User talk:Kudpung/Archive Jan 2016
Happy New Year, Kudpung!
edit
Kudpung,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 11:56, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
- Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Pratyya (Hello!) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! Welcome the 2016. Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2016 with good health and your wishes come true! 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 Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2016 go well for you.
Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:User:Pratyya Ghosh/Happy New Year}} to their talk page with a Happy New Year message.
Happy New Year!
editHello. Best wishes for the new year. It was a bit sad to see you relinquish the tools, but I don't blame you. Judging by your user page you and I have a lot in common, in addition to being retired, the only big difference being that I don't live in Thailand... Cheers, Tom Thomas.W talk 23:12, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Greetings, stalk page talkers
edit
|
Season of Goodwill |
| The phrase “peace on earth and goodwill to all” is often used around this time of the year. It represents the warm feeling that is synonymous with an implicit hope, a spirit of generosity and a kindly disposition toward others which are qualities we should be able to expect from all, whatever their faith (or none).
These ideals are often marred by the most vicious personal attacks and back-stabbing by some so-called Wikipedia contributors. Clearly there is an intentional disconnect between the peaceful-sounding mantras and the disturbing verbal violence. If we lift our heads above the the DYK, FA, GA, RfA, ACE, NPP, AfC, ANI, and the talk and election pages of Wikipedia and take a cold, hard look at the comments around them, where are the peace and goodwill so often alluded to? Unfortunately, some users are determined to undermine our collaborative spirit. The choice is theirs: they can either start demonstrating some good will, or continue to make fools of themselves until they are finally banned, or they just leave us and our project in peace. With over 5 million articles, we can do without their contributions. |
WP:ANI discussion
editI saw you closed the discussion at the ANI regarding Volunteer Marek's behavior. Could you explain what exactly is meant by WP:TITLECHANGES ("Changing one controversial title to another without a discussion that leads to consensus is strongly discouraged....Any potentially controversial proposal to change a title should be advertised at Wikipedia:Requested moves, and consensus reached before any change is made") Your closing of the threat just shows that nobody actually cares about it. And once again, it wasn't about the dispute, it's about the sheer ignorance of rules.HerkusMonte (talk) 06:02, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
P.S.: Just wanted to add that WP:DRN (which you suggested to use) explicitly states "this noticeboard is for content disputes only", while my ANI appeal was not about content but about behavior, the intentional violation of basic rules of WP:RM (WP:RMCI, WP:RMNAC) and WP:TITLECHANGES. WP:3O was neither appropriate because more than just 2 editors were involved. HerkusMonte (talk) 13:41, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- There is too much belief that all content disputes have to be resolved by coming to ANI and expecting admins to block or ban users involved in content disputes. Whether or not some guidelines have been transgressed does not mean either that admins MUST impose a block or a ban to resolve a situation. Whether or not DRN or 3O are the appropriate venues for this particular dispute is besides the pint - the real location is the article talk page and we should make an effort to mediate and steer the participants towards it rather than waving a drill sergeant's baton at them. Feel free to reopen the case if you wish - I don't mind, but heavy-handed use of admin tools is one of the reasons I no longer wanted to belong to that user group.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:59, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
In case you haven't noticed!
edithttps://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-articleinfo/ is operational again. You can look up some pages now.—cyberpowerChat:Online 15:14, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) @Cyberpower678: Hey, how did that get fixed?! Who did it?! TIA! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:49, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Next meetups in North-West England
editHello. This is just to let you know that the next wikimeets in North-West England will take place in:
- Manchester on 23rd January 2016
- Liverpool on 27th February 2016
Please sign up on the relevant wikimeet page if you can make them! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:10, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
You've got mail!
edit
Message added 19:04, 23 January 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
The Signpost: 20 January 2016
edit- News and notes: Vote of no confidence; WMF trustee speaks out
- In the media: 15th anniversary news round-up
- Traffic report: Danse Macabre
- Featured content: This week's featured content
Success Academy Charter Schools -- assistance requested
editHello, Kudpung
We corresponded a number of months ago about how best to address inaccuracies and other issues in the article about Success Academy Charter Schools, and you advised me to engage the editors on the Talk page. Since then, the editors and I have had some lengthy discussions -- none of them particularly fruitful, but at least there was a dialogue. In the last few weeks, however, I have posted and reposted requests about some problems with the page that I consider quite urgent, and I have received no reply from any of the editors. If you could advise me as to how best to call their attention to my posts, so we can restart the conversation, I would be most appreciative.
Thank you. Bev at Success Academy (talk) 23:02, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Bev. From what I can see, most of the contributions over the past 14 months have been from admins or other very experienced editors such as Softlavender for example. The others seem to be mostly 'throw in' edits by passing SPAs. Perhaps you should go ahead and make the required edits - you appear to have a good grasp of our neutrality requiremenrs. No everything needs to be sourced - only claims that might raise contentious objections. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:54, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Greetings! I received a legitimate edit request for Thailand on my user talk page from an new user earlier and in carrying it out, I noticed it's been semi'd since August. Things seemed to have quieted down now and, since you were the one who protected it, I thought I'd ask if you think it might be time to try un-protecting it and see what happens? Cheers!--William Thweatt TalkContribs 13:36, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
- Hi. With articles like Thailand, things are only ever quiet because it's been protected. If you want to start a requst for unprotection, you are welcome to do so, but personally I would be reluctant o unprotect it at all. Even while protected there are problematic edita added by confirmed accounts. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:44, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
- OK, it was just a thought. I meant that the political events in Thailand that precipitated all the vandalism last year have quieted down (obviously the article will be more stable if it's permanently protected). However, I trust your judgement.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 22:24, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 January 2016
edit- News and notes: Geshuri steps down from the Board
- In the media: Media coverage of the Arnnon Geshuri no-confidence vote
- Recent research: Bursty edits; how politics beat religion but then lost to sports; notability as a glass ceiling
- Traffic report: Death and taxes
- Featured content: This week's featured content