This editor is an Illustrious Looshpah and is entitled to display this Book of All Knowledge.

Archives

as Aerobird - Jul 2008-Apr 2010 - May 2010 - Jun 2010-Oct 2010 - Nov 2010-Dec 2010 - Jan 2011-Mar 2011 - Apr 2011-Sep 2011 - Oct 2011 - Nov 2011-Dec 2011 - Jan 2012-

This page has archives. Sections older than 2 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter Volume I, Issue III February 2012 Front cover | Feature | News and announcements | Humor | Want ads To contribute to the next newsletter, please visit the Newsletter draft page. ARS Members automatically receive this newsletter. To opt out, please remove your name from the recipients list.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:04, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

The DYK project (nominate) 16:05, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Dear The Bushranger,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 21:42, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm flattered to be considered, but I'll have to, reluctantly, decline at this time. Good luck with your project though. :) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:09, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	"Yo dawg ... " made me LOL, even if it might qualify as something awful to say by the ArbCom standards [shudder]. ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 22:31, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Laughter is the best medicine! Thanks. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:33, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bushranger, please will you reconsider your closure of the cfD discussion on Category:Mao Zedong family?

I think I understand why you acted as you did, and am sure that it was done in the utmost good faith, but for all that this seems to me to be a mistake. I think that a WP:SNOW close when only 3 !votes had been cast is stretching the definition of snow well beyond its elastic limit. When only 3 !votes have been cast and the discussion has been open for only 3 days out the usual minimum of 7 days, it seems to me to be far too soon say that it meets the WP:SNOW test: that the "issue does not have a snowball's chance in hell of being accepted".

WP:SNOW says that The snowball clause is designed to prevent editors from getting tangled up in long, mind-numbing, bureaucratic discussions over things that are foregone conclusions from the start. However, in this case, the discussion was neither long nor mind-numbing nor bureaucratic. It seems to me that despite your good intentions, the effect of your closure was to cast a supervote, and prevent any other editor from making a case for treating that category as an exception to the convention of Category:Families.

Personally, I would oppose the suggested rename, and would hope that the eventual outcome would be the same as your closure. But I have seen too many cases where a SNOW closure without any snow has caused a huge amount of meta-drama and resentment, which is much more disruptive than just letting the discussion run.

In this case, I think that the most likely outcome of not closing early was that there would be few more "keep" !votes over the next few days, followed by an uncontroversial closure. That seems to me to be much better than having the nominator (and any other interested editors) feel that they were unreasonably denied the chance to test consensus.

Please will you reopen the discussion? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:13, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I figured that the result is a foregone conclusion, hence the snow. But I have no problem with reopening it - consider it done. :) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 12:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I very much doubt that it will change the outcome, but nor can I see any benefit in an early closure.

Thanks for being so open to another view, and for acting on it so promptly. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:52, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see how you can be seen as impartial in closing the cfds on Old West Downs and Old Stoics when you have a partisan position favouring one side of the argument. Surely it would be better for you to leave the closing of such cfds to someone who is uninvolved? Moonraker (talk) 17:26, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that Moonraker has a point here. Given the balance of opinion in those discussions, I don't see any way that another closer could weighed the consensus to reach a different conclusion, and I don't read Moonraker's comments as suggesting that your involvement affected the outcome. But I think that in future it would be better to avoid any concerns over impartiality. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:28, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS I see that Moonraker has selectively notified other editors of his post here: see [1], [2], [3]. It is a pity that Moonraker did not have the courtesy to alert you to of this.

In each case the notice was posted to an editor who shares at least some of Moonraker's substantive views on these categories, and Moonraker appears to have failed to notice the irony of canvassing Ephebi immediately below a warning to Ephebi about canvassing. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:37, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I suppose I can see the point here; I didn't consider it a problem as there was a clear consensus, but it's probably best to avoid any and all appearance of any potential conflict of interest. In the future I'll let others handle closures of CfDs of this type in all cases. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:24, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Boy, this guy's persistant. Calabe1992 02:15, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quite so. If he'd actually channel his energies torwards constructive editing he'd be a great force for good on Wikipedia. Alas... - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:16, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I unfortunately don't see that coming. Oh, and I have no idea why an edit from me just appeared on their talk page upon you creating it. Odd. Calabe1992 02:17, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

o.O Must have been the cybergnomes... - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:18, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. I requested at RPP for one of his target pages to be semi-protected. Not sure if it's been addressed yet. Calabe1992 02:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Due to my block and the requirement for me to force fragment the discussions I responded to your comments at ANI on my talk page. --Kumioko (talk) 12:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:32, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• See User talk:Fastily#Vandalism, since I can't tell you-know-who about the underlying problem, I think you might have to rein in here or else you-know-who will definitely get me into trouble for something I didn't do. Thank you, best and cheers~! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 20:04, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied there to provide a "second"! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks, you have a great weekend. Cheers~! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 23:17, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you for helping recently with a vandal. You said on the administrators' notice board to report incidents to WP:AIV. How do I do that? Many thanks (and sorry if this is the wrong place to ask) 109.152.27.112 (talk) 21:43, 17 February 2012 (UTC) (I'm registering with an account now)[reply]

No problem, and glad to help out. When you find a vandalising IP, you go to WP:AIV, and click 'edit' on the "User-reported" section. You then make the report using the following format:

* {{IPvandal|IP address}} reason for report ~~~~

replacing "IP address" with the address in question, and "reason for report" with a brief description of the vandalism, with diffs. An admin will come along shortly to address the problem. Hope this helps! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:46, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant, thank you 109.152.27.112 (talk) 21:48, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That template you removed because it broke the redirect was reinstated by the bot. Might want to full protect to stop it from adding the template, as strange as it sounds. Calabe1992 03:04, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...ai yi yi. Consider it done. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have new messages at my talk page. Of all people, I would've expected an admin to fully examine the situation before making any administrative action. →Στc. 06:44, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. Fixed now, I think. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:54, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your recent edit summary at ANI, we cannot allow you to sleep - have that caffeine which you mentioned, gratis ;) Sitush (talk) 08:08, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I Have The Power......! And thanks. ;) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:10, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey, didn't know you like She-Ra: Princess of Power... yikes~! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 10:01, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your warning to User:hudicourt, he appears unrepentant. See [4] and [5]. Wee Curry Monster talk 09:29, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]