User talk:Ks0stm/Archive 12

Hi, I'm Flagmaster45 and I'm from Pennsylvania. It's really cool that you storm chase. That is awesome! I hope that I could do the same thing. I actually got two close calls with tornadoes from my hometown of Millersburg, Pennsylvania, the most recent one was about a few weeks ago, and the other one in 2011 with an actual tornado, but luckily no homes were damaged in Millersburg. It scared the living daylights out of me! The only time I'm scared of tornadoes is when one gets towards my hometown. Anytime else, I'm like, "Whoa, that is awesome." But I've never seen a tornado in real life (the only time is on TV). I hope you can write back to me soon!

Your friend, Flagmaster45 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flagmaster45 (talk • contribs) 12:50, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

The final of the 2014 WikiCup begins in a few short minutes! Our eight finalists are listed below, along with their placement in Round 4:

1.   Godot13 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer, finished top of Pool A and was the round's highest scorer. Godot is a featured picture specialist, claiming large numbers of points due to high-quality scans of historical documents, especially banknotes.
2.   Casliber (submissions) is a WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist every year since 2010. In the semi-final, he was Pool B's highest scorer. Cas's points primarily come from articles on the natural sciences.
3.   Czar (submissions) was Pool A's runner-up. Czar's points come mostly from content related to independent video games, including both articles and topics.
4.   Adam Cuerden (submissions) was Pool B's runner-up. Another featured picture specialist, many of Adam's points come from the restoration of historical media. He has been a WikiCup finalist twice before.
5.   Cwmhiraeth (submissions) won the WikiCup in 2012 and 2013, and enters this final as the first wildcard. She focuses on biology-related articles, and has worked on several high-importance articles.
6.   12george1 (submissions) is the second wildcard. George's points come primarily from meteorology-related articles. This year and last year, George was the first person in the competition to score.
7.   Sturmvogel 66 (submissions), the third wildcard, was the 2010 champion and a finalist last year. His writes mostly on military history, especially naval history.
8.   Bloom6132 (submissions), the fourth and final wildcard, has participated in previous WikiCups, but not reached any finals. Bloom's points are mostly thanks to did you knows, featured lists and good articles related to sport and national symbols.

We say goodbye to this year's semi-finalists.   Matty.007 (submissions),   ThaddeusB (submissions),   WikiRedactor (submissions),   Figureskatingfan (submissions),   Yellow Evan (submissions),   Prism (submissions) and   Cloudz679 (submissions) have all performed well to reach this stage of the competition, and we hope they will all be joining us again next year.

There are two upcoming competitions unrelated to the WikiCup which may be of interest to those who receive this newsletter. The Stub Contest will run through September, and revolves around expanding stub articles, especially high-importance or old stubs. In addition, a proposal has been made for a new competition, the GA Cup, which the organisers plan to run next year. This competition is based on the WikiCup and aims to reduce the good article review backlog.

There is now a thread for brainstorming on how next year's WikiCup competition should work. Please come along and share your thoughts- What works? What doesn't work? What needs changing? Signups for next year's competition will be open soon; we will be in touch. If, at this stage of the competition, you are keen to help the with the WikiCup, please do what you can to participate in review processes. Our finalists will find things much easier if the backlogs at good article candidates, featured article candidates, featured picture candidates and the rest are kept at a minimum. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 22:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks for your input on the attempt to delete TLV1. I'm just letting you know that there's a second deletion attempt, and the discussion is happening here. 1-555-confide (talk) 16:36, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

It's nice to see that you have returned again (at least temporarily) after such a long absence. Dustin (talk) 21:27, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, it's good to be back! Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 13:20, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi KsOstm, I'm asking you this because you're an Admin who deals in RMs. Recently the article 'Kačanik' was moved to 'Kaçanik', however the talk page remains at 'Talk:Kačanik'. I'm guessing this is due to a technical problem with 'Talk:Kaçanik' already existing as a Redirect page. I asked the closing admin to sort it out, he said he would but he never got round to doing it. Please could you use your admin powers and sort out this mess so that the article's talk page corresponds with the article's title. Kind regards IJA (talk) 19:30, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Cheers mate IJA (talk) 20:11, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

No problem! Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 20:12, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the strong advisory to the other party there. I was of the same mind as you, but didn't want to let it go without some kind of stern "stop it!". Cheers! --Tgeairn (talk) 00:30, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Well, I'm sorry for raining on this parade. Tgeairn, next time you see something like this, this egregious, post it on ANI, or AIV, or drop a note on the page of any poor admin who happens to be awake. Because this was vandalism: the edits were obviously intended to disrupt the project. Besides, filing a 3R report takes way too much time. (Obviously this applies to Mardochee1 as well--Mardochee, please be more clever about this next time and you'll save yourself a lot of trouble.) But Ks0stm, I don't really understand this block. I mean, sure, 3R and BATTLE, but, again, this was clearly purposeful disruption, besides pure hate speech on that awful straight person's talk page. Sorry, but I hope you see what this looks like from my point of view: an indefinite block on sight is, in my opinion, the way to go--let's see what happens if they return. Drmies (talk) 03:07, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Point taken Drmies. I'll admit that filling out a pain-in-the-arse-3RR was actually a pleasant break for me though with the other activity going on. Thanks for always bringing a level head, and I won't piddle with forms while that type of disruption happens again without just grabbing someone. Gotta see if anyone still uses IRC... Cheers Tgeairn (talk) 03:13, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Oh, it gets worse sometimes. Anyway, thanks for stepping in there. I am sure that Mardochee appreciated having some back up. BTW, do not be afraid to jump into the fray in a situation like that. In such a case any admin worth their salt will protect you, if it's such a clear case of utter disruption. And at the very least you've given the other editor moral support: believe me, but I think you know this, this means a lot. Drmies (talk) 03:19, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I think it's arguable that it could have been speedied as spam, but AFDed now Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:36, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for letting me know. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 15:48, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello--new here and looking to recreate the page for National Academy of Sports Medicine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/National_Academy_of_Sports_Medicine). Wanted to talk with you first and see why it was deleted/what I can do to improve any content that was their originally. Apologies if I'm going about this the wrong way--brand new and looking to learn, so please let me know what I can do! Xstjimmy25 (talk) 19:39, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi! From what I can tell, the main concern was that the National Academy of Sports Medicine did not meet the requirements listed at WP:NCORP, which basically states that in order to be notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia a company or organization must have been the subject of significant coverage (more than just a mention, along the lines of an article or story written about the organization) in multiple, independent sources (unconnected to the organization). This is a rather hard issue to fix; it's only fixable if you can provide those sources to establish notability. If you establish notability the other issues the article had are relatively easy to fix (just rephrasing of the article to sound less promotional, etc). If you want, provide any references you have here that you think may establish notability and I can give them a look over; if you're able to get enough to establish notability (usually three or four reliable sources will suffice) I'll be happy to undelete the article into your userspace, where you can work on fixing the other issues (which I will also be happy to help you with, if you want). Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 19:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for the quick and great response! I appreciate it very much and that helps immensely! I have been digging around looking for sources to establish notability and I have a few follow up questions for you. Do scholarly journals count towards this? Example of what I found (http://www.elementssystem.com/pdfs/Di.pdf). Second question, would articles such as these two (http://www.stack.com/2012/02/06/integrated-training/ and http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2006/02/13/daily52.html) count towards notability? I read through the requirement list that you gave me, but still was a bit unclear about these three. Looking forward to learning more and hopefully I will have enough put together for you to look at very soon.

Also, thank you for the offer to help me with the article if it get undeleted, I will definitely take you up on that! Thanks! Xstjimmy25 (talk) 23:35, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Alright, the first two articles (the scholarly journal and the stack.com article) are basically considered what we call trivial coverage, a passing mention without much substance about the organization. Trivial coverage generally does not help to establish notability. The third article, the bizjournals.com article, is much closer to what is needed to establish notability; it's more than just a passing mention, it's an actual article about the organization itself. If you could find three or four more articles like that, and preferably one of those covering the organization in depth, then notability would probably be established. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 13:46, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Great to know--that was my thought on the first couple of articles and it is good to know I was on the right track for what is acceptable and what isn't. I will look for more articles like the Bizjournal and let you know when I've found them. (Or if I don't find anything like that, will let you know as well.) Thank you very much for your help with this! Xstjimmy25 (talk) 16:48, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

No problem! Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 15:23, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey there--I found a number of articles and wanted to let you look at them to give me some feedback when you have a chance. I believe they establish notability, but I know you will be able to tell for sure after looking at them. Here they are: http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/print-edition/2012/03/02/national-academy-looking-to-certify.html?page=all; http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/print-edition/2014/06/27/entrepreneur-of-the-year-wyant-discovers-business.html; http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/2014/06/29/chandler-entrepreneur-ernst-young-award/11728327/; http://ktar.com/22/1693811/Personal-training-industry-growing-especially-among-baby-boomers; http://clubsolutionsmagazine.com/2014/06/quality-education-counts-type-certification/; http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2006/02/13/daily52.html; http://howtobecomepersonaltrainer-pft.com/best-personal-trainer-certifications/nasm-personal-trainer-certification/; http://www.exercise-science-guide.com/certifications/nasm/; http://www.livestrong.com/article/436098-top-10-best-personal-trainer-certifications/; http://www.askthetrainer.com/personal-trainer-certifications/. Let me know what you think and I will keep digging to see if I can find more articles for you to review. Thank you again for your help! Xstjimmy25 (talk) 00:06, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

@Xstjimmy25: In my opinion, the first three articles are enough to suggest notability, and some of the rest can be used to support it, even though they don't prove it themselves. I would recommend using the first three articles, especially the first one there, as your main sources for the article, using the others to add relevant facts (remember WP:NPOV; don't make it sound promotional). I recommend starting the article at User:Xstjimmy25/sandbox; let me know when you've written a draft there and I'll take a look at it. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 17:44, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi--great to hear and thank you very much for the help! I will start working on a draft and definitely let you know when I have something ready to take a look at. Thank you again! Xstjimmy25 (talk) 21:19, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

@Ks0stm: Hi there--I was wondering if you would mind taking a look at my sandbox and letting me know if I'm on the right track or not. It is no where near done yet and I'm still writing/finding references, but I feel that the framework is good enough that it is time for a first critique. Thank you very much in advance! Xstjimmy25 (talk) 18:03, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

@Xstjimmy25: I'm going to be rather busy still the next couple three days, but if I get a chance I'll take a look at it. If I haven't done so by next Monday ping me again to remind me. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 15:02, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

No worries--I'm still doing a lot of work on that page, so hopefully it will be even further along by the time you take a look at it. Will ping you on Monday if I haven't heard from you then. Have an awesome week and thank you for the help! Xstjimmy25 (talk) 16:30, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

@Ks0stm: Hello and good day! Just pinging you to let you know that I believe that I have the page in pretty good order and can't wait to hear your thoughts on it/what else I can do to make it even better. Also, I was thinking of adding logo and a few images to the page as well. Could you point me towards a guide on how to do that? Thank you again for your help! Xstjimmy25 (talk) 17:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey, sorry it's taking me so long; school is getting in the way again. I should be able to take a look in a couple hours, but again if I haven't gotten to it by Monday remind me. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 15:47, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey there--no worries at all! That is totally more important. Take your time and will ping you again on Monday if I haven't heard from you then. Thank you again for your help and good luck with your school work! Xstjimmy25 (talk) 16:06, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Alright, we'll take this one thing at a time. First of all, some of the sections sound kinda spammy...phrases like "this certification emerged as a standard" and "the industry's first comprehensive training system" just sound a bit too promotional, and the use of the ™ logo is unnecessary and makes it sound like the mark is being promoted, so make sure the draft is free from such language. Basically make sure the article complies with a strict reading of this, because since it's an article about a corporation people will be especially picky with regards to promotional sounding prose. When you've got that improved let me know and I'll take another look. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 13:22, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello--sorry for not communicating for so long--I had a bunch of personal issues come up and this kind of slid to the back of my priorities. I am picking it up again now though and wanted to let you know that I should have the updates you suggested done in the next day or so. I will let you know when that is completed. Thank you again for your help and hope you are doing well! Xstjimmy25 (talk) 16:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your block there - did you know that's a 1RR article? Dougweller (talk) 20:49, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

@Dougweller: No, I did not...I didn't even think to look. Where're the guidelines for handing this, then? Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 20:54, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Nevermind...found it and handled. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 21:10, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that a 1RR block can be given without notification. But I probably wouldn't have given it as it's pretty clear that neither had read the notices. Dougweller (talk) 10:22, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes. See Talk:Syrian Civil War/General sanctions. The sanctions and the 1RR are separate. "Editors who otherwise violate this 1RR restriction may be blocked without warning by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence." Dougweller (talk) 10:39, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Alright, well I'll keep that in mind if I ever action on a 1RR article again, but I think at this point it would be counterproductive to block any more people over this particular incident. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 13:37, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

—MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979, 21:50, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

In one month's time, we will know our WikiCup 2014 champion. Newcomer   Godot13 (submissions) has taken a strong lead with a featured list (historical coats of arms of the U.S. states from 1876) and a raft of featured pictures. Reigning champion   Cwmhiraeth (submissions) is in second place with a number of high-importance biology articles, including new FA Isopoda and new GA least weasel.   Casliber (submissions), who is in his fifth WikiCup final, is in third, with featured articles Pictor and Epacris impressa.

Signups for the 2015 WikiCup are open. All Wikipedians, new and experienced, are warmly invited to sign up for the competition. Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may also like to sign up for the GA Cup, a new WikiCup-inspired competition which revolves around completing good article reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 22:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#IPT may be puzzling to future generations who don't know what IPT is. Would it be possible to rename this to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Investigative Project on Terrorism? Though the committee is unlikely to accept, the issue may live on and have to be referred to in other places. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 19:05, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: I'm sorry, by the time I'm seeing this the case has already been archived. I have added the expanded title to the request in the list of declined requests, though, so if people search for it in the future they should be able to find it. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 17:29, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! It should help people find the declined request in the future or recall what it was about. EdJohnston (talk) 17:36, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

In regard to this report [1], I was under the impression that harassment constituted vandalism. My mistake; obviously, I won't be repeating that error again. Thanks, -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 20:47, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

@Winkelvi: No problem. Harassment/personal attacks are usually better reported to ANI; personally, though, I don't know that that rose to the level of needing a block...in that instance I would say it's probably better to just shake it off unless it's a long term, ongoing thing. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 20:52, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

I will be surprised if it goes further. Seems like a cowardly hit-and-runner to me. Thanks again, -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 20:54, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

@MatthewVanitas: Thanks for the notification, but I submitted that draft for consideration on behalf of the user who created it (they requested via OTRS), so you may want to notify them instead. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 17:23, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Ks0stm. Patrol forty has now posted about 300% more than the limit of 500 words on the GGTF evidence page, and shows no sign of stopping. It's mostly opinion and rhetoric, not evidence. Bishonen | talk 20:18, 19 October 2014 (UTC).

@Bishonen: I got rather busy with school this week, but I will take a look when I get back from class this afternoon. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 15:50, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

You don't have to, it's been taken care of. Sorry I bugged you, please do something more relaxing after class! Come frolic in Bishzilla's pocket, for example! Bishonen | talk 15:59, 24 October 2014 (UTC).

In a youtube video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4STc1r-nVs . It made me happy to see your photos on YouTube as well as Wikipedia. And it looks like they managed to press two photos together into one without making an obvious seam where the two come together. The photos appear to be File:Limenitis_arthemis_astyanax_side_view.jpg and File:Limenitis_arthemis_astyanax_in_Hot_Springs_National_Park.jpg. —Soap— 18:44, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Sweet! Thanks for letting me know! Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 15:51, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello! I would like to invite you to a Wikipedia editathon about WWI and Dissent on November 22 at the National World War I Museum in Kansas City. Join us for the U.S. branch of this international event as we write more social history from the era around WWI into Wikipedia! All editors are welcome, contributors to topics around WWI other than Dissent also encouraged! Food and drinks will be supplied by the WWI museum, Sadads (talk) 21:38, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

@Sadads: Unfortunately I likely won't be able to attend; since I attend school in Norman, Oklahoma, at this point I usually would only have a chance to make meetups that are during breaks from school. Thanks, though, and I'll stay on the list to receive future invitations. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 14:06, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Will do! I was hoping that the beginning of Thanksgiving break would give you a good opportunity to participate :P Since you are at school, have you looked into encouraging some of your professors to participate in WP:WEP? I would be very much interested in talking with you about best strategies when you next get a break. Cheers, Sadads (talk) 16:35, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

I see you handled this declination. Someone pointed out to me that it isn't listed in Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Declined_requests. I think it should be, but in case I'm missing something, I'll leave it to you.--S Philbrick(Talk) 11:54, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

That was my bad, I forgot to do the final two steps (that and removing it from the current case requests template) after I notified the parties that it was declined. Sorry about that! Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 13:56, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

The 2014 WikiCup champion is   Godot13 (submissions), who flew the flag of the Smithsonian Institution. This was Godot13's first WikiCup competition and, over the 10 months of the competition, he has produced (among other contributions) two featured lists and an incredible 292 featured pictures, including architectural photographs and scans of historical documents.   Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 and 2013 WikiCup champion, came in second, having written a large number of biology-related articles.   Casliber (submissions), WikiCup finalist every year since 2010, finished in third.

A full list of our prize-winners follows:

•   Godot13 (submissions) wins the prize for first place and the FP prize for 181 featured pictures in the final round.
•   Cwmhiraeth (submissions) wins the prize for second place and the DYK prize for 65 did you knows in the final round.
•   Casliber (submissions) wins the prize for third place and the FA prize for four featured articles in the final round.
•   Czar (submissions) wins the prize for fourth place
•   Sturmvogel 66 (submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
•   Bloom6132 (submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
•   12george1 (submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
•   ChrisGualtieri (submissions) wins the GA prize for 27 good articles in round 2 and the review prize for 28 good article reviews in round 1.
•   Caponer (submissions) wins the FL prize for three featured lists in round 2.
•   Sven Manguard (submissions) wins the FPo prize his work on featured portals.
•   Figureskatingfan (submissions) wins the topic prize for a nine-article featured topic in round 3.
•   ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the news prize for 28 in the news articles in round 3.

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have participated this year. We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 22:52, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Can you offer your opinion in this consensus discussion? I know you did this last month, but it wasn't a formal consensus discussion, but now it is. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 00:30, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Would appreciate your input on one of your Arbcom cases at User_talk:Worm_That_Turned#I_know_you.27re_busy.2C_but_.... - Dank (push to talk) 09:03, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you! (Though that does remind me that I need to update Storm Prediction Center pretty badly, especially once they change their day 4-8 convective outlooks in about a week.) Sorry I didn't get around to replying to this sooner; I looked at it when I didn't have a chance to respond and by the time I did I'd completely forgotten about it! Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 18:08, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1040 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:51, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

You did know she's currently been blocked for a week, right? John Carter (talk) 22:05, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

@John Carter: Yes, and obviously the restriction is a moot point if the case is closed before her block expires, but the restriction is intended to prevent further disruption on the case pages should the case last more than a week longer or should she be unblocked early. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 22:15, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

I should have thought of that myself. I have a feeling that it might take the arbs a while to decide which of the various approved remedies actually gets implemented. Thanks, and my apologies for implying any ignorance on your part. John Carter (talk) 22:18, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

No problem. I've been known to miss things occasionally, so it never hurts to double check! Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 22:24, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

I thought the proposed decision talk page was supposed to be used to help the Committee arrive at a final decision. Instead, the GGTF talk page seems like a case study for the Red Queen effect. No wonder the queue is so backed up. Can't this page be moderated somehow to keep the focus on direct exchanges of information with the Committee? Just wondering. No need for a Talkback tag; I will check here for a response. Ignocrates (talk) 02:50, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

@Ignocrates: In the end, the close of the case was so close at hand that it ended up not mattering as much, but you're right, we should have kept a shorter leash on that case's talk pages. We'd been trying to get some more eyes on the pages, but including me there's only about three active clerks (we usually call for more after the ArbCom elections, so this is our relatively shorthanded time of year), and between that and the Thanksgiving holiday and the end of the school semester sucking up a fair amount of time into the real world (for me, at least; I can't speak to the other clerks) we just weren't able to keep the pages as moderated as we should have. I apologize for that. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 15:04, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

@Carcharoth, Hawkeye7, Bazonka, and Fæ: I've just noticed your questions for me at my question page; they slipped past me over the Thanksgiving holiday. I currently have a final project I need to finish for one of my classes, so it may take me a couple more days to get to them, but if any of you need them answered before then let me know and I'll try to answer them tonight or tomorrow morning. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 11:38, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I hope you're not too busy to extend PC protection, are you? If so, I shall take this to WP:RPP. --George Ho (talk) 09:16, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I was pretty on the fence about whether to extend it or not since the activity has died down so much lately, but I decided to chalk that up to the offseason and extended the PC until about a month into next season...if it's still quiet by then then I'll probably let it expire, but if it starts picking up again once the season starts then it can be extended again. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 14:52, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I told the questioner I'd discuss it on my talk page, but yes, Key Lime Pie, especially from Key West, is delicious. I discovered after many decades that pecan pie is actually tasty. Dougweller (talk) 11:37, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

He's Its me, remember? now.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 19:24, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello everyone, and may we wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2015 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. We have a few important announcements concerning the future of the WikiCup.

• We would like to announce that Josh (J Milburn) and Ed (The ed17), who have been WikiCup judges since 2009 and 2010 respectively, are stepping down. This decision has been made for a number of reasons, but the main one is time. Both Josh and Ed have found that, over the previous year, they have been unable to devote the time necessary to the WikiCup, and it is not likely that they will be able to do this in the near future. Furthermore, new people at the helm can only help to invigorate the WikiCup and keep it dynamic. Josh and Ed will still be around, and will likely be participating in the Cup this following year as competitors, which is where both started out.
• In a similar vein, we hope you will all join us in welcoming Jason (Sturmvogel 66) and Christine (Figureskatingfan), who are joining Brian (Miyagawa) to form the 2015 WikiCup judging team. Jason is a WikiCup veteran, having won in 2010 and finishing in fifth this year. Christine has participated in two WikiCups, reaching the semi-finals in both, and is responsible for the GA Cup, which she now co-runs.
• The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. While it may be impossible to please everyone, the judges will make every effort to ensure that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.

If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk), The ed17 (talk), Miyagawa (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Figureskatingfan (talk) 18:54, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

I don't know if this should be mentioned in the Arbcom restrictions or not but following a request at WP:RFPP I fully protected User talk:Carolmooredc until December 1, 2015, when the editor can request reinstatement. The talk page has been used and likely will be continue to be used in ways that aren't in line with the banning policy and rather than restrict Carolmooredc alone, I thought it would be better to protect the page and encourage everyone else to move any discussions off-wiki or elsewhere. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:21, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure what past precedent is in this department, so pinging @Callanecc, Hahc21, and Guerillero: What's normally done with the user talk page or talk access when ArbCom bans a user? Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 14:32, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Usually when a user is banned or indef blocked, their user pages get deleted eventually. It's not really good to leave content hanging out there where the user can't manage it. If you look at the other user who got banned, I communicated with her and arranged her user space the way she wanted it. We should provide such courtesies to users who leave the project. Obviously CMDC is not allowed to user her talk page while banned, and if other editors want to talk about the situation, there are plenty of other on- and off-wiki venues available. Jehochman ^Talk 14:47, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

I started a discussion at WP:AN. Let's continue there. Here, because only her talk page is protected, I believe she is still able to change her user page in any manner she wishes. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:45, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Check my block-log. You may use my past situation as a guide for what should/shouldn't be done. GoodDay (talk) 02:25, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi. The top of the Proposed Decision page says that 7 votes are required, and yet you've marked Remedy 1.1 ("DangerousPanda" desysopped") as passing, even though it has only 6 votes. BMK (talk) 13:24, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Same with Findings 1 & 3. BMK (talk) 13:26, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that; I've fixed them. Perhaps I did them a little too quick for 6:45 in the morning. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 13:30, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Please see WP:GGE#Cla68 where a complaint was made about an edit by User:Cla68 at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate/Evidence. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:09, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: To be honest, I think I'm a bit confused about what the issue is (or how least how the enforcement request is related to the evidence talk edit, or why the enforcement request called the evidence talk edit a personal attack, or something). Is there something I'm missing? Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 17:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

I think User:Ryulong sees Cla68's post on the evidence talk as a personal attack. The dollars that were raised by Ryulong in a donation campaign were mentioned in previous proceedings as giving him a COI on Gamergate issues. It has been claimed that Cla68 is open to hosting comments by others as part of his evidence word limit, and Cla68 is hinting that Ryulong will take money in return for hosting evidence (though Ryulong never actually made that offer). EdJohnston (talk) 17:40, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Ahh, I was unaware of the donation campaign aspect. Alright, well, I've hatted the comments, but I'm hesitant to do anything else at this point because Cla68's comment is crafted in a way that, even if intended as a jibe, doesn't leave me with very much ground to justify further clerk action (even when combined with other comments about sharing their evidence section, etc.). Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 17:59, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, I'm sure if off-site coordination is no problem for ArbCom, why not allow GG supporters to coordinate right on the case Talk page. Save everyone the trouble for sending in links. Dave Dial (talk) 18:11, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

@DD2K: You seem to be implying that there's some greater action I should be taking. Beyond hatting exchanges like that my next available option as a clerk would be to ban Cla68 from further participation in the case, and I really don't feel comfortable doing that unilaterally in this instance. If you really feel it (or any other action beyond hatting that exchange) needs to be done you can bring it up for discussion by the clerks and arbs as a whole by emailing the clerks mailing list. Thanks, Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 18:30, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

For some reason, your 'ping' didn't work(I received no notification), but pages I edit go right to my Watchlist anywho. Anyway, my apologies. I don't envy anyone involved in handling that mess, so I guess my snark isn't needed. I'm not editing in that case, but it frustrates me that ArbCom stated a 'quick' fix was going to come if the case was accepted, which hasn't happened. So good luck, I won't make any other snarky comments. Thanks. Dave Dial (talk) 18:43, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Ks0stm, he's at it again on the workshop page [2].—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 01:35, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

• Steve, I know I'm fonder of creative solutions than other admins, and I know clerks aren't generally expected to exercise any initiative, but could you (or @Sphilbrick:) exercise just a little wrt Cla68. He's clearly taking the piss and baiting Ryulong. I'd block him if I felt it would do any good, but his other contributions to the case might actually be helpful (though whether that's luck or judgement on Cla's part I'm not sure) and I don't have any authority for any finer implements. Could you perhaps perhaps instruct him not to address Ryulong and not refer to him unless it's to present evidence or propose FoFs and remedies? The sniping and bickering is silly and is adding useless bytes to what is already an incredible wall of text. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:25, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I I-banned both cla and ruylong. --Guerillero | My Talk 03:38, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Can you explain this diff to me: [3]? Hipocrite (talk) 19:28, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Commiserations on the ArbCom results. I supported you, but hey, think of it as a lucky escape! Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:26, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

I also supported you, and want to thank you for putting your name forward. Thank you also for all the work you do here. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:40, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

I would like to to wish you the best, and hope that next time a seat opens for arbitration that you throw your hat in for it again. I believe you were one of the better candidates, and it's a shame that you were not chosen. Perhaps next time. Keep your head up, and continue editing!--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:58, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

—MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 10:38, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Round one of the 2015 WikiCup has begun! So far we've had around 80 signups, which close on February 5. If you have not already signed up and want to do so, then you can add your name here. There have been changes to to several of the points scores for various categories, and the addition of Peer Reviews for the first time. These will work in the same manner as Good Article Reviews, and all of the changes are summarised here.

Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round, and one of the new changes this year is that all scores must be claimed within two weeks of an article's promotion or appearance, so don't forget to add them to your submissions pages! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs)
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

DGG ( talk ) 19:45, 9 January 2015 (UTC)