Wikipedia

User talk:Timotheus Canens/Archives/2012/12

< User talk:Timotheus Canens | Archives | 2012
Latest comment: 11 years ago by T. Canens in topic Appeal


About the reviewing tab

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I can not installing the reviewing tab. What should I do to install that tab? Please tell me those instructions. I have read the AFC's help script. But following that script isn't working for me.--pratyya (talk) 03:11, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

I believe that it's turned on in Preferences -> Gadgets. User:Madbul is the current maintainer of the script. I'd suggest talking to him. T. Canens (talk) 06:27, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

My question at the election

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi.

Just a brief note to thank you, not only for your answers, but for going "the extra mile" to research and answer the questions I should have asked in the first place. It's appreciated, and entirely in the spirit I think things ought to work here more often than they actually do. Cheers. Begoon talk 10:04, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Again?

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

You just received yet another inquiry about your potential bias and essentially ignored it for the most part (your edit summary was an acknowledgement at least). I feel stupid for admitting this but I actually spent a few hours one night throwing your actions into a spreadsheet since I could not tell if you were biased or if I was just being a jerk. I came to the conclusion that AE you consistently came to the rescue editors with a history of promoting Palestine over the course of a couple months. You would sometimes tread lightly or ignore requests against those seen as Israeli but would request lesser sanctions for those on the other side. You were more verbose (multiple comments were just one factor) in your defense of pro-P than anything else.

But this is just me telling you my interpretation. You ignored my request at the election regarding why people accuse you of bias. They do. You should want to know why if for nothing more than to be better at what you volunteer for. Feel free to not answr the question since one voter guide already called you out for it.Cptnono (talk) 04:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Note that this is intended to be a general inquiry on you letting your biases show and not necessarily related to one topic area even though my looking into it was only PI.Cptnono (talk)

I have not seen the fuss, but the suggestion that TC has a bias towards one side at AE is without foundation, and there is no way that any sensible person would attempt to answer a have-you-stopped-beating-your-wife question beginning "I believe stats show that you could have favored editors at AE who are on the Palestinian side" (hint: Wikipedians want evidence not hidden statistics). Would the compiler of the stats by any chance happen to be on one side of the ARBPIA disputes? Johnuniq (talk) 07:05, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Johnuniq - Why is 'one side' acutely dissatisfied with Canens's AE arbitration and have repeatedly seen fit to question his neutrality? Note that this accusation only applies to Canens and not the other AE admins (Ed, Blade), and is a view widely held by a cadre of editors. Ignoring stats, the fact exists that Canen's conduct is perceived to be inappropriately partisan and an explanation as to how this perception might have arisen would be most welcome. Ankh.Morpork 11:35, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 December 2012

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 10 December 2012

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Child computer

Latest comment: 11 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Hi. I know it was a long time ago, but I have a question about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Child computer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). The article title may not be the WP:COMMONNAME, but the topic of kid/toy computers (types of Electronic learning products) looks to me like a valid candidate for a fuller notability discussion. I wondered whether any info contained within the following would be useful in revisiting the topic.

Considering the discussion was well over 2 years ago, perhaps I should go to WP:DELREV (or WP:UNDELETE) - but I thought I'd come to you first. What do you think? Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 23:52, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

It was deleted because it was created by a sockpuppet of a banned user, not because of notability issues. Feel free to write a new article if you want - no need for DRV. T. Canens (talk) 00:09, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Is there content worth userfying to User:Trevj/Child computer, please? Working with existing text is generally much quicker than starting from scratch. -- Trevj (talk) 01:01, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Do you have any further comments on this, please? -- Trevj (talk) 09:21, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Sorry about delay, I somehow missed this. There's no reference worth salvaging in the deleted revisions, and I'm rather doubtful that you'd find the text to be of much assistance as its quality is quite poor too. I'd rather not userfy a G5'd page, at least unless it's really, really worth it, since that rather defeats the purpose of the speedy criterion. T. Canens (talk) 09:28, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
No problem - I know from experience that it's easy to miss talk page follow-ups. That's fair enough for the deleted version, however User:Nudecline/Child computer wasn't G5d so I've added the above refs and temporarily moved it to my userspace. Without going into the history of the ban and the SPI (I really don't have the time/inclination to do so, unless you feel it would especially illuminating for me in relation to this particular article), the draft doesn't seem to be POV and IMO is a useful starting point. I'm actually failing to have a WIkibreak at the moment, and have only done this now in order to note it here before the discussion's archived. I hope that you don't have any strong objection to my actions, and I'll endeavour to work on the draft and move it to article space (probably under a new title, depending on the content at that time) by April 2013. Thanks.-- Trevj (talk) 21:06, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Request for clarification on WP:ARBSL

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have filed a request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment for clarification on the scope of the topic ban placed upon Brews ohare in the Speed of light case. As you have recently participated in an arbitration enforcement request regarding this case and precipitating the clarification request, your comments would be welcome. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:06, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Adam Lanza

Latest comment: 11 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Could I ask you to please undo your full protection of this (currently) redirect. From precedent for these kind of incidents, there will quickly be (IMHO) a need for a separate article on the shooter. We will likely go through the normal wave of merge requests and AFDs on it, but to preemptively prevent such a page from even being created seems improper to me. I suspect that there will be plenty of admin eyes on it if/when the separate article begins to take form. - TexasAndroid (talk) 21:48, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I'll be happy to unprotect it (or probably better, reduce it to semi) once we get a better confirmation that he's the shooter. I'd rather not do it on a quote from someone speaking on the condition of anonymity when an earlier such source was apparently wrong. T. Canens (talk) 22:02, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Good point. I assumed you were planning to leave it fully protected for a while. If you plan to remove or reduce the protection when the shooter's identity is more strongly/properly sourced, then I withdraw my protest. :) - TexasAndroid (talk) 22:16, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps you should shorten the protection to a day or two then as I suspect it won't be long before we have definitive confirmation that Adam Lanza was the shooter, if we do not already have it, and he will obviously be notable given the severity of this event.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 22:56, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Talk:Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. Uncle G (talk) 21:41, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Articles for creation newsletter

Delivered 01:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC) by EdwardsBot. If you do not wish to receive this newsletter, please remove your name from the spamlist.

Congratulations

Latest comment: 11 years ago10 comments9 people in discussion

Well done :) --Elen of the Roads (talk) 20:29, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, everyone. I'll try not to mess up too badly :) T. Canens (talk) 09:39, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

ArkRe's unblock request

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I just wanted to let you know that I have procedurally declined ArkRe's unblock request that has been on hold for two months. If the user files another unblock request, then we can deal with it anew, otherwise we can just leave it. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 23:29, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 December 2012

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Congratulations

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It's a pleasure to be able to congratulate you to your election to the Arbitration Committee. I've been impressed by your level-headed approach to most contentious conduct issues; you'll continue to need it. Regards,  Sandstein  22:58, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Sharing some holiday cheer

  Holiday Cheer
Michael Q. Schmidt my talk page is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings.

Merry Christmas!

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 


TheGeneralUser (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hello Timotheus Canens! Wishing you a very Happy Merry Christmas :) TheGeneralUser (talk) 13:29, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy holidays

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Some Christmas traditions are very difficult to explain. Kind of like Wikipedia policies.

Wishing you and yours a joyous holiday season, and happiness, health and hopefulness in 2013. I trust you'll enjoy this little token, a favourite performance of Baby, it's Cold Outside, for your holiday amusement. For those of a more traditional inclination, I offer this rendition of my favourite carol.
Best, Risker (talk) 15:37, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


The Signpost: 24 December 2012

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Appeal

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, its Mor you have been reviewing my appeal to 'lift and strike' my block for WP:1RR violation(to avoid evoking block happy sentiments for you guys). The wheel of justice role faster in one direction than the other, so my block already has 'expired' and my appeal request has been removed from my talk page with the same rational. Does that mean my appeal was dismissed?--Mor2 (talk) 10:33, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

No; the appeal is being discussed at WP:AE, although the discussion is winding down and I suspect that we'll have a result fairly soon. T. Canens (talk) 11:47, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Timotheus_Canens/Archives/2012/12&oldid=531291812"