→Block: oh well |
→Block: unblock accepted, ChrisO apologised already |
||
Line 145: | Line 145: | ||
:What are you going to do about the disruptive editors? -- [[User:ChrisO|ChrisO]] ([[User talk:ChrisO#top|talk]]) 00:13, 18 October 2009 (UTC) |
:What are you going to do about the disruptive editors? -- [[User:ChrisO|ChrisO]] ([[User talk:ChrisO#top|talk]]) 00:13, 18 October 2009 (UTC) |
||
{| width="75%" align="center" class="notice noprint" style="background: none; border: 1px solid #aaa; padding: 0.5em; margin: 0.5em auto;" |
|||
{{unblock|I have already agreed to stop reverting, and in the circumstances described in [[WP:AN/I#Iranian nationalist disruption of human rights articles]] it is clear that the material being added to this high-profile article was a repeated, wilful violation of basic content policies of which the editors concerned were fully aware. -- [[User:ChrisO|ChrisO]] ([[User talk:ChrisO#top|talk]]) 00:16, 18 October 2009 (UTC)}} |
|||
|- |
|||
| valign="top" style="padding: 0.5em" | [[File:Artículo bueno.svg|50 px]] |
|||
| style="padding: 0.1em" | |
|||
'''Your request to be unblocked''' has been '''granted''' for the following reason(s): |
|||
<br><br>User already apologised and said that he would not revert again. |
|||
''Request handled by:'' [[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 00:20, 18 October 2009 (UTC) |
|||
<small> '''Unblocking administrator''': Please check for <span class="plainlinks">[http://toolserver.org/~eagle/autoblockfinder.php?user={{PAGENAMEE}} active autoblocks] on this user after accepting the unblock request.</small> |
|||
<!-- Request accepted (after-block request) --> |
|||
|} |
|||
::Like I posted at AN/I, I can't do anything about them because I have to leave here and I think a different admin should look at that anyway. I've urged someone look at them at AN/I. I have to leave, but will be monitoring via my blackberry (impossible to edit using). Good luck. As I said, no need for the reviewing admin to consult with me, I can't respond.--[[User:Wehwalt|Wehwalt]] ([[User talk:Wehwalt|talk]]) 00:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC) |
::Like I posted at AN/I, I can't do anything about them because I have to leave here and I think a different admin should look at that anyway. I've urged someone look at them at AN/I. I have to leave, but will be monitoring via my blackberry (impossible to edit using). Good luck. As I said, no need for the reviewing admin to consult with me, I can't respond.--[[User:Wehwalt|Wehwalt]] ([[User talk:Wehwalt|talk]]) 00:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:20, 18 October 2009
Old discussions now at /Archive 1 / /Archive 2 / /Archive 3 / /Archive 4 / /Archive 5 / /Archive 6 / /Archive 7 / /Archive 8 / /Archive 9 / /Archive 10 / /Archive 11 / /Archive 12 / /Archive 13 / /Archive 14 / /Archive 15 / /Archive 16 / /Archive 17 / /Archive 18 / /Archive 19 / /Archive 20 / /Archive 21 / /Archive 22 / /Archive 23 / /Archive 24 / /Archive 25 / /Archive 26
Please add new comments below.
NowCommons: File:Golden jubilee bridge.jpg
File:Golden jubilee bridge.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Golden jubilee bridge.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Golden jubilee bridge.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:08, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
- File:St ethelburga bishopsgate.jpg is now available as Commons:File:St ethelburga bishopsgate.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:18, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
- File:St barts the great interior.jpg is now available as Commons:File:St barts the great interior.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 12:26, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
- File:St barts the great exterior.jpg is now available as Commons:File:St barts the great exterior.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 12:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
- File:St barts the less interior.jpg is now available as Commons:File:St barts the less interior.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 12:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!
Many thanks, Roger Davies talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Templates for deletion nomination of Template:UN map
Template:UN map has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 20:51, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
GA review of Sara Northrup Hollister
I have reviewed the above and found one minor concern which you can see at Talk:Sara Northrup Hollister/GA1. Cheers. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:08, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)
The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:22, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Naming Conventions. RFC: Removal of exceptions to "use common names" passage.
This is to inform you that removing exceptions to the use of "most Common Names" as the titles of Wikipedia articles from the the Talk:Naming_Conventions policy page, is the subject of a referral for Comment (RfC). This follows recent changes by some editors.
You are being informed as an editor previously involved in discussion of these issues relevant to that policy page. You are invited to comment at this location. Xandar 21:38, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
.PSD for Southeast mediterranean annotated geography.jpg
Hello,
I would like please to have the .PSD for that image, how can we communicate? if via email, how can i give you my email withoug putting it in public ? --Mayz (talk) 23:28, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!
Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators, Roger Davies talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
I've had enough
ChrisO,
I respect you greatly as a wikipedia contributor but if you don't take this behavior a step back soon, I will be forced to file some type of user review request. The style used and the repetitiveness of it have become intolerable.
With respect, JaakobouChalk Talk 13:22, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
@Jaakobou: -- JaakobouChalk Talk 02:12, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- I really didn't want to get to this point but, since you insisted, I filed a report here. I have no interest in going this far and would prefer it if you would apologize and scale things back a bit.
- With respect, JaakobouChalk Talk 00:50, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
File:Obama globe 12jan2009.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Obama globe 12jan2009.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 22:13, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Re: You have mail
Thanks for the heads up! I don't check my email nearly often enough. The article you sent looks interesting, but a bit long (and heavy) for me to read at 3:30am. :) I'll try to take a look when I have more time though. Cheers. ← George talk 10:35, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- Not sure what you're reading, but I didn't send you any articles... -- ChrisO (talk) 10:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, I see what you mean now. I asked you a question as well - I guess I'm looking for a yes or no from you. :-) -- ChrisO (talk) 10:44, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Request for a review
Hi Chris, if you have the time, I'd very much value your opinion of 1948 Palestinian exodus from Lydda and Ramla. I'm thinking of taking it to FAC, so I'd appreciate input from good editors with knowledge of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I've posted it on peer review, but with no response so far. If you don't have time, or just don't feel up to it, I'll completely understand, so if that's the case, please feel free to ignore. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 12:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi there Chris, hope you're doing well. First of all, let me thank you for your incredible job that you've done on Kosovo related articles.
Today, I've been pointed out to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Kosovo-related articles), a MOS that you've created. What happened to it? How can we push it forward and make it a legit MOS for Kosovo-related articles. The way it is right now, IMHO is as neutral as it can get.
We're having issues (from Serb editors and foreign editors who oppose Kosovo's independence) on renaming Kosovo cities/towns/villages, especially those inhabited predominantly by Albanians and where an anglicised name doesn't exist. MOSKOS would resolve such problems.
Regards. kedadial 14:21, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
re Sara Northrup Hollister
He can't really explain the edit too much. Can you please quote from that secondary source the relevant passage, at his talk page? Also, I noticed a separate problem in the article: the Notes refer to a "Smith", but this does not appear in the References. What is this "Smith" source? Cirt (talk) 15:07, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, "Smith" is a typo on my part. It should be "Starr". I've added the citation to Stifle's talk page as requested. You can see it yourself on Google Books - check the link. -- ChrisO (talk) 15:11, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Re: Arbitration enforcement
I understand your position, and I agree, your behavior does not warrant any type of punishment. However, I don't think that either you or Jaakobou is aiming to reach a consensus on the issue - you're opposed to including any mention of the hoax allegations; Jaakobou insists on highlighting them as of primary importance. While I generally agree with your position on the content, two polar opinions that don't want to compromise do not make a conducive environment for consensus building. I don't think that either of you should be formally banned, but I would like to see a gentlemen's agreement between the two of you that lays the groundwork for more constructive editing, whether you both agree to lay off the article for a while (or permanently), or agree to tone it down and follow the proper dispute resolution process. ← George talk 00:31, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
- Which is precisely what I've been trying to broker on Jaakobou's talk page - please see the bottom of the page. Jaakobou has already said that he is likely to withdraw the complaint. In the circumstances, I'm afraid suggestions of banning are unhelpful and only likely to lead to over-hasty reactions from watching admins. I would appreciate it if you could withdraw the banning suggestion while the gentlemen's agreement is worked out. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:35, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Same old issue
ChrisO,
I'm a tad displeased with the continued disregard to my requests to tone it down. The recent smear (per "notoriously unreliable"[1]) does not strike me as a move in the right direction. Would you mind toning that statement down and citing an explanation to why you feel the published source is unreliable?
With respect, JaakobouChalk Talk 17:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- Melanie Phillips is "notoriously unreliable", even Alan Dershowitz see that. Making comments about the reliability of a source is not a "smear". nableezy - 18:07, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- You do know that she is nicknamed "Mad Mel" by the UK media? "Prolific beyond belief, the words gushing forth and overflowing in the manner of a paranoiac Niagara", as the Independent has put it? She's also a creationist, anti-vaccinations, anti-global warming science and so on. There seems to be no cause so cranky that she won't support it. Admittedly that would probably put her in the mainstream of commentators if she was an American, but in terms of the UK media she's way out on the fringe. -- ChrisO (talk) 18:12, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- Hey, Americans aren't anti-vaccination. nableezy - 18:27, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- ChrisO,
- It seems to me that you are adding Fallows to the list of sources you deem to be unreliable. How do you suppose I should respond to this and to your repeated assertions on what "we know for a fact"?[2][3] If you have some type of dispute resolution suggestion here, I'd be happy to hear it.
- With respect, JaakobouChalk Talk 18:40, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)
The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:20, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Peer review request
Sorry, bad timing, I won't be around much for a while and don't have time to look at your article, many apologies! Dougweller (talk) 19:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Inner German border
BorgQueen (talk) 12:28, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
References in Inner German border
Chris, let me know which style you would like to adopt for the references; I'll try to help with the donkey work.
My suggestion would be to transfer all sources used (incl. museum displays) to References and use unlinked short refs (author, year, p.) for all the footnotes. --JN466 13:17, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
- Would you suggest doing that even for references that are only used once? The bibliography is going to get very long if literally everything is listed there... -- ChrisO (talk) 13:25, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
- I've worked out that the article cites around 120 distinct references. We could split the References section into books, newspapers, and museum exhibits to break it up. The advantage is that the footnotes would become much shorter. For an example, see Millennium_'73#Notes. That FA also cites around 100 references, but overall it looks okay I think. It's something you could discuss with the reviewer – we might as well get his support for whatever format we adopt before putting in the work. --JN466 01:57, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
- By the way, I'll be doing quite a few changes this evening in response to the FAC feedback, so it's probably best to hold off transferring refs until I'm done. -- ChrisO (talk) 13:44, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Invitation
You're invited to leave your feed back here.
Warm regards, JaakobouChalk Talk 19:42, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
ANI
My friend, Please be aware that I had to report you here: [4]. I understand you want the best for scholarship and I respect that. There is nothing better than the truth. However I cannot accept generalization of people's background or constant reference to their background. Also I expect to be punibhsed if I break wikipedia's rule and so we should all expect the same. Thank you and all the best for keeping wikipedia falsehood-free in hopefully an unbiased manner. Sincerely, Ali.--Nepaheshgar (talk) 23:36, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Block
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/39/Stop_x_nuvola_with_clock.svg/40px-Stop_x_nuvola_with_clock.svg.png)
{{unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Sorry, I consider 3RR a bright line rule, and if you step over it and are informed of it, you should at least self revert. As I am going out for the evening, if you appeal the block, there is no need for the reviewing admin to seek consultation with me.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:12, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
- What are you going to do about the disruptive editors? -- ChrisO (talk) 00:13, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
- Like I posted at AN/I, I can't do anything about them because I have to leave here and I think a different admin should look at that anyway. I've urged someone look at them at AN/I. I have to leave, but will be monitoring via my blackberry (impossible to edit using). Good luck. As I said, no need for the reviewing admin to consult with me, I can't respond.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC)