User talk:Kudpung/Archive Dec 2015

RfA clerking

I am currently drafting a clerking proposal because the clerking proposal on WP:RFA2015 is informal and vaguely defined. I do not want to open a multi-phase RfC just to confirm past consensus, so you know of any other major attempts at proposing clerking or similar system at RfA other than Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Clerks? Thanks, Esquivalience ^t 03:25, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Absolutely, Esquivalience, why re-invent the wheel. Change its tyres thoughby all means. There is a perfectly good stand-alone clerking proposal at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Clerks. It didn't get consensus because people do not want RfA to become an area where they can no longer misbehave with impunity. Like all attempts at RfA improvement, any new initiatives will probably fail for the same reasons. I would nevertheless give them my 100% support. Incremental changes like these, if made, are none--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)theless likely to gain more traction as a stand-alone proposal rather than long winded RfAs that try to treat many issues at the same time. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Help

Please take a look at Newton Public Schools. There is an ongoing dispute between several editors, one of whom is pushing hard on a POV and is to put it mildly, very verbose. Please help if you can. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 18:38, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

 Done. See talk page, John. Perhaps you would like to organise the RfC. I won't take part in it because I'm now involved as the protecting admin, but I'll keep an eye on it and warn anyone who tries to monopolise it. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

I have never done an RfC, but at this point, the talk page is so trashed I cannot even tell who said what, much less when. Its almost like politics! John from Idegon (talk) 11:20, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

meh

Nothing to see here

REMEMBER, WE ARE ALL VOLUNTEERS. as are the contributors. Thanks.Letterhead330 (talk) 23:14, 2 December 2015 (UTC) you have read the english translation of......what? No clue what youre talking about. There is a panel of scientists involved in bosnian pyramids. Clearly, you are focussing on the discoverer in a prejudiced fashion and ignoring all the other contributors to the discovery's proving. Wouldnt you say? did you read LaViolettes page? Moreover based on the predictions of this theory, he developed an alternative cosmology that effectively replaces the big bang theory. In fact, in 1986, he was the first to cast doubt on the big bang theory by showing that it makes a far poorer fit to existing astronomical data when compared to this new non-expanding universe cosmology. The subquantum kinetics cosmology also led him to make successful predictions about galaxy evolution that were later verified with the Hubble Space Telescope. Dr. LaViolette is credited with the discovery of the planetary-stellar mass-luminosity relation which demonstrates that the Sun, planets, stars, and supernova explosions are powered by spontaneous energy creation through photon blueshifting. With this relation, he successfully predicted the mass-luminosity ratio of the first brown dwarf to be discovered.More recently, his maser signal blueshifting prediction has found confirmation following publication of the discovery of a blueshift in the Pioneer 10 spacecraft tracking data. Dr. LaViolette is the first to predict that high intensity volleys of cosmic ray particles travel directly to our planet from distant sources in our Galaxy, a phenomenon now confirmed by scientific data. He is also the first to discover high concentrations of cosmic dust in Ice Age polar ice, indicating the occurrence of a global cosmic catastrophe in ancient times.Based on this work, he made predictions about the entry of interstellar dust into the solar system ten years before its confirmation in 1993 by data from the Ulysses spacecraft and by radar observations from New Zealand. He also originated the glacier wave flood theory that not only provides a reasonable scientific explanation for widespread continental floods, but also presents a credible explanation for the sudden freezing of the arctic mammoths and demise of the Pleistocene mammals. Also he developed a novel theory that links geomagnetic flips to the past occurrence of immense solar flare storm outbursts. He is the developer of subquantum kinetics, a novel approach to microphysics that not only accounts for electric, magnetic, gravitational, and nuclear forces in a unified manner,

Letterhead330, I have collapsed this. Please see the warnings on your talk page.

comment

Nothing to see here - again

http://starburstfound.org/letters-of-support/ Kudpung... presidential letter - didnt realize theyre clickable, it was Reagan -- still a president, and this man invented several quantum and astronomy sciences. This is the letters of support link - you might read it. Your system is geared to reject the very people who create wiki, and something appears awry in that methodology. How exactly can WIKI work out, when you reject volunteers editing wrong info pages? (2006 is last links for the "claimed" now proven pyramids; 2016 is a whole decade of discoveries youre refusing, and I heard of this from Semir's site, but now I know it to be not an accident. Sorry, but I dont see any rectification and the slurs on Dr. La Violette will make interesting video fodder for the way WIKI operates. It is okay for me to document this treatment, and is that alright, or will it be construed as something personal? (all the comments so far avoid fixing the problem and by golly, theyre insulting.) Letterhead330 (talk) 23:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC) Superwave Theory • Letter from Senator Packwood to the U.S. National Science Foundation • Letter from Senator Packwood to the U.S. National Science Foundation • Letter from Christopher Lehman, Special Assistant to the President • Letter from Dr. Korotkovitch (Leningrad) to the National Science Foundation • Letter from Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts • Letter from Sir Crispin Tickell UK Mission to the UN • Letter from Wilbert Chagula, Tanzanian ambassador to the UN Cosmology • Letter from professor Georges de Vaucouleur, University of Texas, Austin • Letter from professor Jean-Claude Pecker, College of France and professor Jean-Pierre Vigier, director of research CNRS • Letter from professor Jean-Claude Pecker, College of France • Letter from professor Jean-Pierre Vigier, director of research CNRS • Letter from Grote Reber, father of radio astronomy • Letter from professor Paul Marmet, National Research Council of Canada • Letter from professor Dean Turner, University of Northern Colorado Feeling Tone Theory • Letter from professor Karl Pribram, Neuropsychology Laboratory, Stanford University • Letter from professor Walter Freeman, Division of Neurobiology, UC Berkeley • Letter from professor Ted Packard, Chairman, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Utah • Letter from professor Richard Rowan, Director of Counseling Services, The Evergreen State College • Letter from Dee Dickinson, Coordinator, New Horizons for Learning • Letter from Hazel Henderson, Co-Director, Princeton Center for Alternative Futures Aerospace Technology: NASA Space Plane Correspondence • Letter from Charles Morris, Asst. Dir. NASA Aero-Space Plane Program • Letter to Charles Morris, Asst. Dir. NASA Aero-Space Plane Program Requests for Information • Institutional affiliations of people requesting information on Starburst research (1984-1989) Actually kudpung, Im beginning to see that the many times Ive accepted a WIKI search result questing info, may have been a severe error -- if you seriously intend to keep the bosnian pyramids back in the stone age with spurious links and a very questionable narrative...what of the other pages? This is concerning but, also enlightening at the same time, and I think its best for WIKI to remain as it is, uninformed, touting pure nonsense about some very real and important pyramids, and to cease trying to change what apparently is a very much closed mentality to being current and with the times. :) I will not offer my time to adjust any of your pages in future, because I find WIKI now to be very non-credible and inaccurate, and a poor source of facts in the tradition of spurious sources. Thanks for the impression, and happy volunteering. Letterhead330 (talk) 23:24, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Again, please see the warnings on your talk page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:26, 2 December 2015 (UTC) Kudpung, kindly "vanish" me...I am quite sorry for having defended WIKI in the past when called spurious and very inaccurate, and realize I was wrong to give WIKI bennie of doubt. Thanks so much. I dont volunteer to be abused. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Letterhead330 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

...but apparently you volunteer to abuse others. How ironic. Mensa teach you that?
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 01:11, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Warning and complaint over disrespectful user

Kudpung,

In a shocking and unbelievable move, you have given my IP a warning for "blatantly harassing" another user. Funny thing is, I was respectfully calling out User talk:John from Idegon for blatantly harassing me and another Wikipedian. He called me an "east coast elistic prick", and said he didn't give a "flying fuck" about the town of another editor, and he gets off scot-free while you have occupied yourself with issuing my IP a warning for "blatant harassment". I challenge you to materialize once instance of "harassment" on my part - you will find only my responses to being harassed by an internet troll. Please tell me Kudpung - are you disgraced by your punitive act against a victim of an ad-hominem verbal attack, while unthinkably ignoring the guilty perpetrator of harassment? If you do not extend this same warning to him, you will have confirmed your utterly inconsistent, unjust, and disparate treatment of Wiki users based on contribution history. Kudpung - can you find one instance of use of profanity by my IP in my respectful and humane discourse? Yet I get warned, after being called an "elitist prick" whose town the troll in question "[doesn't] give a flying fuck"? Your behavior has shocked me into understanding the true degree of hegemonic arrogance which apparently pervades Wikipedia's administrators.

Kudpung - I eagerly await to hear your justification for vilifying a victim of profane verbal attacks launched by an established editor, nepotistically ignoring a flagrant and obvious verbal abuser, and attacking a newcomer to Wikipedia who is now certain never to contribute. 73.219.217.243 (talk) 13:39, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. I have replied on your talk page with a final warning.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:22, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Kudpung - I did see the thoughtless invective you launched against me on my page, and I left you with a request to explain your perplexing behaviour: falsely accusing an innocent recipient of having given "abusive diatribes" when in fact all of my language has been respectful and I have been called an "elitist prick" by your troll editor-friend "John from Idegon". I eagerly await to hear your justification for such insanity - attacking the passive and innocent victim of such profane verbal attacks, of which your warning shockingly suggests I am a perpetrator rather than a victim. In doing so I hope you will start to use factual quotes as I have, instead of continued false accusations to appease your friend, flying in the face of all reason and civility. Thanks. 73.219.217.243 (talk) 02:32, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Welcoming Committee

I am sorry Sir. Thanks by the way! Marc (talk) 15:40, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for help on school article

Kudpung, thank you for reviewing Corner Canyon High School (Draper), and thank you for the link to WP:WPSCH/AG - I appreciate the assistance!--Thelema12 (talk) 19:31, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Good faith is assumed only until its absence is proven

Hey thanks for the Twinkle, it was really thoughtful, appropriate and useful! I read it extremely carefully, including the links therein. I'm really ever so sorry if I broke the !rules (how exactly?), but you know what, when someone keeps disparaging you by asserting falsities without providing one single diff as supporting shred of evidence, despite your insistent requests, well maybe at that point you would lose your good faith too towards that editor. Wouldn't you? All the best. 87.112.180.82 (talk) 21:54, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Category creation

Hello, Kudpung. I noticed you just removed a Category page (People from Xichang) from my page Feng Yuanwei. I had just transposed the category from Chinese wikipedia. That category was translated for the new article. Zee money (talk) 12:50, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

It was redlinked when I removed it. If the category exists and is populated you can go ahead and restore ithe entry.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:52, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Mrwallace05 socks

New socks NickiMinaj4life and 86.133.178.209 are obviously abusing accounts of Mrwallace05. 183.171.176.73 (talk) 08:21, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Please register them at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mrwallace05.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:29, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi Kudpung, I loaded up another article in my "Great Escapers" series Harold Milford and while tidying it up within 2 or 3 minutes of initial upload (within the last 10 minutes) some Vandal has been in and wiped it out. Please can you recover anything from my first upload ? Thanks for any help. Incidentally I seem to have been nominated for an award which is very nice. R44Researcher1944 (talk) 12:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

 Done. BTW, if you haven't already done so, could you add the Mil Hist project template to the talk pages of the WWII related pages you have created. Tanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:13, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks, I routinely add it and I'll put it back on again, I think that they hit that literally as I was saving it. R44Researcher1944 (talk) 16:30, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

There are several ways you can remove vandalism or restore a page to a former version. Check out Help:Reverting. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:42, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you again for your help, I shall go and check it out, R44Researcher1944 (talk) 09:34, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

The encased picture of Balto that is taxidermed.

Is it me or am I seeing things? There is a face of a little boy inside the back leg of the dog. It looks spooky like a ghost. Please let me know if that is what I am seeing. And did you know it was there .Thank you.- gjblair58@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.18.10.144 (talk) 07:12, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

it's probably you. Lake Isabella uis a beautiful place but AFAIK there are no stuffed dogs there . --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:00, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Canvassing

Hi, I can see you raised the issue of WP:CANVASS here with Cunard but this appears to be continuing. Firstly, DGG rightly declined to comment from this request after intervening. Secondly, I am sure this was done good faith by SwisterTwister here and here but as the AfDs have been listed on the relevant projects I am of the opinion that it should be left for editors to find out about the AfD themselves without any notification. Tanbircdq (talk) 19:05, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Considering that the people whom SwisterTwister notifies often or even usually take opposite views from each other, I think it's done fairly. DGG ( talk ) 19:24, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict):It looks as if I as wrong to have raised it. According to DGG it appears to be a legitimate form of notification and DGG has far more experience in such matters than I. It depends who is pinged. Canvassing to support an opinion is not allowed, but getting more expert eyes on a situation from established editors to ensure that policy is upheld and that an AfD is closed accordingly makes sense to me. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:33, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

This came up a few days ago on ANI, I believe. I also think that SisterTwister is notifying fairly--I think they typically look through the list of contributors to AfDs and article histories, and in this case just called in the cavalry, meaning those with particular experience in a particular area. Remember, Kudpung, when we were young and we had to do AfD all by ourselves, including the notifications? The conscientious editor would typically drop three or more notification templates to different editors. Also, I'm sorry you didn't get in, old friend. Drmies (talk) 05:25, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Don't worry about me not getting in, Drmies, the main thing is you did. I'll work a bit harder in the slums instead to give you a break for what's coming to you at Arbcom. Look after DGG there for me too, he's a very special friend and like you he's not afraid to tell me if I'm climbing up the wrong drainpipe. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

MurderByDeadcopy

MurderByDeadcopy kind of reminds me of User:750editsstrong and other accounts used by that person. That users posted this manifesto at five or six pages, eventually getting blocked for disruptive editing under suspicion of being a banned editor. 750edits had an obsession with Wikipedia:Newbie treatment at Criteria for speedy deletion and murder's post at User talk:Pam120, a one-time editor (and now I wonder if a sockpuppet) complaining about mistreatment from established editors, is real suspicious. If you look at murder's talk page, their barnstar is from a 10-edits account that also seems focused on inclusionism, suggesting that there are more accounts like this out there. What do you think? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 13:02, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, there is a similarity with this and it's almost certain they are still editing, but we get a lot of this kind of thing. Every complaint about MurderByDeadcopy's editing is perfectly justified. I'm sure you've seen plenty of newbies who just don't get it right, don't listen to advice, and then wonder why they get yelled at. As a teacher I've seen it a million times in school of course. As a Wikipedia editor I've made 76,000 edits and never gotten a singe complaint about my editing so if I can do it, theoretically, so can everyone else. I get complaints about my snark of course, but that's because I answer bullshit with with a bullwhip. Yes, I had already noticed there was something not quite koscher going on, but nothing egregious enough to justify a CU. So do keep an eye on them but let's not get paranoid just yet - I've got a lot of work waiting for me in the slums now that Drmies has left us to take up his crown and gown in the Ministry of Justice ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:46, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

That Adam article looks familiar, but I can't find myself in the history, and I didn't delete it or block that editor. I wonder if I saw a post on ANI or something like that. Is there an SPI? Someone should run CU. Those screeds are tiresome, tiresome. Drmies (talk) 15:46, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

• When Wikipedia's police dogs go for the throat, love goes down the drain! --MurderByDeletionism^"bang!" 18:06, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

FWIW....

This guy ain't been alive for 30 years or so now.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:56, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Yup! clicked the wrong button by mistake but did all the other right things. Interestingly it had the right effect though and knee-jerked people into cleaning it up. Which is what New Page Patrol is all about if done properly. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:11, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Juan Branco

Thanks for the advise, I tried to implement it. Now working on a new page, Frédéric Bonnaud... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brc (talk • contribs) 17:04, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

St. Joseph's College (Hong Kong)

The Notable alumni section is a massive train wreck. Many many entries without either a WP article or any references to backup notability. I'm running names in this section through WP to see if them have an article but so far zilch and therefore I did this edit[1]. Notable alumni sections are like notable people sections in articles about places, the entry must either have a article or a reference from a reliable source. I am probably going to be deleting most names in this section. Just letting you know....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:37, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

WilliamJE, you will do us a great service if you just go ahead and nuke them. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:29, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

I saw this morning (I'm in Florida USA. You replied to me Saturday night my time but after I stopped editing for the day) that someone had wiped out the whole section. The couple of people who did have WP articles, that I had gotten around to looking at, didn't even make mention of St. Joseph's in their articles. So in addition to there being no proof of notability for most of the entries in the section, there was also no proof of notable people being an alumni. Wiping out the section was extreme but I can't say it was a wrong move at all....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:59, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Add Block Template

As a non-administrator I am pretty sure that I am not allowed to add the template. Anyways, you blocked User talk:221.126.237.2 and didn't go a {{block}} template. Is it not there on purpose or am I missing something? Dat GuyWiki (talk) 13:12, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

I think you're probably missing something. There is a perfectly appropriate template on the talk page already. No other needed. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:23, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, that's weird. Maybe a cache glitch? Anyways, thanks for taking care of the vandals. Dat GuyWiki (talk) 13:40, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Deleted edits?

Hello Kudpung! Is there any rule against an editor requesting to view their own deleted edits from Special:DeletedContributions from an Admin? There doesn't seem to be, based on what I'm seeing at Wikipedia:Viewing and restoring deleted pages#Viewing a user's deleted edits. I figured I'd ask you, based on your previous participation at Wikipedia:Editor review/deletion edits review. I'd like to try and recreate my CSD log, but Hammersoft at WT:RfA brings up a good point that it'll be impossible for me to do that unless I can review my deleted edits... Anyway, thanks in advance. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:01, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

IJBall, there are no rules on Wikipedia against requesting anything. Whether or not the request gets fulfilled is another thing. You can see a list of your deleted edits here. If there is a specific page you would like to see, let me know with its full, redlinked title. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:23, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Non-Admins can't see the contents of the page you linked to. I probably only need to see the edit summaries to figure out which pages I {{db-move}}d. So, I guess I'd liked to request the contents of that list – I enabled E-mail on my end a while ago, if the contents of those edit summaries are supposed to be kept private. Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:32, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

IJBall, I have emailed you the list. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:46, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Kudpung! The E-mail hasn't shown up yet... I'll let you know if it doesn't show up eventually. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:58, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Inappropriate Comment on User:WWGB page

Evidently you were not aware of the previous report against WWGB for edit warring over the actual 1RR warning template on the same article. [2] or you would never have said WWGB was not aware of the 1RR. Now that you are aware, please use your mop to execute the block. Thanks. Legacypac (talk) 19:13, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Use of the mop is an admin's discretion. There is no rule on Wikipedia that an admin must block anyone. I will not be blocking in this instance. IF you want to throw you weight around, run for RfA.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:08, 13 December 2015 (UTC).

Excuse me? I point out you acted on a false premise and you insult and taunt me? You are correct you do not HAVE to block, but you explaination after you acted on a false premise is suspect. How can we trust an Admin like you? Legacypac (talk) 16:59, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Clerking proposal

Hi Kudpung. If you have time, would you mind looking over this draft RfC for clerking? Esquivalience started it, and it was put on hold until the Phase II RfC is closed. I made some changes to it just now, including some cleanup and the addition of a proposal or two. I know you're very interested in clerking and did extensive work on the topic in 2011, so I'm sure you could provide some valuable feedback. Thanks. Biblioworm 00:07, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi Biblioworm, I am one editor who is 100% in favour of clerking. For one thing, I have said time and tie again that the only thing wrong with RfA is the attitude of the voters. Fix them, and you'll fix RfA. However, There are a few things that I am not happy with. First of all, I assume that in wanting to propose this, both you and Esquivalience share the same goal, i.e. obtaining consensus for some officially recognised form of clerking. However, the two of you do not fully harmonise over this issue. For a joint proposal to succeed or even make sense, it must be prepared in very close collaboration. See for example how WP:BARC was a year in the making in user space, with collaboration and input from interested (but not necessarily vested) and highly experienced parties, and finally launched as a co-authored proposal. OK, it didn't quite get the resonance we hoped for but as WTT recently mentioned, it ain't over yet. That said, with the exception of the regular detractors and some people who told lies to discredit the proposers, it was a good debate and sufficiently subscribed in order to reach a proper quorum and an identifiable outcome.

The Clerking proposal still needs a huge amount of work if it is to succeed and while I don't want to be a co-producer, I would be more than happy to help craft and draft it, and in a way that it best meets our traditions for well formed RfCs, and carries the right degree of impact. However, much as I admire Bilioworm's initiative which has greatly enabled me to step back after these 6 long years battling for RfA reform, and while I appreciate the massive amount of work it involved (I think I'm qualified to judge that too), I think it would be a politically good move at this stage to hand the reins over, at least for the clerking, to someone else.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:56, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't intend to take over the entire drafting process, but I just made some clarifications concerning existing consensus, copy edited and cleaned up some things, and added a proposal that Esquivalience placed on the main proposal page but may have forgotten to add to the RfC itself (the specific proposal was the one about stopping RfAs after the scheduled ending time). Other than that, I think the basic framework of the RfC is good and I don't plan to do much more with it, unless I see something else that could be improved. Biblioworm 01:02, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry if my answer was a bit disjointed. It came due to copying and pasting after an edit conflict. The proposal still needs a lot of fleshing out. As it stands at the moment, the plebiscite would make a mockery of it. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:11, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I'll leave the major fleshing out to someone else; I'm low on ideas after going through the extremely difficult task of putting together two major RfCs, which is why I only did some basic cleanup and clarifications. I'm now going to go back to working on an article I want to get up to GA but have neglected for some time, since I've been answering many questions about proposals and virtually acting as director of the whole effort lately. Biblioworm 01:21, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Now you know how I felt a few years ago with WP:RFA2011. The only difference is that it was designed as a project rather than one big rambling RfC. We actually had a bigger task force than the turnout for your RfC but the work began to get derailed when the anti-admin brigade started to come out in force so, probably much to their satisfaction, we abandoned it.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:17, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

A comment you left

I couldn't help but notice a comment you left here. What were you referring to when you wrote "plebeian drama boards"? Urban Dictionary defines a "plebeian" as "of low social standing, riff-raff, loser", so I'm not sure what boards you were referring to? Thank you in advance for your reply. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:28, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your question. I'm a print-published lexicographer (McGrawHill), I don't use Internet based 'urban dictionaries'. I prefer academic works of reference that provide proper and broader content. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:04, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

What were you referring to when you wrote "plebeian drama boards"? Magnolia677 (talk) 01:19, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

If you are an advocate of democracy, and if you read this in its correct context, with the help of a quality dico it shouldn't be hard to understand. Anyway, the message on Drmies page wasn't meant for you. He understood though.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:22, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

How he treated me after I politely pointed out an obvious error (told an edit warring person he was unaware of 1RR) two threads above confirms his disregard for non-admin users. Legacypac (talk) 18:18, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for protecting The Open Championship. The reason I asked at ANI – and I suppose I should've mentioned it – is that I wasn't sure whether to ask for semiprotection or a block for the anon. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 15:24, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

London District Christian Secondary School

Please reconsider your semi-protection of the London District Christian Secondary School page. In the past two years, there have been only a few cases of vandalism, all from the same IP which can easily be blocked instead. Semi protection for a whole year is overkill and not in line with policy and the open nature of the project. Thank you. 77.99.229.140 (talk) 19:04, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I'll consider it, but it's not because of your Wikilawyering. I'll be 10 miles away from you in in two weeks, so I'll pop round and and we can discuss it over a cup of tea. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:00, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, two weeks is certainly a long time for you to consider your mistake. I left a note here since policy requires me to discuss it with the protecting admin first. Since you seem rather flippant about it, I’ll take it to RFPP. Thank you for your consideration. 77.99.229.140 (talk) 20:24, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps you'll check your facts before you do. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:29, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm open to discussion. If I made a mistake, please let me know. 77.99.229.140 (talk) 20:32, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Your only mistake was coming here with your firs ever edit with such a pompous attitude. I'm the kind of guy that's a lot more cooperative with people who can lighten up - especially if they come from my neck of the woods (or do they?). --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:44, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I shall refrain from posting on your talk page again. 77.99.229.140 (talk) 20:51, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:22, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Legacypac

Given your inappropriate comments to me above, and your inappropriate post to User:WWGB to which I objected, I'm VERY surprised to see you close this RfD Ashley_Golebiewski_(3rd_nomination) I started. I'd ask you revert the close as you are an involved editor and let someone involved close it. Legacypac (talk) 06:25, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

While gathering some diffs for something else I'm working on, yes, I came across that AfD, looked at it, saw an easy close, and closed it. AfD is an area where I frequently operate and my closes are rarely, if ever, overturned. You are welcome to discuss the closure at WP:DELREV where of course I will be happy to comment (availability permitting) if it helps to clarify anything. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:33, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Legacypac, I personally don't see any reason why we consider such local winners notable--but given the discussion, there was no other way to close it. Drmies (talk) 17:31, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy holidays! Jim Carter 13:07, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Message

Hi Kudpung. Thank you for your support at my RfA. I don't recall ever being happier at being described as adequate ;) But more seriously, you make an important contribution to ORCP. At my poll, even before your longer comment, it was encouraging to have positive feedback from an admin deeply involved in RfA and moreover with probably the strictest written criteria! Thanks again and happy holidays to you. BethNaught (talk) 20:39, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings!

Hello Kudpung: Enjoy the holiday season and upcoming winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:51, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Merry Christmas!

Hope the holiday season treats you well my esteemed coulege. (I actually prefer my coulege chowed, not esteemed)

Hope you don't get heat stroke. I'll toss a snowball at my son in your name. John from Idegon (talk) 07:08, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Holiday Cheer

	Seasons Greetings
	Christmas! Christmas, everywhere, on every talk page, I do dispair Seasons being greeted and Wikibreaks told, but still time for a little more editing, for being WP:BOLD! So go on, go forth and enjoy beyond concern Your Wiki will be waiting for when you return. Have a great Holiday Season. Buster Seven Talk 18:40, 21 December 2015 (UTC) This card designed by User:Samtar.

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Bullying_at_Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

You say: "take it to the appropriate noticeboard". Which is the appropriate noticeboard? Biscuittin (talk) 21:27, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I suggest you sound out the people at DRN or 3O.

Wishing you all the best . . .

Merry Christmas, Kudpung, and may your holidays be merry and bright . . . . Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:53, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

ϢereSpielChequers is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec15c}} to your friends' talk pages.

Best wishes for the holidays...

		Season's Greetings
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Shepherds (Poussin) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 10:26, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Buon Natale

May you have very Happy Holidays, Kudpung...

and a New Year filled with peace and happiness.

Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 18:56, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 00:52, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

78.26's RFA Appreciation award

	The 78.26 RFA Appreciation award
	Thank you for the participation and support at my RFA. It is truly appreciated. I hope to be of further help around here, and if you see me doing something dumb, you know where to find me. Of course, we both know you did much more for me than what appears at the RfA proper, but often the best work gets no credit. Again, I thank you. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 02:00, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

ANI discussion

That was a much quicker close that I expected.

"I am very cautious when it comes to avoiding any outing, but if editors feel otherwise, please provide diffs or the like so I can improve."

Do you have any diffs or the like? --Ronz (talk) 16:42, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Ronz, it was prematurely closed in good faith by a non-admin before the opportunity was allowed to issue you with an admonishment for hounding, and for not reading what others had posted. I also find the L2 title of this thread to be a sardonic ad hominem at Scottywong. Please let that be the end of it and note that your contributions are now on admins' radars. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:57, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Could you please provide diffs?

As for the FCOI, I don't know what you mean. He has said he's currently employed by a company listed in the article and whose self-published articles are used as sources. That's a FCOI, correct?

Merry Christmas and happy holidays to you and yours! --Ronz (talk) 15:45, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

The problem is, Ronz, that as has been pointed out on this ANI thread, you don't appear to read or understand what others are saying to you. Now please read my post above, taking particular care to follow the links. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:06, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Your assumption that I haven't read it all doesn't help. I have.

I've asked for diffs, or any other indicator of specific comments, edits, etc that you find problematic. Could you please? --Ronz (talk) 16:39, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Ronz, but with all due respect I'm really beginning to believe you are hard of hearing. The Scottywong case has been closed by the community as reaquiring no action. Your persistent manner is beginning to manifest itself here too. I do suggest you drop both issues and give it a rest. I will not be responding to this thread on my talk page again and I will shortly be archiving it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:52, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your time. --Ronz (talk) 17:06, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

	Merry Christmas!!
	Hello, I wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year, Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia!    –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 12:15, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Greetings

Hello Kudpung: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Tito Dutta (talk) 18:13, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Carlo Luigi Giuseppe Bertero

Well done! Any reason for the variant order of forenames in lead - is it a typo or something from one of the sources? I've made a redirect from the two-name version C.. B... PamD 09:00, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

PamD, dunno. I just took it from one of the other language Wikis. The Germans list it slightly differently. JSTOR lists 'Bertero, Carlo Luigi Giuseppe'. A search in en.Wiki simply under Bertero lists the article, but I have never understood how our internal search engine works. Google has indexed it already. I don't think we need additional redirects beyond what you have done already. Best wishes, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:10, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Suggestions please

Re: [3], I'd like suggestions on what I can do now. Thanks! --Ronz (talk) 17:38, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Drop your COI investigations and find a new focus for your work on Wikipedia? But please don;t post here again if you can elp it.. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:43, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "Drop your COI investigations". I'd like to assume you mean the CobraNet discussion at COIN, which is unchanged in over a week. If you mean something else, then I'm afraid I don't understand. I've tried, but you chose to end the discussion.

I'd appreciate it if you'd not make comments like [4] if you don't want to discuss the matter. --Ronz (talk) 18:20, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 December 2015

• News and notes: WMF Board dismisses community-elected trustee

• Arbitration report: Second Arbitration Enforcement case concludes as another case is suspended

• Featured content: The post-Christmas edition

• Traffic report: The Force we expected

• Year in review: The top ten Wikipedia stories of 2015

• In the media: Wikipedia plagued by a "Basket of Deception"

• Gallery: It's that time of year again

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:34, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

2016

	Happy New Year 2016!
	Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unneccessary blisters.    – Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:07, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year Kudpung!

Happy New Year!

Kudpung,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Poepkop (talk) 17:37, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to user talk pages.

.

Happy New Year, Kudpung!

Happy New Year!

Kudpung,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 00:29, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to send this message

By the way, did you know that this edit was the last edit made in 2015, and this is the first edit of 2016? (Times in UTC, of course). —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 00:29, 1 January 2016 (UTC)