User:Dendodge/Yes

日本穣 may not always respond as swiftly as you would like to queries, so thank you for your patience.

...for that prompt namechange, PristineMerchandise → DinhoGauch10. I was helping the user on IRC; getting the name fixed so quickly really helps keep new users 'on-board'. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  21:00, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. :) ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:01, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anomaly: As of 16:00 March 12 the candidate had 95% support and looked like an ideal candidate. At that time a very large number of people descended upon the RfA. Virtually all were oppose. Within a few hours Schmidt was a failed candidate. Oppose reasons were as follows:

The candidate has

1. "porn issues"
2. "questionable judgment"
3. committed "sock puppet offenses"
4. "spam links"
5. "a serious misunderstanding of the coriest of all our core principles"
6. "a fundamental misunderstanding of BLP policy"
7. a "vested interest in protecting self-promoters"
8. is "powerfully vested in a rather strange ideology"
9. is "hostile to standards that would lead to accurate, verifiable and strong encyclopedic content"
10. did improperly conspire re "offline coordination for the early supports"
11. is " a nudist version of MBisanz"
12. is an "Extreme inclusionist"
13. is "an inclusionist who will dismiss (or seriously contort) policy"
14. goes around "harassing and making inappropriate judgements".
15. reliance on wikilawyering to subvert rules
16. "candidate was way too quick to offer pictures of himself, including nudes",
17. "no one specific thing - just too many situations"

Of course such a candidate should never be an Admin if everything is on the up and up. Could you please check to see if this RfA "is on the Up and Up" - Ret.Prof (talk) 13:34, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The first Oppose-- an editor who loudly bragged he would use his position to stop "extreme inclusionism" as soon as he became an Admin-- throws in the "porn" bomb, and then all the Opposers fell all over themselves. Looks suspiciously like baseless character-assassination of an excellent candidate who, a large, organized group feels, won't delete enough... or, more accurately, will stand in the way of their efforts to delete more. But what else is new ;) Dekkappai (talk) 14:47, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you have concerns, I recommend bringing them up on the talk page of the discussion, then making a note of it at the top of the discussion area on the main page of the RfA. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 23:23, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's actually a fairly normal progress for a controversial RFA. The supporters get in first en masse, the opposers get in second in a similar fashion, and then the few days thereafter determines the result, with some people changing their votes between Support, Oppose and Neutral. What I believe is the reason for this is that the Supporters of course know first about the RfA through either watching the talk page of the editor concerned, that of the nominator, or related discussions. The Opposers first find out shortly after the RfA is launched, and others find out through their talk pages over the next 12-16 hours (keep in mind in some cases there's also timezone issues as the three major locations of US/Canada, Europe and East Asia/Australia/NZ are on almost mutually exclusive TZs). Then word of mouth spreads (especially if it has attracted a lot of interest) and people come to hear of it and dirft in accordingly. I don't have any major problem with it as long as both Supporters and Opposers are actually viewing the user's work and not simply forming an opinion based on the judgement of others or based on some sort of sense of allegiance or antipathy. Orderinchaos 02:05, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you removed the speedy deletion request for the article i made. I've added a few references. As the article stands now, do you think it meets the criteria for notability? Thanks for your help/input. Rafael 06:40, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The closest thing you have to a reliable source is the interview on gotfrag, though I'm not sure if that site would qualify under the guidelines for reliable sources. If you can find any magazine coverage of the company, especially industry magazines such as Electronic Gaming Monthly and the like, that would be best. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:48, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, since a lot of the article concerns public opinion, how come forum threads would not be reliable? I mean I understand that a forum thread should never really be taken as a "reliable source" but if we are trying to verify the opinion of the public then a forum thread should get that done right? Rafael 06:57, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Forum threads can't be used as a source, in general, for anything, and any exceptions must be made on a case-by-case basis. See the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard for doing that. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:03, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove the "db-banned" tags from File:Cobinnaked.jpg, File:Corbinupclosecover.jpg, File:Hsm2 gabriella.JPG, File:Hsm2 sharpay.JPG, File:High-School-Musical-3-movie-06.jpg, and File:CorbinDeal WithIt.jpg, describing them as "extra"? They were produced in violation of a block, and meet csd-g5. Since they were produced in violation of a block, it's important that they be removed immediately, prior to any efforts to repair or salvage their use.—Kww(talk) 14:51, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because those tags are for pages, not images. The images were already tagged for deletion, as well, so they will be deleted anyway. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:38, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

G5 is named G5 because it is general: from WP:CSD's description of the G class: "These apply to all namespaces (and so apply to articles, redirects, user pages, talk pages, files, etc):" (emphasis added). Further, the goal is not to delete them in seven days, the goal is to delete them immediately, before material contributed by a banned user is incorporated into any Wikipedia articles.—Kww(talk) 19:26, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then they need to change the wording of the notices as it clearly states "this page" rather than "this page or file". The files have now been deleted. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:30, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree there. Unfortunately, that phrase is in a protected file (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Db-meta), so I can't fix it myself. Thanks for processing them.—Kww(talk) 19:51, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've modified it to make it recognize if it's being used on a file. Hopefully that should work. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:05, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I didn't know about that, I was wondering what to use. Woogee (talk) 19:08, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. It can be sometimes confusing with all the various tags which can be used. I'm sure everyone (including me!) gets confused at one time or another. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:13, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your recent assistance. Much gratitude. I am working on keeping The »Ask Dr.Rin!« episode summary from being deleted. --Dairi no Kenkyo (talk) 20:38, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I've placed the remaining episodes you had on that page into the proper format. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:45, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm new to editing and creating articles, so please back off of my Eating Emma page unless you want to do it for me. Thanks. RawRock91 (talk) 16:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not meet any of the requirements for keeping it, so I recommend working on it in your userspace until it does. Perhaps at User:Rawrock91/Eating Emma. If you want me to restore the article to there, I'm happy to do so, but do not keep recreating the article in mainspace or you may lose your editing privileges. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:24, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the article to User:Rawrock91/Eating Emma so you can work on it until it meets the requirements for inclusion. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:27, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nihonjoe, I just noticed you declined the speedy request for List of rulers of Kasongo Luunda (Yaka). First, there was a similar list speedied on Friday, List of rulers of Kuba, you might want to recreate this list. I was the one tagging the Kuba list, and both creator User:JohnArmagh and I had put our reasons forward on Talk:List of rulers of Kuba (I assume as admin you can read this).

In order for me not to tag wrong things as copyvio, can you please point me to the policy allowing to copy lists? As far as I thought to have understood, copyright-able material is everything that reaches a certain Threshold of originality. As such, List of towns in Sweden cannot be subject to copyright because everyone could assemble such a list with ease. The lists of ancient kings of Africa as discussed here are a different story imo. They are the result of research activity, and they happen to be in list form. I don't think anyone is allowed to plagiarise them, just like List of sequences in the human genome wouldcould be protected by copyright law, if it existed.

Your opinion and response is appreciated. --Pgallert (talk) 08:27, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Wikipedia:Plagiarism#What is not plagiarism, third last item, seems to be the applicable policy in this case. But this piece of policy does not take into account the possibility of presenting research or original thought in list form. Just imagine someone came forward copying the entire Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus because it is a list! --Pgallert (talk) 08:45, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio and plagiarism are not necessarily the same thing, though they can overlap. You were tagging the list as a copyvio, when it was just a list of rulers, something which could be obtained through any number of sources. As such a list does not require any original content or thought to create, it is not covered by copyright. As that page states, however, you should always list your sources for any such lists so as to avoid plagiarism. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 09:57, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Correction: I did not tag the Kasongo Luunda list.) Would you have the knowledge to write who ruled Kasongo Luunda 200 years ago? No, this list does require original thought. There are no government records whatsoever, and the researcher (who explicitly put the material under copyright) likely spent months digging through private letters and missionary diaries to assemble this list. You might want to look at an opinion exactly opposite to yours here. --Pgallert (talk) 12:57, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hello, my name is Clint. You recently banned my page called ccpproductions claiming i was advertising a product or company. The Adventures of Douchebag Man is a story I wrote in school to help me and my friends get through the day. I am still in high school. The ccpproductions is not a business, and The Adventures of Douchebag man is not a product. I thought it would be cool to have a DBM wiki page up and running for my friends. I know yall probobly get a lot of people trying to advertise stuff on here and that probobly gets stressful, but I am not one of those people. Im just a kid trying to make a DBM wiki page. Thank you for your time and please reply. Have a good one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clint Charles Project (talk • contribs) 01:50, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, Dwayne Flanders is a person which is me, what are you talking about. I understand i tried to create an article about myself but that has nothing to do with username changing. Dwayneflanders (talk) 20:32, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many salutations!!! It seems that you have seen my recent handiwork here and I am very pleased that you have been quite polite with your appraisal.

Still, I am at a loss for how a personal commentary in the edit summary could trouble anybody since the editing history is behind the scenes and has limited utility to the casual visitor who reads our handiwork. Destructive speech that insults people is one thing that should be (and is in many circles) frowned on; still, do you not think that a remark commending something positive that a character does as part of the edit summary documentation should be looked at a little differently? Is there another motive for the injunction against my comments in the edit summary other than personal aversion?

Dairi no Kenkyo (talk) 02:57, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the commentary is not useful in any way. Wikipedia is not here for people to make personal commentary about what happens in a particular article. The edit summary is specifically to tell other editors what you did in a particular edit (hence "edit summary"). You can see more at Help:Edit summary. Hope that helps. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:05, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

日本穣 -- Addressing the specifics of this particular situation may not be the best use of your time; however, I want to keep you in the loop so that you will be well informed whenever you might choose to play an active role.

You may not know that PMDrive1061 agreed to be a non-public mentor.

With regret, I have to report that today's attempt to reach out for help was unclear:

A. I intended to ask for comments here about the use of format as a device (a) to focus my comments and (b) to limit the number of words.

B. Also, I wanted to invite PMDrive1061 to consider posting a comment at the active ArbCom thread.

Instead, my words were construed as puzzling. I tried to restate my purpose and questions here.

I have asked the others to address context-specific issues. I posed these questions:

• Can you offer suggestions about what I might have done differently?
• Can you propose plausible modifications in the formatting or in the wording?

If anyone at ArbCom is monitoring my edits, this small example may help clarify how I expect the mentoring process will work in practice.

In due course, I shall return to editing. Tentatively, I plan to refine this format/parsing technique so that it can become useful when something begins to go wrong in the course of editing.

Do you have any questions? comments? suggestions?

Thank you again for your helpful posting here. --Tenmei (talk) 20:30, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please notice my revised "2nd try" message at User talk:PMDrive1061#Mentorship — only 8 sentences + 2 quotes? It is shorter and thus better? It seems to me that I've not explained enough.

The re-thinking rationale is a variant of less is more; but in this context of initiating a working relationship, I would have thought that less is simply less. In other words, less would seem to be too little?

Like my "1st try" message, this is also puzzling but in a different way.--Tenmei (talk) 16:32, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:10, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We're edit conflicting, so I'm just going to let you finish up. Thanks.--Chaser (talk) 22:35, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. You're pretty active for someone who's retired. ;) ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 22:36, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, since you participated (even though it wasn't to !vote), you shouldn't be closing it, even if it's a withdrawal. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 22:44, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have never understood that to be the standard for withdrawn nominations, which are uncontroversial closes. Has there been a change in the last four months?--Chaser (talk) 02:41, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's best not to close any issue in which you have participated, no matter how small your contribution to it. This avoids absolutely any question of conflict of interest. While I don't personally have an issue with your closure, there may be others who may view it differently. This, my message. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:37, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's too cautious.--Chaser (talk) 05:16, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in this kind of case, I think it's better to err on the side of caution. Then it leaves no doubts. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 05:26, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

are you on right now? You seem to be active over at the username changes and I was wondering if you could review my request.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 00:52, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 01:02, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you an email. --Rschen7754 14:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir,

Recently I created a page about a Microsoft MVP giving all the details about him with proper and credible references about him. This is the link to it - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_John

Suddenly a someone named as Bagheera placed a tag, asking for the speedy deletion of my page that I created. I saw you doing justice, so I am in need of your help. You have already helped me once. Also, I am unable to access to the talk page of the person who has placed the speedy deletion tag on the page. I want you to (if possible) go through the page and see it. I think it is perfect with the references I have given and when you are satisfied, please remove that speedy deletion tag from my post as it will be spoiling the page.

Gyandeep Kaushal (talk) 22:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Think we should file an SPI request? Blanking not just one, but two admins' userspaces--something tells me this isn't a new user. Then again, it might be a 4chan troll ... Blueboy96 17:26, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. I've hardblocked the account. As far as I know, I haven't done anything to make anyone mad lately. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cptnono (talk) is apparently counting you as a supporter of removing the line in the Ady Gil article that mentions Peter Bethune's head being covered by a hood during his arrest. The line is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ady_Gil#Peter_Bethune.27s_detention_and_arrest

The discussion is going on here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ady_Gil#Peter_Bethune.27s_detention_and_arrest_-_massive_deletion_of_referenced_material

Please check out the current edit (assuming it hasn't been reverted again, you may have to check the history) and review the discussion (he thinks it's not relevant, I say it's relevant because it's mentioned in the news article that's referenced and shown in the videos that are referenced, so the editors and producers seemed to have thought it was relevant). If you have an opinion one way or the other, please give it. And if you don't mind, confirm that you don't have any WP:Conflict of interest. Thanks. Ghostofnemo (talk) 13:50, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You apparently blocked me indefinitely, it's funny when an admin does such actions witout any clue in what's going on. the thing is, Tadeusz Kościuszko is ethnicaly Belarusian, yet for a reason some user deletes the references to that and the categories coming along. Another user doesn't know the difference between nationality and ethnicity and tries to write Tadeusz Kościuszko as an ethnic Pole (like Poles), which he isn't (he's a Pole by nationality). Before baning people, learn the case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.177.170.41 (talk) 15:17, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Go back and read the block notice. You were blocked only for your username. Not for any other reason. If you follow the directions on your user page, you will be able to choose a new username and be unblocked. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:41, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

? What's the problem with my username? 79.177.170.41 (talk) 20:37, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]