User talk:Ultraexactzz/Archive 13
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Ultraexactzz. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 |
This archive features edits to my talk page from January 2015 through January 2017.
Deletion and Protection of the Article "Jeremy Glinoga"
Hello Admin! Please allow me to create the page again. That person is a significant performer in my country, The Philippines. Please give me the right to create the article. That person is a prominent performer in my country and I think he deserves to have an article on Wikipedia. Please allow me. Please. I'm begging you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Czarhans (talk • contribs) 09:29, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
u admin :D you are my role model for Wikipedia!
Can you tell me how I can become a Wikipedia user like u? Note: I do not mean how to be a admin, I mean how to be an outstanding editor like u. You can look thru my edits. Doorknob747 Doorknob747 (talk) 02:38, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Ultraexactzz:Can u talk on my talk page?
Just for some info
Although I joined Wikipedia 3 months before its terms of editing regulations changed and its terms of use changed, wheremost now we need references and everything now. How was Wikipedia before that time compared to now? Doorknob747 (talk) 02:38, 20 April 2015 (UTC) Also, I also like THIS IS SPARTA!Doorknob747 (talk) 02:38, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CIX, April 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 06:31, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CX, May 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:09, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXI, June 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:38, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
My RfA
|
Thank for !voting at my recent RfA. You voted Neutral so you get a reasonable two cookies, just cooling off. |
The Bugle: Issue CXII, July 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Acecandheader
Template:Acecandheader has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:44, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXIII, August 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:47, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
c****d****l**
You have been blocked for a year for saying… uh… I can't make myself quote it… for saying c****d****l** on ANI. Shudder. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | talk 18:57, 27 August 2015 (UTC).
(Well played, Bishonen.) UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 19:27, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Ultraexactzz (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Administrator Bishonen (talk · contribs) has blocked me in a clear abuse of administrative authority, and in violation of the First Amendment. Also, they said mean things about me. THEY should be blocked for a year, not ME. I make at least 5 good edits a month, what to THEY do? Seriously, how does this abuse of power continue?!? Next thing I'll be tag teamed by Bishzilla or someone else, and my obviously correct views will be drowned out by argle bargle. WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE? UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 19:27, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Mean things? Mealy-mouthed Bishonen? Haha. Wait till you get one of my templates! darwinbish BITE ☠ 19:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Only now do we see the violence inherent in the system. Help Help I'm being repressed! Censorship! Thumb Biting! Gross Incivility! On MY TALK PAGE of all places. How can I ever show my face on the drama boards again?!? UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 20:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
- Well said. Is it only me who can hear the faint smell of Jackboots coming over the horizon? Irondome (talk) 22:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Hunger Strike of Solidarity until what has happened here is unhappened although I can't quite follow it all yes.
- I officially announce that I shall be be going on hunger strike with immediate effect. I shall no longer be eating Rib eye steak, Truffles, Tinned tomatoes, or Quavers, until err whatever has happened here is disdone. Or fixed in some way. This sends out a terrible signal to those who are interested in these things. Irondome (talk) 20:09, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
- Stay Strong. They can't take our project away. Fight the power. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 20:25, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
- By the time you read this I will probably be dead from hunger or wired to a machine maybe with lights that light up. Then they will all be sorry and all will be good and wise again. Disgraceful. Irondome (talk) 20:49, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
- Stay Strong. They can't take our project away. Fight the power. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 20:25, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
help.
 | I am looking for help! Ask your question below. You can also look at Help Contents, ask at the Help desk or the Teahouse, or check the FAQ. Users who monitor the category Wikipedians looking for help and those in Wikipedia's Live Help have been alerted and will assist you shortly. Note that you can also receive live Wikipedia-related help there; click here to connect. You'll be receiving help soon so don't worry. Note to helpers: Once you have offered help, please nullify the template using {{Tl}} or similar, replace with {{Help me-helped}}, or where {{Help me|question}} was used, use {{Tlp}}/{{Tnull}} |
I need to get adnim dis-syssopped. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 20:24, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
I have contested your speedy deletion of List of popes said to have had sex with men
Grounds: it's not an attack page. deisenbe (talk) 19:51, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Since you posted in the ANI...
Please see the ugly turn it has taken... [[1]] Making accusation on the DailyKos is WAY over the line, especially when the accusations target specific editors. Springee (talk) 00:38, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Your G10 deletion of Chelsea Van Valkenburg
WP:G10 clearly states that "Redirects from plausible search terms are not eligible under this criterion.". It has been shown that "Chelsea Van Valkenburg" is a plausible search term for the article it originally redirected to, therefore G10 does not apply. The redirect is also completely neutral. I chose to bring this up here instead of bringing it to WP:DRV because I want to try to resolve this. sovereign°sentinel (contribs) 14:47, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXIV, September 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:08, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:21, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXV, October 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:47, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Vested contributors arbitration case opened
You may opt-out of future notifications related to this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in 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/Vested contributors. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 5, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 01:19, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
You may opt-out of future notifications related to this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in 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/Arbitration enforcement 2. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 5, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. For this case, there will be no Workshop phase. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 13:53, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Misplaced Comment in re AFD
I don't understand what I did wrong and why you removed this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Christian_Exodus&diff=prev&oldid=684493541 I provided a reason for the deletion. I followed steps 1 and 2 up to the word "OR" listed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#How_to_nominate_a_single_page_for_deletion JimTwiki (talk) 18:48, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXVI, November 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:26, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Help with AfD post
Hello -
I was wondering, since you were able to figure out what I did wrong with a delete nomination last week, figure out what I did wrong with another one? I tried to nominate "Cast In Bronze" for deletion on notability grounds, but couldn't get the nom right on the discussion page and a bot cleared it. Could I ask you to fix or point me to an instruction page tailored to my level of obtuseness? Dkendr (talk) 14:11, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Block
Please block Special:Contributions/2A00:1128:1:1:0:0:152:70. Vandalism-only. Tufor (talk) 15:48, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Nominations for the Military history WikiProject historian and newcomer of the year awards now open!
On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Kettlogo.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Kettlogo.gif. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 05:32, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
AE question
Hello Ultraexactzzz. About your statement. Did you comment in your own section because you consider yourself involved? I assume not, but wanted to check. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 22:09, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXVII, December 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Arbitration enforcement 2 case closed
You are receiving this message because you are a party or offered a preliminary statement and/or evidence in the Arbitration enforcement 2 case. This is a one-time message.
The Arbitration enforcement 2 arbitration case (t) (ev / t) (w / t) (pd / t) has been closed, and the following remedies have been enacted:
1.1) The Arbitration Committee confirms the sanctions imposed on Eric Corbett as a result of the Interactions at GGTF case, but mandates that all enforcement requests relating to them be filed at arbitration enforcement and be kept open for at least 24 hours.
3) For his breaches of the standards of conduct expected of editors and administrators, Black Kite is admonished.
6) The community is reminded that discretionary sanctions have been authorised for any page relating to or any edit about: (i) the Gender Gap Task Force; (ii) the gender disparity among Wikipedians; and (iii) any process or discussion relating to these topics, all broadly construed.
For the Arbitration Committee, Kharkiv07 (T) 02:41, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Arbitration enforcement 2 case closed
Happy New Year, Ultraexactzz!
Ultraexactzz,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Liz Read! Talk! 23:06, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
- Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Soque River
I apptreciate both the action and advice! Happy New Year! --Concertmusic (talk) 21:25, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXVIII, January 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:23, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
WP:ANI concerning Legacypac
Hello, you have voted in favour of a proposal on WP:ANI concerning Legacypac. Perhaps you were right, I respect your vote and your arguments, and have reacted on some of them. But I have also ventured a different proposal, which I consider better. Perhaps you’d care to give your opinion on that one, too: see Competing proposal: block from Wikipedia for one week. --Corriebertus (talk) 15:41, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your support
|
Peacemaker67 RfA Appreciation award |
| Thank you for participating and supporting at my RfA. It was very much appreciated, and I am humbled that the community saw fit to trust me with the tools. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:06, 6 February 2016 (UTC) |
Merge Tenacity (textile strength) into specific strength.
The two are the same thing, also the Tenacity page is a stub. Also, what is quasi-dimensionless supposed to mean? Tenacity should be turned into a section in specific strength. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.109.213.249 (talk) 01:46, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXIX, February 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
User:175.103.25.136
You blocked User:175.103.25.136 a few days ago for edit warring on Karnataka. The user is doing it again over the same issue, along with another IP (presumably the same person). Would you consider re-blocking, and perhaps changing PC1 on Karnataka to semi-protection for a week or 2? Thanks for whatever you decide is appropriate. - BilCat (talk) 13:44, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks. I have opened a discussion on the photo on the talk page. - BilCat (talk) 13:59, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXX, March 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
(Transferring previous conversations) Don't call other editors nazis, as you did at User talk:Sergecross73. It doesn't matter what you think of their edits, calling people Article Nazis isn't going to do anything at all to settle the situation down, is it? It takes two to edit war, and (looking at your reverts) you were inching pretty close to 3RR yourself. Do be more careful going forward, please. Thank you. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 15:00, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- "Deadpool became the first film of 2016 to top the box office for three consecutive weekends, and the highest grossing R-rated film of 2016" This is a chart that list number 1 films from week to week and those films' milestones, broken records, etc. from week to week. First off, the information that User talk:Fruitloop11 is trying to enter into this chart (became... the highest grossing R-rated film of 2016) is not correct because Deadpool did not become the highest grossing R-rated film during the 9th weekend of the year, the section of the chart that the information is entered under. Even though I have told User talk:Fruitloop11 and his alter ego User talk:76.107.252.227 that the information entered into the article is incorrect, they continue to replace the information, both saying they have a right to "contribute to the article". I have gone back and checked other pages that list box office number 1 films (down to 2010) and I haven't seen where the milestone of highest grossing r-rated, pg-rated, g-rated, x-rated film has ever been enter into this chart. Mainly because it seems redundant since there is a "Highest Grossing Films of 2016" chart at the bottom of the page. I have told them that as WP editors, we have a responsibility to make sure what we put in the articles are correct, no matter how minute the incorrect information is. I have ask them both to enter the information into the chart where it would be a true statement or just leave it out of the article (which is my choice since it's never been entered as a milestone before in these charts). I am bringing this issue to your attention since the user has come to you two editors (User talk:Sergecross73, User:Ultraexactzz) in the past about this.
Past conversation; User_talk:76.107.252.227#List_of_2016_box_office_number-one_films_in_the_United_States Thank you. HENDAWG229 (talk) 03:21, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
- No more arguing is needed. It is the highest grossing R-rated film of 2016 end of discussion, But since you can't stand being wrong. How about showing me proof where the first film to reach three weekends at number 1 is a milestone. I put it at the 3rd weekend because those three weekends add to it's overall total, which counts when taking in box office numbers.
And you wanna make a claim like "I have gone back and checked other pages that list box office number 1 films (down to 2010) and I haven't seen where the milestone of highest grossing r-rated, pg-rated, g-rated, x-rated film has ever been enter into this chart."
I have gone back to the 1990s box office number-one films in the United States, and there is no milestone saying First film too reach number 1 for three weekends in the year of 199X WHY??? Because it's not a milestone it's a TRIVIAL statement. Films go three weeks at number 1 all the time in The United States.
Also I never contacted User:Ultraexactzz. He came to you because you were being disruptive and violated the 3RR rule. two different other users reverted your edits User:Mlpearc and User:Lazylaces, but hey they're probably my alter egos too. --Fruitloop11 (talk) 08:17, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
- First off, I'm not arguing, I am discussing an issue. I guess you are arguing and getting upset for being wrong. I never said the film was not the highest grossing r-rated film of 2016, I have always said that the statement "became... highest grossing R-rated film of 2016" is not a true statement where you and User_talk:76.107.252.227 continue to place the statement in this chart and redundant since there is already a highest grossing films of 2016 chart at the bottom of the page. Will you and your partner please just place the information into the chart where it is a true statement or just leave it out all together. Also, the third weekend of a film's release is not it's "overall total" box office since the film is still in release and making money in the United States. As for your alter ego, you and User_talk:76.107.252.227 have both made the same statement arguing about of why a film that stays at number 1 for three weekends is a milestone (here and here, what a coincidence). I would like to hear feedback from this administrator about the false information and sockpuppet issue. Thank you. HENDAWG229 (talk) 13:12, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
- Ok Why do you keep moving the discussion to different users talkpage??? You are not listening when he told you to take it to the articles talk page. Also you have to have my consent before moving what I wrote to someone elses talk page. You just seem to be trying your hardest to get me in trouble because you can't stand to lose
I never said
-became... highest grossing R-rated film of 2016
I said
-and the highest grossing R-rated film of 2016
Which makes it a fact. If i said became it would be out of place, but I didn't.
--Fruitloop11 (talk) 18:33, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia email_ Request to Restore Page- Pariveshayati Trust
Please refer the below information
20:41, 13 April 2016 Ultraexactzz (talk | contribs) deleted page Pariveshayati Trust (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)
Kindly requesting you to restore this page as this is not meant for advertising or promotion. The intention is to create awareness and take the message of the benefits of the trust to common people and to help the poor and needy.
Moreover, there are lots of pages which actually advertises and promotes similar causes. When such commercial articles are exempted then why not this genuine article? This is properly registered with government of Tamil Nadu, India. Please contact me for verification of the registration. Kindly restore this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sathya07prakash (talk • contribs) 05:26, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
- I've replied on your talk page. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 12:43, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Your recent block of user:Wattsj528
I believe you blocked him for edit warring a move of I Swear . On his return from the block he immediately made the same edit. At least this time he moved it rather than making an edit and paste copy, but he still made no attempt to discuss the edit. Since he returned he's also broken 3RR on The Pirates Who Don't Do Anything: A VeggieTales Movie (again repeating an edit from before his edit warring block) and has made other undiscussed and questionable article moves. Meters (talk) 22:06, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Gamaliel and others arbitration case opened
You recently offered a statement in 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/Gamaliel and others. The scope of this case is Gamaliel's recent actions (both administrative and otherwise), especially related to the Signpost April Fools Joke. The case will also examine the conduct of other editors who are directly involved in disputes with Gamaliel. The case is strictly intended to examine user conduct and alleged policy violations and will not examine broader topic areas. The clerks have been instructed to remove evidence which does not meet these requirements. The drafters will add additional parties as required during the case. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Evidence.
Please add your evidence by May 2, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. This notification is being sent to those listed on the case notification list. If you do not wish to recieve further notifications, you are welcome to opt-out on that page. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Wattsj528
Hi Ultra, any objections if I extend Wattsj528's block an additional 2 weeks? He started editing while logged out to continue his disruptive edit-warring. My reversions noted here. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:56, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXI, April 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:37, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Involuntary celibacy again
@Nihonjoe and Samwalton9: (the other admins involved in closing the most recent discussion) - Looking for advice on where to take this. First noticed a user created Incels to redirect to the Incel disambiguation page, for which none of the targets take a -s to pluralize except the "involuntary celibacy" Wiktionary link. Sent it to RfD. That's still ongoing. Now the same user created Involuntary celibate and Love-shy as redirects to Incel, with a hatnote there. As I see it, if, after many discussions, it was determined the subject needed to be salted on Wikipedia, it seems inappropriate to use redirects to point people to the subject on Wiktionary. There are reasonable counter-arguments along the lines of someone looking for that subject could potentially benefit from the Wiktionary page, but as Wiktionary has separate standards for inclusion, that seems like circumventing consensus on the English Wikipedia by linking/soft redirecting to the same article on another language Wikipedia. Anyway, I was about to tag them for CSD but wasn't quite sure which tag fit and if it would stick, so asking for advice... — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:46, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
- Update: Nihonjoe deleted them as R3. Guess that's what I should've tagged them as in the first place. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 20:02, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for removing the AFD boxes! - I had to leave the house so just dumped them there & ended up forgetting to remove everything so thanks for that - Much appreciated :), Happy editing, –Davey2010Talk 20:36, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
An arbitration case regarding Gamaliel and others has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
- Gamaliel is admonished for multiple breaches of Wikipedia policies and guidelines including for disrupting Wikipedia to make a point, removing a speedy deletion notice from a page he created, casting aspersions, and perpetuating what other editors believed to be a BLP violation.
- DHeyward and Gamaliel are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with or discussing each other anywhere on Wikipedia, subject to the usual exemptions.
- DHeyward (talk · contribs) is admonished for engaging in incivility and personal attacks on other editors. He is reminded that all editors are expected to engage respectfully and civilly with each other and to avoid making personal attacks.
- For conduct which was below the standard expected of an administrator — namely making an incivil and inflammatory close summary on ANI, in which he perpetuated the perceived BLP violation and failed to adequately summarise the discussion — JzG is admonished.
- Arkon is reminded that edit warring, even if exempt, is rarely an alternative to discussing the dispute with involved editors, as suggested at WP:CLOSECHALLENGE.
- The community is encouraged to hold an RfC to supplement the existing WP:BLPTALK policy by developing further guidance on managing disputes about material involving living persons when that material appears outside of article space and is not directly related to article-content decisions.
For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:38, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others closed
The Bugle: Issue CXXII, May–June 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:04, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Regarding Pot House Hamlet
originally mistakenly posted to userpage, moved here by NottNott
Hi
Im trying to reply to the admin thread regarding Pot House Hamlet. Finding wiki very difficult to use and can't manage to reply on that thread. Sorry had to write this here. I created 'Pot House Hamlet' Page. I would like it deleting as it is posing problems for the 'Pot House Hamlet' the business. FB use the wiki page as a auto generated page which creates a conflict on FB with the official page. The business is seeing that this is extremely destructive and it is causing real damage to the business. Would really appreciate the page being removed completely. thank you unsigned comment by Beck2008
File:Chandikadevikatol.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Chandikadevikatol.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:22, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXIII, July 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:44, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Same user, multiple IPs?
Thanks for your work on this recent situation. Given the parallels, you might also want to look at this one. Thanks again. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 23:04, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Lua module solution
I've potentially found a Lua module that can find the target of a redirect automatically. I've posted it up at WP:AN Tazerdadog (talk) 00:43, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
And I think I've found a solution. See the AN thread. Tazerdadog (talk) 02:34, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXIV, August 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:57, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
hi
Could you elaborate a bit on your concerns with Hillary Clinton brain damage hoax? You may want to read the AfD discussion; there's a general consensus this is a GF article, even among those supporting Delete. As someone who has been on the forefront of arresting the vandalism of WP with conspiracy theories and obfuscation of content, I'm a little concerned at the suggestion I would, in fact, be a propagator of the same. I know you're not aware, but I've been almost singularly patrolling Frank Gaffney for the better part of a year from a revolving door of sockpuppet sanitizers and have even been angrily called-out on CSPAN by Gaffney himself; I'm also dealing right now with stopping the removal of sourced content from Planned presidential transition of Donald Trump by someone claiming to be a COI editor from the Trump transition office. To be quite frank, I'm at the spear-tip of stopping "disruption and shenanigans" of a kind that no one else wants to deal with due to how muddy it gets, so it's a little hurtful when I'm accused of perpetrating them.
I don't really care how you !vote on the restrictions issue, but please just don't accuse me of disruption and shenanigans. Shenanigans wasn't even an accusations that anyone brought up in the original restrictions; it was a question of my accuracy in conducting QPQ DYK reviews and nothing else. No one has ever accused my work on WP as constituting vandalism or shenanigans until now. LavaBaron (talk) 20:15, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
Question...
In this thread back in January, you mentioned that the signature isn't really problematic so long as the user isn't naming names. Well, I only ask what your take is on it now because now it looks like he is naming names. (Normally, I would have posted a diff of his actual comment, but for some reason it doesn't show up that way via the direct diff; could it be because of some sort of script?) Erpert blah, blah, blah... 23:51, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- I haven't been around much, apologies. I really don't have any insight on this one - the links don't seem different in any substantive manner. Sorry. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 14:14, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXV, September 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject coordinator election
Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Extended confirmed protection
Hello, Ultraexactzz. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.
Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.
In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:
- Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
- A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:50, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Fyi
An editor you blocked for making personal attacks on me showed up on my talk today and commented unconstructively on two unrelated discussions. Do with it what you will. I'm fine with just ignoring him. this John from Idegon (talk) 17:41, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXVI, October 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:17, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins
Hello,
Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
A new user right for New Page Patrollers
Hi Ultraexactzz.
A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.
It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.
If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Ultraexactzz. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Why did my page get deleted?
I made a page on my user account that I titled "Life of the Big One." Within an hour of posting it, it was flagged for speedy deletion, saying it had no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. It was one paragraph long, and more was to be added, how could you say it was unsalvageably incoherent when it wasn't completed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phillip 2000 (talk • contribs) 18:55, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.[1] The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.[2] The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.
You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.
Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
- ^ This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
- ^ Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.