User talk:Timotheus Canens/Archives/2014/2
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Timotheus Canens. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The Signpost: 29 January 2014
- Traffic report: Six strikes out
- WikiProject report: Special report: Contesting contests
- News and notes: Wiki-PR defends itself, condemns Wikipedia's actions
- Arbitration report: Kafziel case closed; Kww admonished by motion
Message on DS review page
Hello Timotheus Canens,
I've left the message below the DS Review page [1], and hope you and all the other arbitrators will take a look and leave a note indicating that you've looked at the discussion of the important issues with DS, with indefinite bans, and with the phrase 'broadly construed' which have been raised throughout that page. NinaGreen (talk) 22:06, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Two arbitrators, AGK and Roger Davies, have added occasional comments to this page concerning the significant changes which have been suggested here, all of which are quick, easy and effective fixes which would (1) drastically reduce arbitrator and administrator workload; (2) permit the reduction in the incredibly high number of administrators (1400), as a result of (1), and allow for the elimination, almost entirely, of WP:AE; (3) improve Wikipedia's public image; (4) improve the general atmosphere on Wikipedia, making it more collegial and far less adversarial; (5) significantly improve editor retention. However are the other 13 arbitrators at all aware of these suggestions? The lack of any comments from them in this review suggests they may not be. Could the other arbitrators just drop a note here to indicate that they are aware of the suggestions? Obviously change can never take place if the people who can effect if aren't aware of the problems which have been identified in this discussion and the suggestions which have been made for fixing them.
The Signpost: 29 January 2014
- Traffic report: Six strikes out
- WikiProject report: Special report: Contesting contests
- News and notes: Wiki-PR defends itself, condemns Wikipedia's actions
- Arbitration report: Kafziel case closed; Kww admonished by motion
RfC/U Quackguru, again
Hi Timotheus! You participated in an RFC/U concerning User:QuackGuru in 2011. There is a new RFC/U on for the same user at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/QuackGuru2, and your input would be welcome. Cheers, --Mallexikon (talk) 07:03, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
RfC/U Quackguru, again
你好 Timotheus，and 新年快乐! You participated in an RFC/U concerning User:QuackGuru in 2011. There is a new RFC/U on for the same user at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/QuackGuru2, and your input would be welcome. Cheers, --Mallexikon (talk) 05:36, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Comment placed on Roger Davies' Talk page
I've placed the comment below on Roger Davies' Talk page under the heading 'Correction to collapsed discussion' and am copying it here because the point is obviously one of vital concern to all arbitrators. NinaGreen (talk) 18:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Roger,
Could you please correct this comment you made at [2]:
This is your fourth edit since you were asked to back off yesterday. Whatever benefit there might have been in your contributions has been lost in the - to put it mildly - freeranging nature and inquisitorial tone of your comments. You have singlehandedly provided about half the commentary over the last month, sometimes derailing discussions, stopping others in their tracks, and contributing greatly to bloat. Please now step right back.
Your statement is inaccurate. I made only a single comment after I was told my comments were unwelcome by AGK yesterday, and that comment was made in reply to a question asked of me by Robert McClenon. Can another editor no longer ask me a question, and receive a reply? The four 'edits' were merely 'fixes' to that single comment, as is obvious from the edit history. Please correct that inaccuracy by removing your statement which implies that I made four separate comments after being told my comments were unwelcome, and which fails to recognize the fact that I was replying to a question asked of me by Robert McClenon. Your statements that I have 'derailed discussions' or 'stopped others in their tracks' are also both inaccurate. I have never done that, nor have you provided an example of either. I have merely raised questions, and in almost every single case an administrator, either you, AGK, or Salvio has abruptly shut down any discussion of the questions I have raised. The questions I've raised are valid ones. Perhaps they seem 'inquisitorial' to you and to other administrators because you are committed to discretionary sanctions and you cannot look at them from the point of view of the vast majority of Wikipedia editors who find DS strange, unjust, and harmful to the project.
Also your own comments which you later added to that section directly contradict the information provided to me by Robert McClenon, so why has Salvio been permitted to collapse the discussion with the comment 'Asked and answered' when the question obviously hasn't been answered? You state unequivocally earlier in the discussion that I was the only one ('one notable exception') who didn't understand the difference between the powers exercised by administrators in DS and in non-DS situations, and Salvio rudely told me that my question had been answered before, and that I was exhibiting 'supine ignorance'. The discussion now shows I was clearly not the only one who didn't understand the difference, since your later comment completely contradicts the explanation of the difference given by Robert McClenon. It is not healthy for Wikipedia when even an experienced editor like Robert McClenon obviously doesn't understand the difference between the powers, and when you have to tell Robert that his explanation is completely wrong, and when no Wikipedia editor can find anywhere on Wikipedia a clear difference and distinction between the powers. The only way to fix this is to set out on the DS project page a clear explanation of the difference between the powers of arbitrators, the powers of administrators in DS situations, and the power of administrators in non-DS situations. At present the differences are completely blurred, and no Wikipedia editor has access to a clear statement of what an administrator is actually authorized to do in DS situations as opposed to non-DS situations, or how the powers of administrators differ from those of arbitrators. Robert McClenon stated that administrators in DS-sitations have been given 'arbitrator-like powers'. By what authority has this happened, since administrators were not elected to be arbitrators? This blurring of powers, the refusal to clearly set out for the benefit of all Wikipedia editors the differences between the powers exercised by arbitrators, administrators in DS situations and administrators in non-DS situations, and the handing over of arbitrators' powers to administrators who were never elected to exercise such powers is not healthy for Wikipedia, nor is it healthy for Wikipedia for you, AGK and Salvio to shut down discussion of such a vital point. Nor is it healthy for Wikipedia for you to shut it down on the basis of an inaccurate statement about my comments (see above).
The Signpost: 12 February 2014
- Technology report: Left with no choice
- Featured content: Space selfie
- Traffic report: Sports Day
- WikiProject report: Game Time in Russia
In regards to King Magnetic
Hi, I'd like to make edits and create the page King Magnetic as it redirects to Army of the Pharaohs however on July 2010 you protected so that only administrators can make edit to the page. Is there a way the protection can be removed so that edits can be made to the page once again? TwinTurbo (talk) 11:15, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
- Since I protected that page due to an AfD discussion that found the topic unsuitable for a separate article, you'll need to take it to deletion review. T. Canens (talk) 08:39, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 19 February 2014
- News and notes: Foundation takes aim at undisclosed paid editing; Greek Wikipedia editor faces down legal challenge
- Technology report: ULS Comeback
- WikiProject report: Countering Systemic Bias
- Featured content: Holotype
- Traffic report: Chilly Valentines
Please comment on changes to the AfC mailing list
Hello Timotheus Canens! There is a discussion that your input is requested on! I look forward to your comments, thoughts, opinions, criticisms, and questions!
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page.
- This message was composed and sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 18:18, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Happy Holidays!
Saturday: NYC Art And Feminism Wikipedia Editathon
 |
Please join Wikipedia "Art and Feminism Editathon" @ Eyebeam on Saturday February 1, 2014, an event aimed at collaboratively expanding Wikipedia articles covering Art and Feminism, and the biographies of women artists! There are also regional events that day in Brooklyn, Westchester County, and the Hudson Valley.
|
Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon
| Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon | |
|---|---|
 You are invited to join upcoming Wikipedia "Editathons", where both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on a selected theme, on the following two Saturdays in March:
| |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)
Hello Timotheus Canens:
WikiProject AFC is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1, 2014 to March 31, 2014.
Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!
Posted by Northamerica1000 (talk) on 02:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation
The Signpost: 26 February 2014
- Featured content: Odin salutes you
- WikiProject report: Racking brains with neuroscience
- Special report: Diary of a protester: Wikimedian perishes in Ukrainian unrest
- Traffic report: Snow big deal
- Recent research: CSCW '14 retrospective; the impact of SOPA on deletionism