in the Wikipedia so I didn't consider it plagiarism. OK, looks like the page needs to be taken down because it hasn't won any awards. Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wfish (talk • contribs) 21:12, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm not saying that it has to win some sort of award, it just has to have a claim of notability. Something like, 'ChristianCrush was featured in X semi-known magazine' or 'ChristianCrush was one of the top 10 websites in X category on Y site' or some claim to notability. Specifically, the speedy deletion claim which is being held here is WP:A7. The award thing -would- count as a claim of notability, but it doesn't have to be an award. Additionally, would you please read WP:PLAINANDSIMPLECOI? Tutelary (talk) 21:19, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, that makes sense. I read the conflict of interest page too. ChristianCrush was one of only four sites to win the International Alliance for Honest Dating Sites recognition. http://honestdatingsites.org/ Not sure if that matters now since the conflict of interest issue. Thanks for all of your responses! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wfish (talk • contribs) 21:36, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Governor-General of Australia

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Governor-General of Australia. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Emerald Reprobates speedy deletion tag

Hi, Tutelary. I removed the CSD template because I do think that the article asserts importance/significance. I think it might end up at AFD if the author of the article can't source it, though. LouiseS1979 (talk) 19:16, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

What statement do you see specifically that it asserts significance? I see no such statement. Simply having a podcast does not make it notable. Tutelary (talk) 19:25, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

I think it was the iTunes nomination as 'New and Noteworthy' that helped. Then again, I think the Prod is reasonable, as it gives GammaBro2015 enough time to find some sources - if they exist. LouiseS1979 (talk) 20:00, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

iTunes does not manually select apps, they go by an algorithm from what I understand. PROD is a weaker form of deletion, and anyone can remove it. (including the article creator) The article fails the general notability guideline and if the PROD is contested, I'll be nominating it for afd. Tutelary (talk) 20:01, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:9/11 Truth movement

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:9/11 Truth movement. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Closed is closed?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=640861077

Hi there, you are appearing on my updates, I was wondering, your comment - "Closed is closed-talk to admin if you want to reopen" - would you please link me to that policy as I have had problems with users doing the same, thank you Govindaharihari (talk) 23:07, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

It's out of process, but I don't think there's an official policy or guideline for it. Just imagine if somebody can revert an admin's close to a deletion discussion, or to a merge request, or a topic ban proposal. In general, once an admin has ruled on what consensus is on that issue, it shouldn't be just reverted. There are review processes, like WP:DRV or appealing to the community at one of the noticeboards, but I don't believe it's possible to revert without a significant reason for it. Tutelary (talk) 23:12, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for that, if you can link me to anything wiki guideline or policy that supports this position I would appreciate it? What do you think about WP:IAR? What is WP:Process ?Govindaharihari (talk) 23:16, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

WP:PROCESS is an essay which no person is obligated to follow, but may better elaborate on your reasoning than you can do in a single argument. WP:IAR actually is a counter policy to the 'being not able to revert admins on their decisions'. 'Ignore all rules'. Again, I don't think there's a policy you can cite. But if you link me I can check it out. Tutelary (talk) 23:24, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, you said "Just imagine if somebody can revert an admin's close to a deletion discussion, or to a merge request, or a topic ban proposal" - it is true as I can see, such situations are admin closed and actioned and not reversible without discussion by a non admin - but thread chats, if a user believes there is more to discuss then it is almost acceptable to reopen it and continue the discussion unless it becomes disruptive, so as I have been told, "closed is not closed" at all? Govindaharihari (talk) 23:27, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

I really can't help you out here as I don't know what examples you are citing or their circumstances. Tutelary (talk) 00:23, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

No worries, I appreciate your input/comments, many thanks for that Govindaharihari (talk) 00:29, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

If you gave me specific examples I could evaluate them and give you my thoughts on whether they were appropriate or not. Tutelary (talk) 00:31, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Interview for The Signpost

This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Articles for creation

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter¹²³ (indicate) @ 10:51, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geopolitical entities not recognised as states

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geopolitical entities not recognised as states. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Henry Makow changes

The edits I made all cited Makow's own writing and website (http://henrymakow.com/) with quotes and links to specific articles; and I did provide a summary of the changes that I made: "expended information on Makow's work and political views". Your blocking of and automatic deleting of edits is not helpful or appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.30.11.254 (talk) 20:20, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jimi Hendrix

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jimi Hendrix. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

It's a blatant violation of WP:BLP, especially using primary sources to insult another living person. If you reinstate the edit without reliable, secondary sources (not one from his website), you run the risk of being blocked. Tutelary (talk) 20:22, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Deepak Chopra

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Deepak Chopra. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hubert Walter

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hubert Walter. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Newport Beach, California

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Newport Beach, California. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Infobox album

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Infobox album. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Manhattan

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Manhattan. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Israel

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Israel. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Infobox officeholder

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Infobox officeholder. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:War on Terror

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:War on Terror. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Answer to your question on ArbCom Case

Regarding this where you ask about editors who are no longer arbitators acting on the case this is covered in Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy#Arbitration_proceedings "An arbitrator whose term expires while a case is pending may remain active on that case until its conclusion. Newly appointed arbitrators may become active on any matter before the Committee with immediate effect from the date of their appointment." Hope that helps. — Strongjam (talk) 19:12, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jersey City, New Jersey

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jersey City, New Jersey. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:13, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate closed

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

1.1)

(i) The community Gamergate general sanctions are hereby rescinded and are replaced by standard discretionary sanctions, which are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed.

(ii) All sanctions in force when this remedy is enacted are endorsed and will become standard discretionary sanctions governed by the standard procedure from the moment of enactment.

(iii) Notifications issued under Gamergate general sanctions become alerts for twelve months from the date of enactment of this remedy, then expire. The log of notifications will remain on the Gamergate general sanction page.

(iv) All existing and past sanctions and restrictions placed under Gamergate general sanctions will be transcribed by the arbitration clerks in the central discretionary sanctions log.

(v) Any requests for enforcement that may be open when this remedy is enacted shall proceed, but any remedy that is enacted should be enacted as a discretionary sanction.

(vi) Administrators who have enforced the Gamergate general sanctions are thanked for their work and asked to continue providing administrative assistance enforcing discretionary sanctions and at Arbitration enforcement.

1.2)

Uninvolved administrators are encouraged to monitor the articles covered by discretionary sanctions in this case to ensure compliance. To assist in this, administrators are reminded that:

(i) Accounts with a clear shared agenda may be blocked if they violate the sockpuppetry policy or other applicable policy;

(ii) Accounts whose primary purpose is disruption, violating the policy on biographies of living persons, or making personal attacks may be blocked indefinitely;

(iii) There are special provisions in place to deal with editors who violate the BLP policy;

(iv) The default position for BLPs, particularly for individuals whose noteworthiness is limited to a particular event or topic, is the presumption of privacy for personal matters;

(v) Editors who spread or further publicize existing BLP violations may be blocked;

(vi) Administrators may act on clear BLP violations with page protections, blocks, or warnings even if they have edited the article themselves or are otherwise involved;

(vii) Discretionary sanctions permit full and semi-page protections, including use of pending changes where warranted, and – once an editor has become aware of sanctions for the topic – any other appropriate remedy may be issued without further warning.

The Arbitration Committee thanks those administrators who have been helping to enforce the community general sanctions, and thanks, once again, in advance those who help enforce the remedies adopted in this case.

2.1) Any editor subject to a topic-ban in this decision is indefinitely prohibited from making any edit about, and from editing any page relating to, (a) Gamergate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. These restrictions may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.

4.1) NorthBySouthBaranof (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

5.1) Ryulong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

5.3) Ryulong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely banned from the English Language Wikipedia. They may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

6.2) TaraInDC (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished for treating Wikipedia as if it were a battleground and advised to better conduct themselves.

7.2) Tarc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

7.3) Tarc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is strongly warned that should future misconduct occur in any topic area, he may be banned from the English Wikipedia by motion of the Arbitration Committee.

8.2) The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

8.3) Subject to the usual exceptions, The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is prohibited from making any more than one revert on any one page in any 48-hour period. This applies for all pages on the English Wikipedia, except The Devil's Advocate's own user space. This restriction may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.

8.4) Subject to the usual exceptions, The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely prohibited from editing any administrative or conduct noticeboard (including, not not limited to; AN, AN/I, AN/EW, and AE), except for threads regarding situations that he was directly involved in when they were started. This restriction may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.

8.5) The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is strongly warned that should future misconduct occur in any topic area, he may be banned from the English Wikipedia by motion of the Arbitration Committee. Further, the committee strongly suggests that The Devil's Advocate refrains from editing contentious topic areas in the future.

9) TheRedPenOfDoom (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished for treating Wikipedia as if it were a battleground and advised to better conduct themselves.

10.1) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic ban preventing Tutelary (talk · contribs) from editing under the Gamergate general sanctions. This ban is converted to an Arbitration Committee-imposed ban. Tutelary (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

12) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic bans preventing ArmyLine (talk · contribs), DungeonSiegeAddict510 (talk · contribs), and Xander756 (talk · contribs) from editing under the Gamergate general sanctions. The topic bans for these three editors are converted to indefinite restrictions per the standard topic ban.

13) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic ban preventing Titanium Dragon (talk · contribs) from editing under BLP enforcement. This ban is converted to an Arbitration Committee-imposed ban. Titanium Dragon is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

14.1) Loganmac (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

15) Willhesucceed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

18) The Arbitration Committee urges that knowledgeable and non-conflicted users not previously involved in editing GamerGate-related articles, especially GamerGate-related biographies of living people, should carefully review them for adherence to Wikipedia policies and address any perceived or discovered deficiencies. This is not a finding that the articles are or are not satisfactory in their present form, but an urging that independent members of the community examine the matter in light of the case.

For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:46, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Apologies

Apologies for that! I was browsing on the iPad, and it's amazingly easy to f up there. Best, -- Sam ^Sing! 21:12, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

No problem, I did the same for a while. Tutelary (talk) 21:20, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Somebody doesn't want you to leave RfC

--Atsme☯^Consult 00:22, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

I'm hoping that you can contribute meaningfully to other areas of Wikipedia. Or even something else in life, positively of course. Good luck. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 05:14, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello

Re [2]. I understand your position. I simply don't agree with it. I've placed an RFC tag to get more input from the community. NE Ent 22:19, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Well I was gonna debate it out with you and try to appeal to some of your concerns. I was also hesitant to put it on an RFC only because it seems like a small thing to add and it already got some support and I honestly just think it's common sense. But alright, that's fine. Tutelary (talk) 22:29, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

SI

Hello. You participated in a previous discussion. Today opened a new case about this user. If you want to add something then write boldly. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 16:57, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Sad kitty

Haven't seen you around recently stealing my reverts. Remember that every day you don't make at least 10 vandalism reverts, the developers kill a server kitty. Please think of the server kitties!

In seriousness, you're a great vandal hunter and someone I admire. Feel free to give it some time, but I expect fast accurate Huggle reverts soon! If it helps, deliveries of shiny things can be arranged. :)

--L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 05:24, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks User:Lixxx235, just haven't really been in the mood for vandalism patrolling. Plus, I'm not even sure why I did it when Cluebot NG was on the job. I always see that bot on my watchlist. But uh, I appreciate you leaving a message 'cuz I do read my talk page. Tutelary (talk) 22:45, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Double post at ANI?

You might want to remove one of the two versions of your comment. And, FWIW, I've done a hell of a lot than that myself, particularly if I hit the save button more than once accidentally. John Carter (talk) 22:49, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

That was me, we edit conflicted [[3]] Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:56, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

I know I can be a pain in the butt sometimes and we haven't had the more amicable encounters in the past. But thank you for discussing on Talk:Cleavage (breasts) and showing collegiality. So here's a kitten.

EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 04:38, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Where to begin...Let's see...For your efforts in counter-vandalism and new page patrolling. For trying to help out everywhere in general and finally, for taking part in important discussions. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 11:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Tutelary (talk) 19:34, 7 March 2015 (UTC)