User talk:FormerIP/Archive5

Fascism

I wasn't aware edits to the fascism page weren't welcome without prior approval. The edit I made was heavily sourced including original source document transcriptions of speeches from Lenin & Trotsky. Since I'm a newbie I'm hoping you'll share some advice with me as to the correct method for submitting edits to that topic. cheers, User:kckranger

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Jerusalem 2, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, --WGFinley (talk) 18:48, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

ITN/C - January 3

	The Yakov Smirnoff award for ITN/C headers
	In ru:wikipedia section header laughs at you! LukeSurl t c 23:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

RfC

Talk:Jerusalem/Mock RfC was also an unsuitable name so I have moved it to User:FormerIP/sandbox. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:20, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Hebephilia article

Hello, FormerIP. Do you mind weighing in on this discussion to better explain a revert you made. Flyer22 (talk) 20:58, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Jerusalem RfC discussion: rounding up step one

Hello. This is a boilerplate message for participants in the moderated discussion about the Jerusalem RfC - sorry for posting en masse. We have almost finished step one of the discussion; thanks for your statement and for any other contributions you have made there. This is just to let you know I have just posted the proposed result of step one, and I would like all participants to comment on some questions I have asked. You can find the discussion at Talk:Jerusalem/2013 RfC discussion#Judging the consensus for step one - please take a look at it when you next have a moment. Thanks — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 17:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Discussion you were involved in.

Hi, FormerIP.
FYI, there has been a report at AN/I regarding a discussion you were in: ANI#User:Jokestress at Talk:Hebephilia
— James Cantor (talk) 23:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't have the time right now, sorry, but I'll comment tomorrow if the discussion is still ongoing. Cheers. Formerip (talk) 23:58, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Jerusalem RfC discussion: step two

Hello. This is to let you know that we have now started step two in the Jerusalem RfC discussion, in which we will be deciding the general structure of the RfC. I have issued a call for statements on the subject, and I would be grateful if you could respond at some time in the next couple of days. Hope this finds you well — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 16:34, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case

Hey, FormerIP. I'm alerting you of this case, which now goes by a different name, in case you aren't aware of it. Why you weren't contacted about the case has also been queried. Flyer22 (talk) 18:20, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Crime victims and perpetrators

Hi, FormerIP. Per our previous discussions here and here, I was wondering if you might take a look at another proposal I've posted on my talk page and offer any comments or suggestions: User talk:Location#Crime victims and perpetrators. I thought it might be helpful to get some feedback from someone I've worked with previously before going "live" with it. Thanks! Location (talk) 05:43, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Jerusalem RfC discussion: step two question

Hello everyone. I have asked a question about having drafts versus general questions at the Jerusalem RfC discussion, and it would be helpful if you could comment on it. I'm sending out this mass notification as the participation on the discussion page has been pretty low. If anyone is no longer interested in participating, just let me know and I can remove you from the list and will stop sending you these notifications. If you are still interested, it would be great if you could place the discussion page on your watchlist so that you can keep an eye out for new threads that require comments. You can find the latest discussion section at Talk:Jerusalem/2013 RfC discussion#Step two discussion. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 04:43, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. This is just a quick message to let you know that unless there is significant ongoing discussion, I intend to wrap up step two in a few days, probably on Thursday 31st 28th February. I invite you to have a look at the discussion there, especially at question five where I have just asked a question for all participants. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 13:37, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Recent issue related to the Flag of Western Sahara

Hello,

Recently, a major change was made on the article Flag of Western Sahara, by merging it with Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic .

Since you participated to the RfC discussion on Talk:Flag_of_Western_Sahara, you might be interested by a related discussion on ANI or, at least, you might be interested in participating to the recently launched discussion on Talk:Flag of Western Sahara.

Regards,
--Omar-toons (talk) 08:16, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "Microsoft Office 2013".

Guide for participants If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form. What this noticeboard is: It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction. What this noticeboard is not: It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct. It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums. It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN. It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy. Things to remember: Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors. Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion. Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page. Sign and date your posts with four tildes "~~~~". If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage. Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! Death of Mido Macia The article you nominated for the front page section In The News will almost certainly not be posted there, but there is support for you nominating this for Did You Know. μηδείς (talk) 21:47, 4 March 2013 (UTC) Jerusalem RfC remarks Hi FormerIP. I noticed the exchange between you and Tariqabjotu yesterday, and I thought I ought to leave a comment here about it. Although I doubt you meant anything bad by it, I think Tariqabjotu was right to bring up[1] your mention of "stalling tactics"[2]. This is another one of those situations where labelling things can result in misunderstandings - what seems like stalling to one person can seem like honest debate to another. It's probably best not to use these kinds of words in the discussion, as people are likely to interpret them in ways that you didn't intend. If, on the other hand, you are worried about conduct issues in the discussion, it would be better to bring them up on my talk page or to email me about them. That will allow the discussion to progress without editors becoming distracted by conduct issues. I hope this makes sense, but please do ask if you have any questions about it. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 02:23, 9 March 2013 (UTC) Coat of arms of Western Sahara/SADR Hello, There's a discussion you might be interested in at Talk:Coat_of_arms_of_the_Sahrawi_Arab_Democratic_Republic#Move?. Regards, --Omar-toons (talk) 22:08, 13 March 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for March 14 Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Julian Cope, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gwent (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC) Six Nation - thanks I thought this overview you did was good and much-needed.--A bit iffy (talk) 09:45, 17 March 2013 (UTC) RSN As a regular contributor to RSN, whose opinions I respect, but don't always agree with, I'd appreciate your thoughts on this Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Colombo.2C_Rose.2C_Fight_Back_Legal_Abuse:_How_to_Protect_Yourself_From_Your_Own_Attorney. At this point, one uninvolved person has commented, but I prefer to have more than one uninvolved person comment under the circumstances, so as to get a clear consensus one way or the other. Thanks. Fladrif (talk) 22:13, 17 March 2013 (UTC) Jerusalem RfC discussion: step three Hello all. We have finally reached step three in the Jerusalem RfC discussion. In this step we are going to decide the exact text of the various drafts and the general questions. We are also going to prepare a summary of the various positions on the dispute outlined in reliable sources, per the result of question nine in step two. I have left questions for you all to answer at the discussion page, and I'd be grateful for your input there. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 08:53, 20 March 2013 (UTC) AFD - Legal abuse Thanks for your comment at RSN related to the sole source for this article. I've gone ahead and filed Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Legal_abuse. Fladrif (talk) 17:43, 20 March 2013 (UTC) Re. Margaret Thatcher ITN You spoke in favour of including Margaret Thatcher's death on ITN, but that you were "indifferent" to the nomination itself. Is this because you found the nomination to be of noticeably poor quality? Or were you referring to the brevity of the blurb itself? If both, would you mind explaining where I went wrong so I can post a better ITN candidate in the future? Thanks. Kurtis (talk) 12:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC) I was just making a jokey comment, safe in the knowledge that the nomination was a shoo-in. There's nothing wrong with the nomination. Formerip (talk) 12:28, 8 April 2013 (UTC) Oh! OK, just making sure. =) Kurtis (talk) 12:29, 8 April 2013 (UTC) Capital OED OED is behind a paywall and I am curious. How does OED define "capital"? tnx --Ravpapa (talk) 13:44, 14 April 2013 (UTC) "The chief town or city of a country". This my own dead tree desktop version. I think it also shows the pitfalls of going off a dictionary definition, because they are not always very good. By that definition, California must be a country, because it has a capital. Formerip (talk) 15:52, 14 April 2013 (UTC) ... and that Los Angeles, and not Sacramento, would be its capital. --Ravpapa (talk) 19:02, 14 April 2013 (UTC) Indeed. I guess a matter for debate would be the meaning of "chief". Does it mean "biggest", "most politically powerful" or just the place where the chief hangs out? To complicate it further, Google maps tells me there are three towns in the US that are actually called Chief...Formerip (talk) 19:15, 14 April 2013 (UTC) YMMV Thanks for the laugh! They confuse me too, but I'm pretty sure it's "yet more monotonous verbiage". Writegeist (talk) Jerusalem RfC step three comments Hi FormerIP. This is just a reminder not to let yourself get worked up about comments made in the Jerusalem RfC discussion. I can understand why you wrote this comment, but comments like this that focus on the contributor are really not going to solve anything, and in fact will usually only serve to escalate matters. You're welcome to vent all you want, but only if you do it to me, in private, by email. :) I'd prefer to keep all commenting on contributors off the RfC discussion page. Even if it's not a vent, feel free to email me with any conduct issue you notice on the discussion page, however small, and I will take a look at it. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 04:20, 15 April 2013 (UTC) Request for clarification regarding Jerusalem RFC A request for clarification has been submitted regarding the ArbCom mandated Jerusalem RFC process. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:32, 29 April 2013 (UTC) right-wing I am sure your removal of the paragraph on the use of "right-wing" in Europe and the U.S. was well-intentioned, but the use was supported by direct quotes from the sources. I've removed the wedge-brackets so the quotations are more easily available: The use of the phrase right-wing differs from region to region. In Europe, the phrase is usually used to describe racist and anti-immigration policies.(ref)http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library/139345/Fighting%20Poverty%20in%20the%20U.S.%20and%20Europe%20A%20World%20of%20Difference%20EdGlaeser.pdf "Modern right-wing European politicians play up their opposition to immigrants or other ethnic minorities."(/ref) In the United States, right-wing is used to describe libertarians, anti-communists, and religious conservatives.(ref)Sara Diamond, Roads to Domination: Right-Wing Movements and Political Power in the United States, p. 7, "Libertarianism, anticommunist militarism, and traditionalism have been the three pillars of the US Right.", The Guilford Press, 1995, ISBN: 978-0898628647(/ref) Is your objection that, while each source gives a different definition, neither says the usage is different in the two areas? If so, I'll add a source that says that explicitly. Rick Norwood (talk) 14:02, 4 May 2013 (UTC) That's part of my objection, but also neither of the sources support the statements "the phrase is usually used..." or "right-wing is used...". They are just examples of usage. Formerip (talk) 14:25, 4 May 2013 (UTC) Reconsider ITN on RoboBee? In your oppose you imply that coverage should be a significant factor in how we judge whether a particular invention\scientific development is important or not. In response, I have provided a list of coverage from around the world. For what it is worth, I write a fair number of those stories about interesting new inventions (most of which never are nominated at ITN). This one has the most press coverage I've seen. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:11, 4 May 2013 (UTC) I'm not going to reconsider, but I'll post a reply. Formerip (talk) 22:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC) Fair enough, thanks for your input. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:24, 5 May 2013 (UTC) Jerusalem RfC discussion: finalising drafts Hello. We have almost finished step three of the Jerusalem RfC discussion, but before we move on to step four I would like to make sure that all the participants are happy with the drafts that we have chosen. The content of the drafts are likely to dictate what ends up in the actual article, after all, so I want to make sure that we get them right. So far, there hasn't been much interest in the process of choosing which drafts to present to the community, and only three editors out of twenty submitted a drafts statement. I have used these three statements to pick a selection of drafts to present, but we still need more input from other participants to make sure that the statements are representative of all participants' wishes. I have started discussions about this under question seven and question eight on the RfC discussion page, and I would be grateful for your input there. Also, there have been complaints that this process has been moving too slowly, so I am going to implement a deadline. If there haven't been any significant objections to the current selection of drafts by the end of Wednesday, 8 May, then I will move on to step four. Questions or comments are welcome on the discussion page or on my talk page. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Tokyo I've added the discussion. Simply south...... eating shoes for just 7 years 12:14, 12 May 2013 (UTC) OK thanks. I'm not really sure if I have a view, but new items to that list do need a discussion. Formerip (talk) 12:20, 12 May 2013 (UTC) Jerusalem RfC discussion: step four Hello everyone. We are now at step four of the Jerusalem RfC discussion, where we will decide the details of the RfC implementation. This is the home stretch - the RfC proper will begin as soon as we have finished this step. Step four is also less complicated than the previous steps, as it is mostly about procedural issues. This means it should be over with a lot more quickly than the previous steps. There are some new questions for you to answer at the discussion page, and you can see how the RfC is shaping up at the RfC draft page. Also, when I say that this step should be over with a lot quicker than the previous steps, I mean it: I have set a provisional deadline of Monday, 20th May for responses. I'm looking forward to seeing your input. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 12:55, 13 May 2013 (UTC) Jerusalem RfC discussion: final countdown Hello again, everyone. I have now closed all the questions for step four, and updated the RfC draft. We are scheduled to start the Jerusalem RfC at 09:00, 23 May 2013 (UTC). Before then, I would like you to check the draft page, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jerusalem, and see if there are any errors or anything that you would like to improve. If it's a small matter of copy editing, then you can edit the page directly. If it's anything that might be contentious, then please start a discussion at Talk:Jerusalem/2013 RfC discussion#The final countdown. I'll check through everything and then set the RfC in motion on Thursday. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 16:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC) Jerusalem RfC has started Hello again everyone. We have finally made it - the RfC is now open, and a few editors have chimed in already. The discussion is located at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jerusalem. I'm sure you don't actually need me to tell you this, but please go over there and leave your comments. :) You are the editors most familiar with the Jerusalem lead dispute on Wikipedia, so it would be very useful for the other participants to see what you have to say. And again, thank you for all your hard work in the discussions leading up to this. We shall reconvene after the results of the RfC have been announced, so that we can work out any next steps we need to take, if necessary. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 13:19, 23 May 2013 (UTC) Talk:List of vegetarians I reverted you. I've left notes on WP:AN/RFC and User talk:Dpmuk seeking input on how to proceed. A user involved in the discussion unilaterally reverting an edit conflicted close is not one I am willing to accept. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 00:03, 1 June 2013 (UTC) Well I suppose I did say that anyone was free to revert me. I'm not sure you doing it was a very polite move, though. Formerip (talk) 00:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC) Dispute Resolution Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in. This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! ÓCorcráin (talk) 18:23, 23 June 2013 (UTC) Talk Section on Dispute Resolution Hi I fixed that for you, I don't know why that happened. Feel free to contribute. :) ÓCorcráin (talk) 20:49, 23 June 2013 (UTC) Jerusalem RfC: breakdown of results Hello again everyone. Now that the Jerusalem RfC has been closed and there has been time for the dust to settle, I thought it would be a good time to start step six of the moderated discussion. If you could leave your feedback over at the discussion page, it will be most appreciated. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 09:38, 15 July 2013 (UTC) ITN/C This edit deleted Abductive's comment I think? --Stephen 00:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC) Thanks. I put it back. Formerip (talk) 00:53, 29 July 2013 (UTC) ITN for INS Vikrant (Vikrant class) --SpencerT♦C 18:20, 12 August 2013 (UTC) Your edit comment here. Please check Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships)#Pronouns. Historically, ships have always been referred to as "she" or "her". Just for your info. Thanks! Anir1uph | talk | contrib 10:20, 14 August 2013 (UTC) Well, countries were referred to as she historically, but nowadays its normally just people and animals. Still, per our antiquated guideline, the gender should stay as it was when the article was created. Formerip (talk) 11:05, 14 August 2013 (UTC) I am only telling you the wiki policy - that is not antiquated - navies still do refer to their ships as "she" etc. And I understand that the gender should stay as it is through out - that is why i felt no need to change anything. But from your edit comment, i got the impression that you were not aware of the naming convention, so i just pointed you to the relevant page. That's all! Anir1uph | talk | contrib 11:18, 14 August 2013 (UTC) Navies may refer to their ships as "she", but we are not a navy. Style guides always recommend neuter for ships. Formerip (talk) 11:27, 14 August 2013 (UTC) A barnstar for you The Socratic Barnstar Indeed, that was an amusing exchange, and a very tenable structure on your behalf, during the ITN Olinguito affair. Albeit, I feel the subject matter was duly posted. QatarStarsLeague (talk) 23:47, 15 August 2013 (UTC) Thank you. Formerip (talk) 11:55, 16 August 2013 (UTC) ITN for 1953 Iranian coup d'état --SpencerT♦C 06:11, 22 August 2013 (UTC) DYK process proposals/discussion thread Notifying you that I have posted at WT:DYK some ideas how we can avoid problems of the kind we just had, in future. Contribute if you can, and thanks :) Link). FT2 (Talk | email) 15:51, 24 August 2013 (UTC) RfC relating to Vietnamese geo article titles Since you participated in Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Vietnamese)/Archive 2 you may wish to be informed of Talk:Gia Bình District#RfC: Should non-exonym Vietnam geo article titles have Vietnamese alphabet spellings?. Thank you. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:59, 25 August 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the correction Thanks for pointing me toward the talk page discussion on Dice. I've added my two cents. If the consensus is that "dice" is the preferred singular form, you may wish to update the article accordingly; most of it uses "die." Thanks again! DoorsAjar (talk) 21:52, 25 August 2013 (UTC) Women's rights in Saudi Arabia --Jehochman Talk 12:34, 30 August 2013 (UTC) "Where's the 'large majority'?" If one includes the anonymous contributors to the survey, then there is a large majority in favor of keeping MOS:ID as it is. If one does not include them, it's still a pretty even split. We have not established an affirmative consensus for Betty's new text, at least not yet. Changing the MoS before the discussion is over is premature. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:49, 1 September 2013 (UTC) September 2013 Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Cent Quatre may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page. List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page: of the time (that of large train stations and exhibition halls)<ref name="L'Expansion"/>), and constructed around a cast-iron frame using glass and brick. The surface area of the building Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:53, 3 September 2013 (UTC) Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to There Is a Light That Never Goes Out may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page. List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page: as a double A-side with his cover of [[Patti Smith]]'s "[[Redondo Beach (song)|Redondo Beach]]") in 2005. It reached number 11 in the UK singles chart.{{Citation needed|date=February 2010}} Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:38, 21 September 2013 (UTC) Listen I know you think it would be better to do the move request now. I appreciate that, you're anxious, you're chomping at the bit. However, I want you to think of the consequences of doing that. If you open a move request, it can be closed by anyone - an editor, or an admin, in good standing, who will cite the previous consensus-of-three-neutral admins. Most people won't oppose. If you revert, and then an admin reverts you, you now have a wheel war on your hands. I can almost promise you, if someone starts a move request early, that is what will happen. In addition, as noted, sources are shifting - a few shifted today. In 3 weeks time, we may have a complete snowstorm. So just be patient, life will go on, and if you wait the 30 days, there's a strong chance Chelsea will prevail.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 23:47, 4 September 2013 (UTC) I'm not chomping at any bit. Closers of move requests don't have any authority to set a future timetable for move requests. Ideally, the next move should be one minute prior to whatever they suggested. Formerip (talk) 23:52, 4 September 2013 (UTC) As the closer noted, their authority is exactly what the community will give them. Given the number of kudos for the close they received from senior admins, even those opposed to the close, my feeling is, the community as a whole has agreed with the 30-day waiting period, unless events merit. We shall see. I don't understand your one minute comment.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 23:55, 4 September 2013 (UTC) The community is divided and they have received more criticism than praise, I think. My "one minute" comment - I do not want a new move request now, but I also don't want the false impression given that there is a rule or consensus about when it should happen. It should happen at an appropriate time and we don't yet know for sure whether that's in an hour or a year. Formerip (talk) 00:01, 5 September 2013 (UTC) Loud voices don't always represent the majority, you know.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 00:08, 5 September 2013 (UTC) DYK nomination of Cent Quatre Hello! Your submission of Cent Quatre at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Rosiestep (talk) 21:55, 6 September 2013 (UTC) About Wikiwix Have you read this? πr2 (t • c) 01:53, 7 September 2013 (UTC) Background on Azerbaijan Further to the discussion on Jimbo's talk, please note the following assessments of Azerbaijan's record: Committee to Protect Journalists Reporters without borders Human Rights Watch Freedom House Amnesty International (Euronews report) Thanks for your interest. Andreas JN466 21:34, 7 September 2013 (UTC) Thank you. I do have Internet access, though. Formerip (talk) 21:42, 7 September 2013 (UTC) Penny for your thoughts. Andreas JN466 21:46, 7 September 2013 (UTC) It depends on what your angle is. I don't think it's logical to suppose there is anything particularly sinister about either this or Wikibilim. Spending on getting people to edit their local WP probably makes total sense as an economic development activity for countries with the GDP rankings we are talking about, provided your expenditure is proportionate to your aims. I don't see what reason there would be to see it as part of an information control agenda. That's not to deny the existence of such an agenda. Incidentally, I don't think this guy seems like a state apparatchik: [3] [4] [5]. How WMF should engage with different countries is another question but, reading between the lines, I'm slightly concerned that their attitude in this case is dismiss it out of hand. An effect of ill-motivated drama campaigns, perhaps. I don't see how it could have much to do with ethics, given that the standard offer to countries with appalling human-rights records and an actual, known history of state interference with Wikipedia content is a conference. Formerip (talk) 23:26, 7 September 2013 (UTC) Evidence phase open - Manning naming dispute Dear FormerIP. This is just a quick courtesy notice. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 19, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Seddon talk 23:22, 8 September 2013 (UTC) Royal Mail I'm just curious as to why you withdrew it, I was about to support the nomination. Hot Stop talk-contribs 00:20, 12 September 2013 (UTC) Because it isn't being privatised tomorrow, it's just that an official notice that it will be privatised will be made. I jumped the gun, in other words. Formerip (talk) 00:30, 12 September 2013 (UTC) Fair enough. Hot Stop talk-contribs 01:16, 12 September 2013 (UTC) Evidence This describes one incident. I believe the others who blogged have been mentioned. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents/Manning#April_Arcus_off-wiki_canvassing I'm willing to rewrite my principle and am open to suggestions. But the general idea is that this isn't the place to be a drum major for X.Two kinds of pork (talk) 22:58, 12 September 2013 (UTC) DYK nomination of Et moi, et moi, et moi Hello! Your submission of Et moi, et moi, et moi at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Abecedare (talk) 00:17, 16 September 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for September 16 Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited J'aime les filles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pye (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 16 September 2013 (UTC) DYK for Cent Quatre The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 22 September 2013 (UTC) DYK for Et moi, et moi, et moi The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 23 September 2013 (UTC) Samantha Lewthwaite Per the MoS, "links in the 'See also' section do not have to be directly related to the topic of the article, because one purpose of 'See also' links is to enable readers to explore tangentially related topics." Two other high profile females linked to a high profile terrorist organisation certainly fit the description of being - at the very least - "tangentially related"! BlackberrySorbet 16:16, 26 September 2013 (UTC) A barnstar for you! The Teamwork Barnstar This barnstar is awarded in recognition of your contributions to building the evidence base for the Chelsea Manning move. Well done! Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 06:11, 1 October 2013 (UTC) Thanks. Formerip (talk) 15:25, 1 October 2013 (UTC) I told you so Just saying. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:23, 19 October 2013 (UTC) DYK for Il est cinq heures, Paris s'éveille The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 20 October 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for October 22 Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Autobiography (book by Morrissey), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Joyce (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 22 October 2013 (UTC) DYK nomination of Autobiography (book by Morrissey) Hello! Your submission of Autobiography (book by Morrissey) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Gamaliel (talk) 22:11, 23 October 2013 (UTC) Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs) Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:38, 27 October 2013 (UTC) DYK for Autobiography (Morrissey) The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 30 October 2013 (UTC) Well done--thanks! As it happens a student of mine mentioned this to me yesterday, citing the fact you put in your hook, and I'm ordering a copy--do you get a cut from Penguin? :) Drmies (talk) 14:17, 30 October 2013 (UTC) And "Paris s'éveille" is yours as well--wow! Great song, great article. Drmies (talk) 14:21, 30 October 2013 (UTC) Thanks Drmies. Formerip (talk) 19:29, 30 October 2013 (UTC) Asma Al-Assad Hi FormerIP (I'm a former IP as well!), I was wondering if you could continue to stop by the Asma al-Assad talk page to continue in the discussion in regards to the Vogue piece? I appreciate your opinion and I would appreciate your continual presence on the discussion page and would appreciate it even more so if you could partake in the editing process. Merci beaucoup. Les Etoiles de Ma Vie (talk) 21:13, 28 November 2013 (UTC) No problem. But I don't think you can take my comments on their own as meaning there is a consensus. I am only one editor and it might turn out I am in the minority once other editors have had their say. Formerip (talk) 21:32, 28 November 2013 (UTC) No, of course not. But I feel that you are an objective set of eyes. The other editor in question is so deeply invested in the subject that he does not see the flaws in the argument of including the magazine piece (which has been retracted), not to mention that the article as a whole, just looks plain sloppy given it's own section on the article. There is so much repetitive information taking up space. I really appreciate you consenting to continue revisiting the talk page/article, as time allows. It's nice to have a outside voice chime in! :) Have a great day.Les Etoiles de Ma Vie (talk) 21:41, 28 November 2013 (UTC) Hi, I just wanted to express my utmost gratitude to you for stopping by the Asma al-Assad talk page again. Your voice and opinion COUNTS and I sincerely sincerely appreciate your eloquence and suggestions. It means a lot to me to have someone neutral on the talk page. Merci mille fois! :) Les Etoiles de Ma Vie (talk) 03:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC) Category:Jacques Dutronc Category:Jacques Dutronc, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 15:32, 2 December 2013 (UTC) The Wikipedia Library Survey As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:11, 9 December 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for December 13 Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Morrissey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Joyce (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 13 December 2013 (UTC) Pete Townshend page An administrator has proposed edits to the Operation Ore section. Please check in to give your opinion. Thanks. Pkeets (talk) 19:02, 13 December 2013 (UTC) Jonathan King Thanks for joining the crusade Pedohater (talk) 09:39, 24 December 2013 (UTC)