Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 31 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

		Leaderboard Award—5k articles—3rd Place (tied)
		This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Basalisk for copy editing five articles of 5000 words or more during the GOCE November copy edit drive. Thank you for your efforts. -- Dianna (talk)

		Leaderboard Award—Word Count—3rd Place
		This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Basalisk for copy editing articles totalling 61441 words during the GOCE November copy edit drive. Thank you for your efforts. -- Dianna (talk)

		Leaderboard Award—Number of articles—2nd Place
		This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Basalisk for copy editing 44 articles during the GOCE November copy edit drive. Thank you for your efforts. -- Dianna (talk)

		The 10k Copy Edit Barnstar
		For the following amazing copy editing: List of Imortal episodes (16,596 words) during the November 2011 backlog elimination drive. --Dianna (talk)

		Special Barnstar: Largest Single Article
		This Special barnstar is awarded to Basalisk for courageously editing the largest single article during the Guild of Copy Editors' November 2011 backlog elimination drive – List of Imortal episodes (16,596 words). Your contributions are highly appreciated! – Dianna (talk)

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		This barnstar is awarded to Basalisk for copy editing articles totalling 61441 words during the GOCE November copy edit drive. Thank you for your efforts. -- Dianna (talk)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:34, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors November 2011 backlog elimination drive report Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors November 2011 Backlog elimination drive! We would like to thank all who participated in this drive. Here is the end-of-drive report. Participation There were 48 editors who signed-up for this drive, of which 35 participated. Thank you to everyone who helped reduce the size of the backlog! Progress report During the drive, we reduced the backlog by 232 articles, or by about 6%. This is a two percent increase from our September drive, when we copy edited 4% of the backlog. We were successful in our primary goal of clearing the oldest three months—March, April, and May 2010—from the queue. Thanks to all who helped copy edit these difficult articles. Thus far we have reduced the copy edit backlog by 5086 articles, or by about 61%. End-of-drive results and barnstar information can be found here. Coordinator election The term of our second tranche of coordinators has run out, and we will be accepting nominations from December 5, 00:01 UTC to December 15, 23:59 UTC. If you or any other member of the Guild of Copy Editors wishes to be a coordinator, add your name to this page along with a statement describing why you believe you should be a coordinator for the Guild. You must be able to commit to a six month term. Thanks! Once again, thank you for participating in the Guild's November 2011 Backlog elimination drive! Our next drive will be in January, and we hope to see you there! Your drive coordinators – Diannaa, Chaosdruid, The Utahraptor, Slon02 and SMasters

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 08:15, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Elahrairah. You have new messages at Ambelland's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

This was very questionable. As the nominator, attempting an unsigned supervote in a comment box rings wrong. I have no opinion on the AFD, but you should not have written that, especially unsigned, especially in a magic box. Hipocrite (talk) 13:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concern. I put the comment box at the top simply because a lot of the keep !votes are copy-pastes from the previous discussion and I wanted any potential closing admin to be aware of this (especially seeing as the previous closer apparently did so without even comparing the discussion to policy). I absolutely intended no deceit regarding a signature, I didn't think to sign it. However, I will do so now that you have raised the concern. Do you have any other concerns? Regards Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 14:19, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It's not neutral. I'm rewriting it as a disinterested individual - perhaps you can see what makes my version different than your version. Hipocrite (talk) 14:22, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say I disagree with you – there is no requirement that such a notice be neutral to the debate. I also consider myself to be a "disinterested individual". Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 14:32, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You nominated the article for deletion. You don't want it deleted? The nominator should not attempt to supervote. Hipocrite (talk) 14:33, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want a delete or a keep. What I want is for the closing admin to act on consensus and policy, not a democratic vote. I can't possibly be so-called "supervoting" as a deletion discussion is not a poll; I was instead drawing attention to why the discussion was re-opened. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 14:40, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You !voted delete. You sure you don't think the article should be deleted? Hipocrite (talk) 14:41, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You know what, you're right. I do think that WP policy dictates the article should be deleted. However, there is no requirement that any notice on a deletion discussion should be neutral (see the canvassing notice above it) and you are out of line removing the notice I placed. If you want to raise your concerns or introduce a notice of your own, that's fine, and I can't stop you from doing so just to make a WP:POINT. But the notice I placed there was valid (particularly in light of the previous discussion). Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 14:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• This 2nd AfD was unwise to bring so soon after a strong keep close. I would ask that you consider opining a wish to withdraw your nomination without prejudice to renomination in six months. The AfD is a waste of editor resources. Cheers.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 02:56, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I hear what you're saying, and I realise that the new AfD was a controversial move, but I would like to mention (for the nth time) that I only did so because I felt the previous one was closed incorrectly. I'd also like to point out that I floated the idea at ANI first, and only proceeded after some editors showed support for another discussion. I wasn't part of the original discussion and so I don't see this as me flogging a dead horse – this is the first time I've been involved, and I acted in good faith. For those reasons, I'd prefer to let the discussion run its course and close according to due process. I won't be withdrawing the nomination (particularly as there is some significant opinion to delete; a withdrawal would be unfair on those editors), but you're welcome to ask for an early close in the discussion. Regards Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 12:18, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If it wouldn't cause more drama, I would NAC IAR close now as inevitable no consensus. A withdrawal would only be symbolic but would help get the discussion over with. All time spent on AfD is overhead to the project, so its nice to make it efficient when we can. But, thanks for your response.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 14:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	The Civility Barnstar
	I've been loosely following the whole Occupy Marines debacle, and I think your level-headed calm has been very impressive given the tone of the conversation and some of your opponents. I'd probably have gone nuts by now. Keep it up! ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 18:47, 13 December 2011 (UTC) [reply]

After the warning you gave this user I had hoped he would refrain from further personal attacks, sadly he has not. [1] Says I am biased and am pushing an agenda. [2] Says he was right to call me a vandal and another accusation of bias and also that I am editing in bad faith, would you please warn him again to desist from this behaviour. Darkness Shines (talk) 23:39, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've had another word with him about his trigger-happy use of vandalism accusations, but apart from that I don't think he's been uncivil in that discussion. Be careful about your reverts too – I haven't read through all the diffs but you seem to be determined to remove some of his edits which are well sourced (one such statement is sourced to the Guardian newspaper in the UK, certainly a reliable source). If you feel you need input from other editors then see here for options. Regards Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 23:59, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's it, really. It jus amused me and I wanted to say so. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:54, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers bro! Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 01:02, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See [3]. Yworo (talk) 03:02, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No wikihounding. No interaction with Yworo. Just a simple correction to an article, and even an invitation on the talk page for anyone to discuss. As usual, Yworo goes into a knee-jerk rage because someone disagrees with him. 24.163.38.235 (talk) 03:21, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edits clearly fit the description of Wikihounding due to expression of perceived slights, the "errors" "corrected" are not unambiguous, and the hounding is being accompanied by tendentiousness, edit warring, personal attacks like just above and at AN/I. Yworo (talk) 04:06, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Basalisk, regarding your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Santi Bonfanti, I had relisted the discussion 20 minutes prior. I did this because, while only the nominator was arguing for deletion, the nominator brought up valid points that have not been addressed. The deletion concern is whether or not the subject has received significant coverage in reliable sources. No sources were presented by the keep !voters to meet this concern, nor did the comments even clearly establish the subject's notability. Could you please undo the closure and allow further comments to establish clearer consensus. Thank you, Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 03:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. To be completely honest I'm trying to learn the ropes regarding non-admin closures. I'm bound to make a few mistakes but I'll be more useful for it! I've relisted the discussion...but I'm not too sure I've done it correctly. Really sorry if I've made a hash of it, I'll be more careful in future. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 03:17, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...yeah, I did make a balls up of it. Sorry about that. Back to school for me...Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 03:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem, everyone makes mistakes. I corrected the relist for you. Keep up the good work. Best wishes, Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 03:25, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: A very civil exchange here, gents, that does credit to you both. I noticed this as it was happening and thought about saying something, as I had a vote-cum-noxious blast I wished to interject, and now that you've given me the chance, I hope you don't regret it (too much). --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 01:09, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to know why you proposed the article List of accolades received by Bodyguard (2011 Hindi film) for deletion. -- Karthik Nadar 07:34, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I PRODed the article because it appears to be an obscure list of information, which is discouraged by wikipedia guidelines. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 07:39, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then what about this article List of accolades received by Lage Raho Munna Bhai? The list is just the start, and is set to expand and become a huge page within few months after few more awards. -- Karthik Nadar 07:44, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. Feel free to PROD the second list as well; you'd have my support. Regards Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 07:47, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then what about this one List of accolades received by Avatar, a featured article? I'm just clarifying my doubts. -- Karthik Nadar 07:54, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again, see WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. Feel free to PROD the Avatar list article if you want. As an aside, the original list article was just speedied for a completely different issue (blatant copyvio) Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 07:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article was surely not a copy vio. The website which you referred as copy vio had instead copied from Wiki page. The copy-vio corenbot says that it's okay if the text is copied from Wiki. -- Karthik Nadar 07:58, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may or may not be correct, but I'm the wrong person to raise the issue with as I neither tagged the article as a copyvio nor actually deleted it. It was tagged by a bot and deleted by the patrolling admin; you'll have to take it up with him. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 08:01, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would take a look at this myself to try and clear it up, but since the article has already been deleted I don't have access to it I'm afraid. The admin who deleted it is User:Guerillero so you could ask him about it. Be nice! He's just doing his job. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 08:03, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm sorry in case you felt me a little rude. But I was just seeking for justification, because this is not the alone list article for accolades. Cheers! -- Karthik Nadar 08:21, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problems man. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 08:23, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Basalisk. I am just letting you know that I deleted The samoyed, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Guerillero | My Talk 07:36, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Couldn't make up my mind to be honest. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 07:50, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Long days happen, they can get the best of us. =)

The research was, of course, easy - the dupe detector found a link. It wasn't entirely a line by line duplicate, as it omitted certain data, but it's close enough to criteria for copyvio that it's reasonable.

Have a good night, and a safe and happy holiday. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 07:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors Elections are currently underway for our third tranche of Guild coordinators. The voting period will run for 14 days: 00:01 UTC, 16 December – 23:59 UTC, 31 December. All GOCE members, as well as past participants of any of the Guild's Backlog elimination drives, are eligible to vote. There are five candidates vying for four positions. Your vote really matters! Cast your vote today.

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 10:21, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

JV was warned by an admin a couple of hours before launching that attack on me. By the way do you notice a similar editing pattern with any other participants in the talk page. I'm specifically thinking of someone trying to needle. Interested to hear your thoughts. Wee Curry Monster talk 21:14, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 03:03, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I didn't mean to call you a dick, though it may have looked that way. I'm sure you can deduce which editors I may have been talking about, though. Not sure it makes a difference, but hope you feel less attacked. Happy holidays :). -Kai445 (talk) 21:05, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The block was for personal attacks, and I don't see that in the comments you linked. I was going to leave a "this is your only warning" message, but I see nothing objectionable here, so I suspect that nothing will happen. Have a happy Christmas! Nyttend (talk) 17:19, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for closing that thread. That was very awkward. Thanks also for assuming my good faith in the end. Debresser (talk) 15:05, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, we all make mistakes (hence why my signature invites readers to "inspect damage"). Happy holidays Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 15:08, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have been muffled from the discussion page so I cannot really defend myself against the darkness (the user darkness shine) so let me have my say please the user has also attacked others calling them "dimwits" and reverted more 10 times today as have I so if justice is to be done we both should be blocked or warned or whatever the admins do to punish cheers again 109.150.60.235 (talk) 16:44, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors 2011 Year-End Report We have reached the end of the year, and what a year it has been! The Guild of Copy Editors was full of activity, and we achieved numerous important milestones in 2011. Read all about these in the Guild's 2011 Year-End Report. Highlights Membership grows to 764 editors, an increase of 261 Report on coordinators' elections Around 1,000 articles removed through six Backlog elimination drives Guild Plans for 2012 Requests page report Sign up for the January 2012 Backlog elimination drive! Get your copy of the Guild's 2011 Year-End Report here On behalf of the Guild, we take this opportunity to wish you Season's Greetings and Happy New Year. We look forward to your support in 2012! – Your 2011 Coordinators: Diannaa (lead), The Utahraptor, and Slon02 and SMasters (emeritus).

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 05:53, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Elahrairah. You have new messages at WhatamIdoing's talk page.
Message added 17:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Probably, but I need to cogitate a tiny bit on the matter first and try some crossref in other venues - it does no good if I go off in the wrong direction at the very beginning. MSJapan (talk) 02:47, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing the redirect.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 06:35, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 06:36, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From what I read of this message board, can I ask that, are you a member of Wikipedia's Guild of Copy Editors? If you are, any chance you can copy edit Startling by Each Step, to see if further grammar check is needed? --NeoBatfreak (talk) 06:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get right on it. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 06:46, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 06:49, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Let me know if there are any problems. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 07:17, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, no problem at all. Thank you very much.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 20:33, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As asked above. If it is a problem with the name having the word "crisis", then I accept that the name could be changed to replace the term "crisis" with "dispute". Whether it is the "crisis in the Strait of Hormuz" or the "Strait of Hormuz dispute", it is still a serious issue that has recently erupted - US, British, French, and Russian naval forces entered the Persian Gulf area this weekend and multiple government officials from the US, China, and other states have responded to the events happening in the Persian Gulf. Iran's recent military exercises in the Gulf and threats to attack US forces should a US aircraft carrier enter the region have aggravated the US.--R-41 (talk) 22:46, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]