User talk:Coren/Archives/2008/December

Acuma Incorporated

Hi, I got a message saying I'd copied from a page/site created by someone else source when in fact the other source copied this text from the Acuma Incorporated website. The text on the Acuma Inc page, Acuma Inc website and the other source are all public domain anyway, but Acuma needs to have an entry of its own, so that we can add to the currently limited info available. Thanks. 01/12/2008 acumainc Acumainc (talk) 00:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Please read the guide to requesting and formalizing permission to use copyrighted works on Wikipedia. Note that, in addition to copyright requirements, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest. — Coren ^(talk) 00:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello about the Backyard Burial page

Hey i am kind of new to this and am wondering if ive fixed the problem yet i put references on every copy righted text so can you come and see if there is still a problem

Thank you

Fightmuzik (talk) 13:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I am the author of the text found at http://www.studinchina.net/overviewofbinzho/index.html I am the owner of http://www.studinchina.net Please give the permission to the article on Binzhou University

3rd December 2008 Yann Perrot

Coperon

Dear Madam/Sir, The article is a description of the company "Coperon Technologies" and I have the permission to use the info (as available on the web www.coperon.com) within the uploaded text, Thank you, Best regards, Jessica R. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessicarahhal (talk • contribs) 12:16, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

D*Minds content

The content that is on UMC Management was created by D Style Group, who own the content. We are a client of UMC Management and they therefore post our content on their website... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamdstyle (talk • contribs) 12:18, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Alice_Cullen_(Twilight_Character)

I got the information from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_characters_in_Twilight Therefore, most information on that page must be copied. I was planning on taking information for each character from that page and creating them a page.

I also gave a source link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_characters_in_Twilight .

(This is regarding http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Cullen_(Twilight_Character) ) I have removed the tag.

--Betting On Alice (talk) 16:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

The original source moved from the main article via {{main|Alice Cullen (Twilight Character)}} into new article, hope that makes sense : ) --RedKiteUK (talk) 16:47, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Reuben and Rachel, the text is the same because they are the lryics to a song written in 1871! All lyrics are public domain. No copyright issues here. I have removed the tag.Esasus (talk) 01:35, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

I moved the page titled "Evidence" to Evidence (general) because that is what it covered. There are other pages devoted to specific types of evidence. I will, of course, change the disambiguation page to correct. Piratejosh85 (talk) 02:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

William Wayte

Your bot left a message on William Wayte indicating that it appeared to be substantially a copy of Charles Ranken. It was indeed, but only because I used the Ranken page as a template to start writing the Wayte page, since the two have somewhat similar biographies (chess-playing English reverends in the Victorian era). Krakatoa (talk) 12:15, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom

FYI, I've added two more questions to your ArbCom question list. JoshuaZ (talk) 02:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay, I've been a bit real-life busy, but I'll have plenty of time to sit down and give the new questions attention starting tomorrow evening.  :-) — Coren ^(talk) 03:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok. That's good. I still need to think a bit more about your candidacy but I think I have all the information I need to make a decision. Best of luck. JoshuaZ (talk) 23:43, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

All information on the page you found was taken from my own personal myspace page - www.myspace.com/djpariswalker - where the infomation was copied on the page you found it was used without my permission as I own the copyright on the information submitted as it is my own biography. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pariswalker (talk • contribs) 04:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Literature of Wales

Your bot sent me a message while I was changing Literature of Wales into a disambiguation page for Literature of Wales (Welsh language) - which contains the bulk of the earlier Literature of Wales article - and Literature of Wales (English language) - which is a renaming of Anglo-Welsh literature. All this follows consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wales#Literature. Hope all is OK now. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:48, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

New Cold War

The redirect for New Cold War needs to be changed from Russia–United States relations#Increasing Tensions to Russia–United States relations#Post-Cold War increasing of tensions. Thanks. Otebig (talk) 00:41, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

 Done — Coren ^(talk) 05:34, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Awesome, thank you! Otebig (talk) 07:05, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

The MR Men show UK and US versions

It seems that the US and UK versions of the mr men show cannot be on the same article, as there are some differences between the shows. I have tried to put information for the UK version on the original article, but as it kept getting deleted I chose to create two separate pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fruit.bmp (talk • contribs) 11:09, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Władysław Kowalski - disambiguation

Hello. I have received a message from Your bot about topic Władysław Kowalski I'd change. I tried to add new wiki page of another Władysław Kowalski person. There are 5 people in Polish Wikipedia. In English Wiki in topic The Double Life of Véronique person Władysław Kowalski refers to page of politician (who died before makin that film) not to page of Władysław Kowalski - actor. I've tried to add new page of Władysław Kowalski - actor, but my Wikipedia skills are poor :-/ Krystianissimo (talk) 12:05, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Robert Townson (producer), Robert Townson, Robert Tounson

I found content about a current music producer (now Robert Townson (producer)) on the page about Robert Tounson, a 17th century bishop. I therefore forked this off, converting the existing article Robert Townson, which had redieercted to the bishop to a dab page. I trust this is the correct procedure, as the bio of a living producer should not have been on the bio-stub page for the bishop. Peterkingiron (talk) 23:08, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure what is going on here. I observe that the new article has been deleted, presumably because some admin objected to it. I am not an admin, so cannot undo this. I have no view on the merits of the article that I forked off, but should it not have gone through AFD? It was not patent rubbish. Converting it to "Robert Townson" and provising a capnote referring to the bishop would also have been an acceptabl;e alternative. Peterkingiron (talk) 23:41, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

You probably want to contact the deleting admin, Black Kite (talk · contribs), who is in a better position to explain why the article was deleted. — Coren ^(talk) 02:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Donegan text

The text in question has a source and author attributed to it. Any similarities between the website and wikipedia is a result of the website reproducing the same text from the original source.

~secrowl —Preceding unsigned comment added by Secrowl (talk • contribs) 03:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Your opinion...

...regarding a potential RfA candidate is solicited at my talk page. Thanks!  Frank  |  talk  08:27, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Šāhzādé is User:Tajik

Hi, I'm writing to you because you had unblock user:Tajik. Tajik is causing wide scale disruption on Wikipedia, spreading racism [1], hate, propagandas, POVs, etc. These 8 edits by IP 84.59.205.77 will prove that user:Tajik is behind that IP and the sockpuppets. In this edit, he writes like User:Šāhzādé then, hourse later, in this edit he writes like User:Šāhzādé and User:Tajik combined. He writes "Le[t´s] see here"...in the beginning and then changes the style to "But despite Zalmay Khalilza[d’s]"... "Afghanista[n’s]"..."Mr. Khaliza[d’s]"...[2] To top it off, user:Tajik did this edit and wrote in the edit summary "info + sources added according to talk page", which is letting us know that it was he who wrote in the end of the talk page of Zalmay Khalilzad. Finally, Tajik is known for writing ā this way, see his latest signatures[3] and his other proven sockpuppet (User:Al-Fanā). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roge from What's Happening (talk • contribs) 13:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Anayansi Prado page - my bio

Hi, I just created a page for myself and got a message that my bio matched that on my site and that it can't be public. Well, since I posted it, it means that I'm OK with it. :) thanks, AP —Preceding unsigned comment added by Annieprado (talk • contribs) 02:30, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Your candidacy

I ask that you review your answers to my questions (to ensure that all of them have been addressed). 24 hours from now, I will be reviewing each candidate and preparing final votes. This is a courtesy note to make you aware that I will not look at any further answers or modifications once this time has lapsed. I apologise for an inconvenience caused, and hope that you've been adequately notified. Thank you for your time, Ncmvocalist (talk) 18:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

My lunch break today is all yours. :-) — Coren ^(talk) 13:10, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Coren

Jxc5 (talk) 00:36, 11 December 2008 (UTC) I'm new on wikipedia. I'm trying to familiarize myself by perusing the guidelines. I might have accidentally overlooked a few. I also did outside search to get the answers to the topics I was looking for.

Is there any way that I can keep/store articles (for further editing) on a certain page?

You might also have quick suggestions I can learn more quickly.

Thank you.

Michelle

Creating Profile

HI,

I was creating my company profile. But it was deleted due to copyright act. May I know what is the reason. www.integratedretail..com is my own website. What is the problem ? Why i can't created my profile ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Irmc (talk • contribs) 13:01, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

My new page for Lamar Heystek is not in violation of copyrights even though many parts of it are the same as that from the DavisWiki page because I am one of the authors for both postings. DavisWiki is a local version of Wikipedia and is not copyrightable material because it can be updated by anyone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eljfox (talk • contribs) 00:08, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Please read the guide to donating your own copyrighted material to Wikipedia. Note that, in addition to copyright requirements, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest. — Coren ^(talk) 02:44, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Healing Sixes

I am the band's publicist and have written the band's bio, fact sheet etc. and was simply posting their history and current activity as a band as a matter of information but received notice that it is too similar to language on the band's website, language that I too wrote. PLease allow the information on Healing Sixes to remain on Wikipedia. If this can't be done I guess that's fine. But would appreciate it if it can stay as is. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Awilson1098 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Please read the guide to donating your own copyrighted material to Wikipedia. Note that, in addition to copyright requirements, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest. — Coren ^(talk) 02:43, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hi Coren, question for you here. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^talk|edits 07:26, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

ARCA

Please note that Noah Charney, Director of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art, has authorized his website content to be used on wikipedia for the advancement of knowledge into art crimes and theft. Please feel free to contact Director Charney at director.arca@gmail.com with any questions you might have. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Best Regards, Jason L. Sparks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlsparks4 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Please read the guide to requesting and formalizing permission to use copyrighted works on Wikipedia. Note that, in addition to copyright requirements, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest. — Coren ^(talk) 13:29, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

History of the National Health Sevice

Hi. Just a note to say that I am trying to sort out the present article by creating separate article about the History of the NHS in England, Wales and Scotland. Initially I have moved most material to a new article (which appears similar for a few minutes!) but it will change. Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 22:51, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Jive Aces

Cirt tells me you were responsible for deleting the Jive Aces entry recently. I understand the reason given was lack of referenced articles implying insufficient notability. I have subsequently found the following, and therefore request that the entry be reinstated. Many thanks:

- http://www.retroradar.com/keely-smith-and-the-jive-aces/
- http://www.thisissussex.co.uk/entertainment/Jive-Aces-Royal-Victoria-Hall-Theatre-Southborough/article-500815-detail/article.html
- http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:jcfrxqujldse
- The International Who's Who in Popular Music 2002 (see listing for Ian Clarkson, Jive Aces frontman) http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=gZIjT8PgJMEC&pg=PA97&lpg=PA97&dq=%22jive+aces%22+encyclopedia&source=web&ots=XyV-iKS83V&sig=XrbOFgQI8UtwJwBFts2GTdDtgDs&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=13&ct=result
- a collection of past articles, none of which appear to be live any more (all archived and readable for a fee it appears) but it does at least givw the publication and date http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-4518014.html
- This confirms that they were awarded the City of Derry International Music Award http://www.derrycity.gov.uk/Press%20Releases/020507-jiveaces.htm
- http://2008.montreuxjazz.com/concerts/artists_details_fr.aspx?id=751
- http://www.tbnweekly.com/editorial/local_entertainment/concerts/content_articles/120407_leconcert-02.txt
- Newcastle Evening Chronicle http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_6783/is_2007_Jan_10/ai_n28397674
- On the bill of the BBC's Children In Need annual fund-raiser http://www.bbc.co.uk/cambridgeshire/content/articles/2006/11/07/cin_duxford_event_evening_feature.shtml
- On Hungarian TV http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LW8TwoZBaHo&feature=related
Johnalexwood (talk) 10:46, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

You can simply write a new article in your userspace (like at User:Johnalexwood/The Jive Aces) and bring it to deletion review; if notability is established, then it'll be moved to mainspace. — Coren ^(talk) 13:29, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Is there any way I can get to see the deleted article? I would like to start from there rather than reinvent the wheel Johnalexwood (talk) 18:32, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I've placed a copy in your userspace: User:Johnalexwood/The Jive Aces. — Coren ^(talk) 19:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Possible Plagiarism

Hi,

I'm not sure if your bot has caught this before, but I just discovered that a good portion of the National Storytelling Festival page has been lifted directly from the National Storytelling Festival site. (Discovered it while doing a paper for school, actually.)

I don't usually use Wikipedia, so I don't know what the procedure for taking care of this problem would be. If you could send your bot to the page or take care of it yourself, that would be great.

Thanks! 208.100.200.64 (talk) 05:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

IRISH PAGES confusion

Hi Coren - I was transferring information from the erroneously titled "The Irish Pages" to the correct "IRISH PAGES" article. I think the bot got confused in the process. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Philipknox (talk • contribs) 13:56, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for help with a distruptive editor

Hello Coren,

You gave me some advice a couple months ago on how to avoid 3RR when dealing with disruptive editors while I was temporarily blocked. I'm on the brink of the 3RR on the John McCain presidential campaign, 2008 article and do not want to violate it again, so I'm asking for your assistance because of your previous advice to me and because you're a third party. But it has more to do with just the 3RR. I've been dealing with a disruptive editor for the past few weeks who is completely unopen to compromise, revert wars, and now is !vote counting on an RFC he started only a couple days ago, amongst other things -- and I've completely lost my patience with him. I do not believe that the disruptive editor, Commodore Sloat has been exhibiting good faith for some time during this dispute (as well as other disputes on the article, but that's neither here nor there). I've been pointing this out multiple times -- admittedly snidely and with sarcasm but my patience has been thin for a while, and he regards it as personal attacks even though there's plenty of evidence. I probably should've asked for assistance sooner, but better late than never, and I'm now officially convinced that there's no appeasing csloat because he has no intention of being appeased or reaching consensus.

As I said, this is related to the John McCain presidential campaign, 2008 article, particularly the World opinion subsection. This was a section that I created as part of an enhancement effort after the election, but it was also part of compromise to a major content dispute related to an edit that csloat made which was ultimately reformatted, reduced, and moved to the end World Opinion section. Everyone from both sides of the argument over exclusion/inclusion of the material supported the compromise, except csloat. Shortly afterward, he aimed most of his interest at the rest of the World Opinion section, focusing on removing content related to polling data about world disinterest in the election. But this isn't a content dispute (or just a content dispute, rather), this is about disruptive behavior both in editing and discussion.

First and foremost, I believe there is simply no appeasing him. I've made numerous compromises, and he has made absolutely none. This is best illustrated by comparing my original version and my most recent version. Here's a list of the compromises I've made:

1. Added information about a statistically insignificant margin for Laos in the 2nd paragraph; a slight modification of one of his edits.
2. Changed the lede sentence for the 3rd paragraph since it was not sourced with a more neutrally worded lede sentence; per his request.
3. Removed any reference to "apathy" and replaced with "no opinion" in the 3rd paragraph; per his request.
4. Provided separate sources from the main source for China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Latin America because these poll results weren't specifically mentioned in the main source's summary; per his request (which I'll elaborate on shortly).

As for Csloat, he hasn't made any compromises. All he's done is remove content and claim that I'm drawing conclusions outside of source material and distorting data. Here's the diff of his first edit/content removal where he pastes over data displaying various countries' disinterest towards the election with a redundant quote (all the information was already in the section's lede paragraph). Here's the diff from his most recent edit/content removal, and here's all that's changed:

1. After having it pointed out that his pasted quote was redundant with the first paragraph, he simply removed the first paragraph.
2. After pointing out the hypocrisy of him calling poll data about China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Latin America "cherry picked" but condoning inclusion of data about the European Union, Africa, Canada, Australia, Japan, and South Korea which came from the same source, he simply removed everything and replaced the entire paragraph with his original pasted quote.
3. Per a token compromise that I never asked for and don't support, he pasted a sentence about China after the quote.

CSloat came up with multiple reasons that my contribution was against policy. The accusations would come iteratively as each subsequent accusation was either disproved or addressed, and the accusations got more far-reaching each time -- to the point where his complaint had no valid basis in any Wikipedia policy or guideline. Here's how it unfolded:

1. Claimed my contribution was original research. I explained to him that this was not original research since everything in the contribution was backed by the source.
2. He then changed to claiming that my contribution was synthesis. I explained to him that this claim has no basis since synthesis requires multiple sources.
3. He claimed that the source drew a conclusion and that my edit was contrary to it. I explained that the source didn't draw a conclusion, it merely summarized poll data; I also pointed out that article specifically said that the majority of the world expressed disinterest, which is the material he was adamant about excluding.
4. He started an RFC where he claimed that since the poll summary article is titled "World Citizens Prefer Obama to McCain by More Than 3-to-1" that citing any information that is not about this is against policy (again claiming original research). Now this is just plain ridiculous, and I flat out called it the worst and most transparent excuse that I've ever heard for exclusion of material. But since I realized that simply explaining this to him wouldn't be enough, I appeased his ridiculous claim and went and found articles that supported all of the polling statistics that he wanted excluded. I hoped that this would finally bring a close to this.

So now, he's just saying that he simply doesn't like it. His most recent post to the RFC said that there are still "multiple issues" even though he didn't bother to list any, and that I have no more valid points.

But it's more than just his overt resistance to compromise and the various reasons he's come up with for exclusion. During the dispute, when he was on the brink of violating the 3RR rule, he instead placed a totally-disputed tag on my version of the World opinion subsection multiple times; since this was obviously not true and was clearly way too severe a tag, I regarded it as vandalism and removed it each time. During his countless reverts, in the edit summaries he'd often put "per talk", claim his edit was the "consensus" when the dispute was between just us two, claim his edit was "preferred" when again it was just us two, and claim my edits were "disruptive" when his edits were the ones removing content. The last straw was an RFC that he started, with a very slanted paragraph explaining the issue. After two days and only two other opinions voiced, he counted !votes and declared consensus and unilaterally reapplied his revert -- and this was only sixteen hours after my latest version which addresses all of his stated concerns. It became evident at this point that he was not interested in compromise or consensus, he simply wanted my contribution excluded and intended to count !vote as a basis for the exclusion.

The problem is, now one the people who expressed an opinion in the RFC is engaging in the reverting as well. I don't think this person is a sock puppet, but it honestly wouldn't surprise me at all if it turned out to be one.

If you made it through this entire post, I thank you since I know it's a lot to read. But I wanted to be as clear as possible what my reason is for needing help, because this has gone on for too long and I need help since consensus and compromise have proved impossible.

Thank you, and I appreciate any help you can offer. --Amwestover (talk|contrib) 03:25, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm about to go to bed, but I'll look into this tomorrow morning (GMT-5) to see what help I can offer. — Coren ^(talk) 04:23, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

That's okay, it's late here too. I appreciate any help you can offer, and I know it's a long read but I wanted to be concise. As more easy-going Wikipedia editors remind me: there's no time limit on Wikipedia, so it can definitely wait till tomorrow. Take care --Amwestover (talk|contrib) 04:30, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, and judging from the history, this is still pretty much a straight-up content dispute. You might want to look into formal mediation, which usually does a fairly good job of helping everyone reach consensus amiably. Political topics are amongst the most difficult to reach neutrality on because of... well, the politics.  :-) MedCom can help there. It's a strictly voluntary step in dispute resolution but the most powerful one.

In the meantime, you may want to "allow" the version you are displeased with to stick around; edit warring isn't going to help resolution and may end up weakening your position (especially if you get sanctionned for it). Like you've said yourself, there is no deadline. Even if it takes a while to get mediation winded up, it'll help reach an acceptable result for everyone. — Coren ^(talk) 15:48, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Suffice to say that the above is a complete misrepresentation of my position by Amwestover -- it is such a distortion that it borders on sheer sophistry. Other editors have seen this pretty clearly, as the discussion has shown that the only other editors who have shown an interest preferred the version that I've suggested rather than Amwestover's. (And Coren is right to conclude that this is a straight-up content dispute). I've tried several times to suggest that Amwestover read such gems as WP:AGF and stick to arguing the issues rather than hurling accusations of "disruptive editing." I've been more than reasonable in the discussion, and the version that is currently in place has the virtue of being supported by consensus. That said, I'm happy to look at any new version suggested by anyone. But I implore Amwestover, please stop running around Wikipedia attacking me as some kind of disruptive editor or vandal when you know very well that neither of those things is true. If you don't want to discuss the issues in talk, please don't engage me at all. I have been very restrained about reporting your behavior -- you blatantly violated 3RR a few times now, and you have laced nearly every comment to me with sometimes vicious personal attacks, and you even filed a phony AN/I report on me and used part of your userspace to host an attack page setting up for another phony AN/I, and yet I have held back from reporting this behavior in the hopes that you would eventually realize the virtue of civil discussion. I ask you once more, please stop turning everything into an attack on my character. Thanks. csloat (talk) 18:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Guido den Broeder

A discussion of Guido den Broeder's conduct and status as an editor has begun at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ANI#Improper_use_of_MfD_page.3F

I've alerted you since you are on his "respected user" list WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 02:39, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject Outreach

WP:OUTREACH now exists in larval stage. Please visit the talkpage to help it pupate. //roux   21:42, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Caveat arbiter?

I was encouraged by your somewhat bold and certainly frank comments in the context of the recently concluded election for members of the Arbitration Committee.

In my view, your observations represented a constructive step forward in a number of on-going discussions in which too much is left unsaid. They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but I don't know that I'm quite ready for that. I admit that I liked the tone, but I'm still pondering the substance. --Tenmei (talk) 20:40, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I ran because I thought I had something to offer the community, and I still do with or without a seat on ArbCom. The holidays are catching up to us, but I expect I'll be rather active with my ideas during the next year. — Coren ^(talk) 04:32, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

The essence of judgment

Precepts on the secret of success in life drafted by Tokugawa Ieyasu from the collection of Nikkō Tōshō-gū.

In this interval between the close of Arbcom voting and whatever comes next, this could be a timely opportunity to share a bit of wisdom attributed to Tokugawa Ieyasu, the founder of Japan's Tokugawa shogunate. I modestly offer a translation of the calligraphy -- with an emphasis not in the original:

Life is like walking along a long road shouldering a heavy load; there is no need to hurry.

One who treats difficulties as the normal state of affairs will never be discontented.

Patience is the source of eternal peace; treat anger as an enemy.

Harm will befall one who knows only success and has never experienced failure.

Blame yourself rather than others.

It is better not to reach than to go too far. --Tokugawa Ieayasu, 1604

I hope this becomes helpful in the year ahead. --Tenmei (talk) 04:36, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

本当にありがとうございます. 私はそれらの賢明な言葉を探ってみる. — Coren ^(talk) 17:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Special Olympics Illinois

I got a message to her becasue of the work i am doing for Special Olympics Illinois (SOILL). I am an employee of SOILL, the Area 18 Director- Ethan C. Bontly. Since we do not have anything in Wikipedia i am working on adding information.

Please let me know what needs to be done so i can get our information in Wikipedia.

Thank you,

Ethan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prosoc3 (talk • contribs) 06:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Please read the guide to donating your own copyrighted material to Wikipedia. Note that, in addition to copyright requirements, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest. — Coren ^(talk) 14:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Notify

Don't forget to formally notify Moreschi. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:02, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Nope; him an AN/I are next. — Coren ^(talk) 15:05, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 15:25, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

how many?

I may be misunderstanding how it works, but in the motions on Moreschi, how many arbs are a majority? Tom Harrison ^Talk 15:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Over half of the acting ones on the case/motion, which in this case was 10 active, so 6 were a majority. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:26, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't 1.3 have only 5 net supports? Tom Harrison ^Talk 15:38, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Arbitration votes generally pass by raw support, not net support. The only things that net support is used for is opening and closing cases (and that uses net-four, not net-majority). Kirill 15:41, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, surprising it's not net, but however you choose to do it (but "generally"?) Anyway, thanks for checking. Tom Harrison ^Talk 15:46, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

It's strict supermajority, simply enough. The point of 6 (for ten arbs) being that even if every other arb would vote against, there would still be enough votes in favor. — Coren ^(talk) 15:48, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Right, fair point. Thanks, Tom Harrison ^Talk 16:10, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Schermerhorn Hall

WikiCU is under the GFDL (see the bottom left of their pages). Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 17:22, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

 Added to the list of known GFDL sources. — Coren ^(talk) 17:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations

You made it :) Sceptre ^(talk) 23:38, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, Coren. :) All the best, — Aitias // discussion 00:10, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, Best wishes.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:46, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Best wishes from me too, even though I opposed your candidacy. Tried to spare you the torture, but would the community heed my acts of mercy? No! :-) Anyway, do a great job. That's what everybody wants, no matter how we voted. Best of luck to you. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 09:11, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Echoing Heimstern, and though I personally disagreed with some of your positions I think you'll do well. Just keep ArbCom away from making policy and/or expanding BLP... Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 09:23, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Fez

OK, you traded in your clerk fez, not get that arb fez on! — Rlevse • Talk • 11:55, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I would have expected it to be an arb capirote!  :-) — Coren ^(talk) 14:54, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Arctiid moths

Your bot is throwing a tanrum over a bunch of arctiid moth stubs I made. :O Abyssal (talk) 15:29, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! <3

Pulley system

Sorry about that. Meant to change it and forgot. Changed it a bit but still have to edit more. Have a nice Christmas! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmendonc (talk • contribs) 19:30, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day Of Winter!

Happy First Day of Winter!

A stand of Pine trees beautifully coated in winter snow.

Wishing you a Merry Christmas, Hanukkah, or Kwanzaa!

Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Winter 2008! Mifter (talk) 17:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

If you live in the Southern Hemisphere and are entering the season of Summer not Winter then I wish you a happy First Day of Summer 2008!
To spread this message to others, add {{subst:First Day Of Winter}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Congrats on your appointment to the Arbcom and Best of Luck :)! --Mifter (talk) 17:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Mount Naeba and Naeba Ski Resort

You bot noticed the similarity between Mount Naeba and Naeba Ski Resort. I was in the middle of splitting the two articles so they did seem similar for a short time. I removed the tag.--imars (talk) 22:29, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Ping

Your Checkuser access has been granted per request at Meta. Please check your mail for validating access to checkuser-l. Thanks and best wishes. ++Lar: t/c 05:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Validate-schmalidate. Let me in! :-) — Coren ^(talk) 15:18, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Your bot

Yes, Jean-Jacques Ekindi is (right now) a substantial copy of Progressive Movement (Cameroon) (which I also wrote), but surely that is not a problem? We need articles on both, and it made sense to use the relevant content in another article as the starting point for the new one. Everyking (talk) 07:47, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about it and just axe the warning; in-wiki copy notices are there to help catch cut-n-paste moves or forgotten GFDL attributions during merges neither of which apply in your case. — Coren ^(talk) 15:21, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

weaksauce

just for clarity should I assume "weaksauce the board" = "Hobble the board"? Not a phrase I've come across - global communities are great. --Joopercoopers (talk) 15:48, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, "weaksauce" is online-gaming jargon for "make weak". Aka "Nerf".  :-) I guess sometimes my hobbies percolate through. — Coren ^(talk) 15:54, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

ScienceApologist RfAr

Comment left for you in the "Clerk Notes" section of the User:ScienceApologist request for arbitration.

JFYI.

AGK 21:01, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

WP:RFAR#user:ScienceApologist

An editor that you have been involved with in the past has been taken to WP:RFAR#user:ScienceApologist. You are welcome to express your comments at the specific RFAR case. Thank you, seicer | talk | contribs 21:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Plagiarism Bot

Just a friendly heads up that your bot hit a page I wrote with a quote from a UN Security Council Resolution. I'm removing the tag, as UNSCR is public domain and quoting substantial parts is necessary to explain its meaning. Thanks for your bots' diligence :) Bagsc (talk) 02:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Another page incorrectly tagged

Same here. Your bot hit the Initiated constitutional amendment article which is a page based on content from ballotpedia.org (which is under the GNU Free Documentation License) so is free to be used win WIkipedia under the terms of the GNU license. Removing the tag. Lestatdelc (talk) 05:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

...and another one

Hi Coren! You tagged the LP-album Revenge Of The Budgie as a substantial copy of http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~slowcoach/jstewart/disco/revenge.html. But it's mainly a track listing and a list of musicians and instruments (all taken from the actual album cover which I also reference on the page!), but no copied sentences. Not really sure what more I can do in a case like this. What do you think? Can you please remove the tag if that is OK with you? Merry Christmas! Aj-tibast (talk) 19:56, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy holidays

Thanks for making 2008 an interesting and enlightening year for me; I shall look forward to working with you on the Arbitration Committee in the coming year.
Wishing you and yours a joyous holiday season, and happiness, health and hopefulness in 2009. I trust you'll enjoy this little token, a favourite performance of Baby, it's Cold Outside, for your holiday amusement.
Best, Risker (talk) 22:25, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas from Promethean

O'Hai there Coren/Archives/2008, Merry Christmas!

Coren/Archives/2008,
I wish you and your family all the best this Christmas and that you also have a Happy and safe new year.
Thankyou for all your contributions to Wikipedia this year and I look forward to seeing many more from you in the future.
Your work around Wikipedia has not gone un-noticed, this notice is testimony to that
Please feel free to drop by my talkpage any time to say Hi, as I will probably say Hi back :)

All the Best.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk)

Re: Wheels

I have replied to at my talk page. CIreland (talk) 06:21, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Henry Scobell (disambiguation)

Your bot tagged a disambiguation page I created, based on a mirror of the page I created. Do you have any means by which you can ascertain the creation/update time of a page to determine which source came first? Jokestress (talk) 16:23, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Problem at checkuser

• Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Wiw8

You need to make clear to Caulde that checkuser cannot be used to establish innocence of sock or especially meat puppetry. He went ahead and blocked Wiw8 on very dubious logic after you ran that check. Jehochman ^Talk 21:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

You're correct that the CU conclusion has been used a little too strongly; I'll go talk to Caulde. — Coren ^(talk) 22:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I've agreed that the user can remain unblocked. Even if my assumption of good faith is wrong, I doubt this particular account could cause much trouble at this point. Thank you. Jehochman ^Talk 01:33, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

I have responded to your concerns on my talk page. Caulde 14:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

RE : Review Board

Seasons Greetings. Look like momentum seems to be waning on Wikipedia:Review Board. Just wondering about the next step forward (feedback, implementation, etc) for this proposal. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 01:21, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

feedback requested at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Committees

Hi, if you have time, I'd appreciate any feedback on a slightly crazy idea I had at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Committees. It's related to the Arbitration Committee. Thanks! rootology (C)(T) 18:34, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge!

On 24 December I listed Frank Anchor as a suspected sock puppeteer using Baseballfan789, NewYork483 and Busta Baxta as his socks. Shortly thereafter Rvelse confirmed Baseballfan789, NewYork483 and Ben1283 as socks, but listed Busta as being “Stale”. As a result, you blocked Frank for two weeks and the confirmed puppets indefinitely.[4] Subsequent to this, Busta has suddenly reappeared, after a five month hiatus, to revert the notification of his alleged sockness from his talk page[5] and has begun editing BCS controversies, a page created by Frank[6]. This is clearly a case of a blocked user attempting to evade sanction. (Busta has only made 21 edits total with six of the first seven being to award Frank a barn star.) Would you recommend that I resubmit this case or is what I have previously submitted sufficient to act upon? Prost! Hammersbach (talk) 19:49, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Both confirmed and dealt with. — Coren ^(talk) 22:51, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Your proposed motions Re:TTN on WP:RfArb....

...are really one sided, I'm disappointed to say. As I said in my statements, this is an attempt to have ArbCom Rid them of this meddlesome TTN. He is acting specifically within the purview of his previous editing sanctions, and is being attacked because he's so successful. The community agrees with his action (look at the percentage of his AfD's that are closed as merge or delete). Meanwhile, the other side is Trying to unilaterally change Wikipedia policy and edit warring those changes multiple times over months. I hope you will restrict these folks from bringing these cases to ArbCom and tell them to not come back. SirFozzie (talk) 19:44, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I tried to make the case that (a) what TTN is doing isn't wrong, and (b) he should be a little more receptive to discussion. I think it's pretty clear by now that ArbCom is most definitely not "getting rid of" TTN, and I strongly feel a motion making explicit that what he's doing is not outside of policy was needed. If you feel another point also needs to be made, I'm all ears and will try to work it in if it's appropriate. — Coren ^(talk) 21:55, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

My response to your proposals is here.—Kww(talk) 22:10, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

The truth is that the community does NOT agree with his actions, which is why we have had three requests for clarification on his arb sanctions since the Episodes and characters 2. If AfD is for deletion and only c. 20% have been deleted then that is further proof that the community does not agree with him, because if it did, then they would not go with redirects or merges. He is calling for deletion and closes as redirects and merges is NOT in agreement with him. The other problem is that many of his nominations are dishonest. He uses that same copy and paste bot like post for pretty much every nomination that always claims sources don't exist, even when they do, and will apply the same copy and paste nomination to a main character who appears in multiple works of fiction as a one time character, i.e. an indiscriminate and misleading approach to nominations. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 22:30, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth: patience is a virtue. I have finished formulating the motions to address the "other side" of the dispute. — Coren ^(talk) 22:43, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I strongly urge a motion that he at least be expected to provide accurate nomination rationales. In the following examples in which I commented and helped rescue articles he nominated notice that they all have the same worded nomination rationale despite different qualities of articles: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eddie Quist (relatively easy to find and add secondary sources and to improve the article), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Corvin (again same worded nomination for a different character with different kinds of notability and for which we were able to rescue it), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mesogog (another instance in which sources turned up and again for which the character had different notability than the previous two examples, yet same wording of nom), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Auraya of the White (not able to get a keep closure, but a merge which is not what the nomination asked for and yet the nomination as does all of his has the same copy and paste as the other examples), etc. He has over 400 nominations with the same wording. Some close as keep, some as merge, some as redirect, some as delete. The fact that they have such variety of outcomes and any objective comparison of these articles will see that some of the claims don't even apply suggests an indiscriminate if not misleading approach to these nominations, rather just going through categories of various works of fiction and nominating all of the fictional characters listed in those categories (one day its godzilla monsters, another day Underworld characters, etc.) regardless of main characters versus one off characters and regardless of availability of sources. Furthermore, even some of those that did close as delete have rather baffling closes, such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rubber-Band Man (Static Shock). Where is the consensus to delete rather than merge that article from that discussion? Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 22:50, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Jean Luc Cornille Article

Hello We wrote and own site Jean Luc Cornille is owner of Science Of Motion. Permission is given for his biography and articles to be used on Wiki. Permission given by Jean Luc Cornille .

(....) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypasha (talk • contribs) 03:53, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:Closed RFA case page

Show me the rule, please. You can revert me I suppose, but it's disrespectful to make up rules to support it and then think it likely I'll believe this. If the case is having its name changed, my statement is no longer relevant and its historically misleading to leave it there as it looks like I'm opening a case about eastern European matters in general, when I wasn't. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 05:48, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Responded on your talk. — Coren ^(talk) 06:33, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

That statement is a claim about the rules, not actually proof that the rule exists. It nevertheless fails to say that I can't remove my own comments, or that I can't remove my comments if the case is changed post facto, which I think is quite important since there is a natural expectation that I should be able to do so unmolested. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 06:35, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

If the topic of a case is changed, it should be transparent that it has changed [of which there is no guarantee] and I am entitled to object to my own comments remaining in a case page different from the one they were inserted to. Likewise, if you re-posted my comments into, say, the PHG case, I'd be entitled to object to this, as it would be both historical misrepresentation of the comments and misrepresentation of myself. To stop me preventing this, Coren, you are 1) synthesizing different written prescriptions to form a new prescription suitable to this new particular circumstance and 2) presenting some written prescriptions as proof of being rules. While this is reasonable, it is not convincing and certainly doesn't allow you to state Those are rules, not suggestions since clearly they are the latter without clearly being the former. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 06:55, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

You don't think I am being reasonable? I think I'm being very reasonable. I am just arguing after all, I don't have the authority to do anything [expected to be] binding in this matter. 2008-17 would clearly be better than something meaningful as it wouldn't mislead about my opening statement. In truth, it is obvious that it is not good practice to allow arb cases to be named as they are (anything the filer decides), given their publicity, and I think it is being realised slowly, via rename requests like this one, that this will have to change in principle. If it does, that would be great, but it hasn't yet! This whole nonsense reveals another reason why it ought to be. It is unreasonable to have my comments under a heading irrelevant to the topic being addressed as it misrepresents my comments and indirectly impersonates me (not to a select few, like yourself, of course, who will know all the history, but to others).

Anyways, I expect by the time you awake Coren it is very likely one of your more experienced or haughty arb colleagues to be will have sent you an email which, in essence, will be some elevated variation of meta:What_is_a_troll?#Not_feeding_the_trolls. It is obviously easier and less stressful to not discuss things publicly than to do so. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 07:17, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

That's not what I said, Coren. Moving on ... what isn't reasonable is to act like a bunch of computers and present ossified bureaucratic rigidity when faced with every change and problem. That's worth combating for its own sake. And by the same token as your own assertion, making a mountain out of a mole hill is making a big deal of whether my arb statement should be there or not. All that counts for you as either a clerk or an admin are the remedies and FoFs. Fundamentally, because the rest of the case is historic, no-one can actually change the name, and so if the entry name is changed it is no longer an accurate record of the case. So if I want to worry about the history because forces outside my control force this, i.e. when someone else changes the name, I don't see why it should bother you. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 17:31, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Matt Lee new DRV

This is a courtesy notice as you were involved in AFD, DRV or CSD's regarding various Matt Lee articles you may want to comment on the new DRV. Also, if you haven't already, you may also want to check out Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Redirect question and "Need history check for Matt Lee" ANI thread. Thanks. Soundvisions1 (talk) 18:13, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Ring out the old,
and Ring in the new.
Happy New Year!
From FloNight

And a merry Ding! Dong! to you too.  :-) — Coren ^(talk) 22:14, 31 December 2008 (UTC)