User talk:Privatemusings/Archive 2

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Hoppingofffornow.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kelly ^hi! 02:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Kelly - not sure if you watch these message or not - but I've popped a question onto the image talk page - hope you might be able to help! thanks, Privatemusings (talk) 04:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ps - just in case you are around... do you think it might be possible to reword / remove the word 'blatant' from the above template? - to me, it creates the impression that I'm 'in trouble' - and could perhaps be toned down a bit? I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on that one... Privatemusings (talk) 04:41, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hooray! (and giggles!) - thanks for the thong boots, hesp - hopefully you might agree in due course that the smh article was actually ok, and that my talking to people isn't too bad a thing! Now that we've exchanged footwear, I think we can set off on a better path! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 07:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, no, sorry, thanks. To paraphrase

yeah! - you're a legend! - there might even be further opportunity (or work for you!) once they get online and hopefully get some attention - links to the meta pages will be essential, and any other ideas are most welcome too! thanks heaps! - Privatemusings (talk) 04:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saw you added Alex Bakharev's pic. I did initially consider adding the pics, but some are not hosted on Commons, and I wasn't sure whether I should just upload them their myself, so I left all of them out.

talk) 06:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

yeah - I kinda just wanted to see if I could make it work! - and I think it does 'prettify' the page a bit - under the terms of the licensing I guess I could copy the absent photos over from meta - but perhaps there's a way of linking to a meta wiki image? - I'll fiddle tomorrow - the audio is going online in about 24 hours I'd say - 7 our of 15 so far, but hopefully I'll get over half way before the deadline! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 07:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. Those images that were uploaded exclusively to meta cannot be displayed without uploading them to Commons or WP. I'm guessing from statements like for use in my candidacy that those users certainly wouldn't want the pictures elsewhere, and we'd have to ask them for express permission. Since there is a link to each candidate statement, where in turn the images are displayed, I think it's not really worth the trouble.

bah! - I've taken a liberal interpretation of 'for use in my candidacy', and hope not to ruffle any feathers by uploading 3 of the pics to commons so the little image thing worked!

you deserve huge credit for the page layout - which I think really helps make it easy to click and listen etc., so thanks heaps! I've dropped a note at AN about the interviews... and hopefully it'll get some listeners in due course! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 06:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you going to complete the series (the notice above the uncompleted ones seems to imply that not)?

talk) 07:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

The episode is an interview special with the candidates for the 2008 elections of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. It includes interviews with english wikipedia candidates such as Ryan Postlethwaite, Matthew Bisanz.

From the Not The Wikipedia Weekly team -- ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 16:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're receiving this message from

Hi there, I would just like to point out that this is a slight error, Although the page has now been created ready for the sound files the sounds are not currently there and all link to episode 16. Sorry for this message, I will resend a remind once the files are confirmed and uploaded. Thanks. ·Ãḍď§ђɸŗЄ· ^Talk 18:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

though you must be absolutely snowed under wiki-wise semi permanently nowadays, I've rustled up the temerity to swing by here and wonder if I could chat to you about a checkuser related question? - It'll probably take a few questions and answers and stuff - but there's absolutely no rush at all, and I thought I'd see if you were up for it... It relates to my case specifically, and if it's cool with you I can explain...! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 03:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't do so much CheckUser stuff myself, but you're welcome to ask anything you like; probably best if you

talk) 12:50, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm not a clerk, but I reformatted your petition using their standardized template. I listed it as a request to amend your prior case, but it might be more legitimate to call it an appeal. On that, I'm uncertain. However, I agree with you that template is impossibly difficult to figure out. I might stab at refining it later. Have a good day! --InkSplotch (talk) 12:37, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks heaps, splotch! - after about 10 mintues of well intentioned button clicking, I'm afraid I just sort of gave up, and in a bit of a blanche moment relied on the kindness of strangers! so thanks! (and good luck with the template tweaking!) - Privatemusings (talk) 12:39, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem mate. I probably could have left a message saying it was a category for all players who have played for the Storm. Good pics of the Manly players BTW.Londo06 12:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, always good to know there are wikipedians who like their footy.Londo06 12:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does checkuser work for admin also? I really did accurately report that an image is now available at the commons with a bogus file history. It should be well known and understood, especially by those who have access to faking a file history that I have no way to actually prove it other than being there and being interested. There is a similar problem with some people who have recently gained administrative priveleges (as in since November 2007) -- they simply did not exist before then and arrived here all expert and 'in'. It makes me sad and the kind of sick inside where I think that the being human is reverting back into the dark ages and the abuses of the class (the kind of class in which one person says I am in charge here and you are supposed to be a worker 'for' me).

I really have a difficult time changing my language for such medieval kind of behavior and systems but yet, I should be here if for no other reason than I am a good contributor and not a huge hacker of existing, broken and wrong systems.

As for writing articles, it has been difficult -- I write for my web site and I can read, that stuff is pretty darn good. Writing for the formatted stuff like this has been an excellent challenge.

It would be nice if those who are making an issue of my 'plagiarism' and citing their own collegic experiences with it would 1) use their real name and give transcripts that show they have the experience they claim 2) I would like to see receipts for non-free software that is used to work the free wiki with -- imaging and editing stuffs 3) administration without the use of real names or knowlege of their real backgrounds, they want to be taken seriously?

Does checkuser work on admin with suspicious non-provable backgrounds? -- carol (talk) 08:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jumping in here, as an admin who real life identity has been confirmed by the Foundation, checkuser can be requested against any registered account or IP address at

WP:SOCK. As far as requiring identification, the Foundation that own the servers and software the site runs on, has removed the issue of requiring disclosure of one's real life identification from community decisions at m:Foundation issues, point 2. So even if the en.wiki community as a unanimous group wanted to demand identification, it couldn't. Its a flaw, as we all learned with the Essjay controversy that people can claim fake credentials, but given the issues with harassment and privacy that have occurred in the past, I can understand why some individuals would seek to use pseudonyms when editing. MBisanz ^talk 20:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Personally, I can provide evidence that I did not acquire a Bachelors degree in Mathematics or Physics if required to do so. It is my claim about my credibility. -- carol (talk) 20:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know exactly what the file history that you claim has been falsified consists of, so I can't comment specifically. I will say that no-one, admin, bureaucrat, checkuser, founder, has the technical ability to insert details into any log or history (though users with the oversight permission can remove information, although this action is logged). Only developers with shell access can manage this, and I find it extremely likely that they would. Perhaps you could provide more details? Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 21:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Sam, if you can provide some more details on the specific file in question (is it an article or an image file? was it at en.wiki or another project? who uploaded it and around when did they do it? etc) I can look in the deleted file logs and can probably give at least a link to the publically available log showing that an action occured. Sam knows the rules of oversight better than I do, since he is one, so I'm not sure what he can confirm from their logs, but we do have the m:Ombudsman commission to investigate alleged abuses of the oversight tools. I'll also note that if this involves an image: space file, that previously deleted images were unable to be undeleted, and that deleted image logs would not carry over with a rename, so if this involves a very old file (before 2004 or 2007 depending on the type) it may be necessary to trace it through a couple of log entries to find the original file. MBisanz ^talk 22:50, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope my clerks were able to help you, Carol... your specific questions have, I hope, kinda been answered above, but if you wanted to chat about anything else - broader issues? how many little pricks it takes to change a lightbulb? :-) I'm happy too... whilst the bogus file history is a bit unlikely, is there an underlying issue I'm not getting yet? dunno really... let me know! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 01:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

God - I just re-read that last bit, and wanted to be really clear about two things; Firstly - Sam and Matt are not my clerks... this is a joke! - and secondly (and very importantly) the reference in the light bulb gag is to another of Carol's posts - and is nothing to do with anyone else, on this page, or elsewhere! phew! Privatemusings (talk) 01:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is okay by me, especially as I also don't have balls (as I insinuated elsewhere recently), nor do I want to magically grow some especially this late in my life. I do know how to change file histories on computers though; I do this on my computer and for my web site often. There is one of three time stamps which cannot be altered (that I know of). And it has been a while and I am only remembering two time stamps for files. I could install a wiki here and figure out which of the file times is being displayed. The making of a wikilink where there wasn't one while blocking is kind of minor and that happened to me. The changing of an image upload date is not so minor of an infraction to me. It is an image file that is on wikimedia.org and since then, it has happened to several files. I like that larger versions of the older images are being uploaded, I question the reason that the times are being changed. Not being able to change history is one of those things in life that is there to help calibrate what is being done. That could be expressed more clearly I think. Making the kind of history that you would like to remember is a much better approach to whatever the current problem is.

Oh, and the files are only uploaded there for contests which are here; I complain here about it because of that. Here being at the english wikipedia, not here on this particular talk page.... -- carol (talk) 02:45, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Privatemusings !

The topics include Wiki-Stress, Arbcom making policy and

From the Not The Wikipedia Weekly team -- ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 12:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC))[reply]

You're receiving this message from

Sorry 'bout that! You seem to cop your fair share of MfDs. Andjam (talk) 11:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no worries, andjam - it's interesting to see that the word can stir up such strong feelings - well actually the strength of the reaction isn't surprising, but the direction seems interestingly unpredictable... and yeah, I do seem to head to MfD semi-often - I'm just glad that it seems to be heading for a 'keep' - do you think it's a good idea? cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 23:33, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, completely my mistake. I deleted the wrong MfD...It was meant to be the one above it! It was a user request and awkwardly formatted, so I got the wrong one. Restored it immediately after realising. :) Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 23:29, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One of the things I was referring to was that "click" was misspelled. As for RSS feeds, I have no experience with them. Wish I could help. Enigma ^message 07:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

doh! - I fixed this now - thanks! - Privatemusings (talk) 03:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I've been listening to the episodes via Dan T's website. I just wish they were all posted there. Ah well, I take what I can get. Thanks for hosting them, Enigma ^message 04:52, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One more typo from the website: Episode 23: "the conversation with Ting Chen, recently elected to the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundaiton.... Should be three ellipses, not four, and Foundation is misspelled. Such niggling points... Anyway, I assume you know about this, but the quality on 23 was really poor. Thanks, Enigma ^message 05:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not edit anymore BLP's. Your arbitration sanction is still in place, and the recent comments by arbitrators have said that this is to be kept in place. You cannot lift ArbCom sanctions on your own back. Failure to comply with this will lead to a block. Ryan Postlethwaite 01:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hmmm... I'll have a think about this one - would you mind reviewing my recent edits (Jamie Lyon, Steven Bell, and a few others) to see if you agree broadly with me that they're ok to remain? Are you ok if I do vandalism reverts on the few BLPs on my watchlist? I'll certainly hold off for now elsewhere, and will post further here in due course.... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 01:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have problems with you reverting obvious vandalism, but you changing pics or any other type of editing are against the remedy. Given the request to revoke the sanction has been rejected so recently, you really are going to have to stop editing BLP's or you're going to end up blocked. Don't make any mistake here - I've got a hell of a lot of respect for you - you're clearly an intelligent guy, it's just time to put that intelligence into something that doesn't infringe on your editing restriction. Ryan Postlethwaite 01:55, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The ruling and arb comments on your clarification are clear. Plus, you can not overturn your own restriction. You're lucky you weren't already blocked. The ruling does not say "edit as long as they're 'good' edits". It says don't edit BLPs period. So, do not edit BLPs again or you will be blocked per the remedy. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

<- I'm definitely not going to edit any BLPs at the mo - though I would most certainly like to see my restriction lifted - I know you guys are here in good faith, and totally understand your positions - I'll lay out my thoughts a bit more when I've collected them. cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 02:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quit screwing around! You screw around too much!! I respect that you need a wheelbarrow to carry your

cajones around in, but it won't be funny when someone cuts them off. -- Kendrick7^talk 02:23, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

heh! anyone after my cajones would have to get past the person currently looking after them, and I wouldn't envy them that task! - let me know how they're doing, if you make it, and best wishes for a speedy recovery! This is, of course, a joke, and any reference to how my wiki behaviour clearly reflects my emasculation elsewhere will be deleted and stamped upon as a groundless personal attack.

The meat of this current tea cup tempest relates, amongst other things, to two rather fuzzy pictures of blokes lucky enough to play for the

best NRL team going - and hopefully we've avoided any escalation or further problem now...... it'll all come out in the wash... (good to see you, btw...) - Privatemusings (talk) 02:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I worked for a long while with a few waitresses. One of them told me that in her opinion, the very best line ever written for a rock and roll song was "Send me down to Paradise City where the grass is green and the girls are pretty". I agree; this is a great line/rhyme that should meet up to all standards ever imposed on that genre of music.

Lately, I have been thinking that the line "Told my girl I had to forget her, rather buy me a new carburetor" while somewhat dated now with fuel injection is almost as good or superior to that other line which kind of gets it easy through life as most grass is green.

Thoughts or better lines? -- carol (talk) 01:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And don't get me started on how they make cars now that never even had a heart.... -- carol (talk) 01:37, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"It's all put together, with alligator leather; m-m-m-m-m-my, my, my Mustang Ford..." and "Just like a car, you're amazing to behold - I'll call you Jaguar, if I may be so bold" (Marc Bolan). LessHeard vanU (talk) 08:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I well remember the salacious giggles when I first heard the first draft of those lyrics, carol... you can't actually get much better than Love Me Do in my book - but here's another personal favourite;

..the owner is a mental midget with the I.Q. of a fence post

and I certainly haven't been drinking. Privatemusings (talk) 23:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Beatles cannot be compared against for harmony, I think it is one of the main reasons that their lyrics will live and live and live. I think that Abacab was a quite possibly a homework assignment.... -- carol (talk) 04:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

C+, must try harder. Privatemusings (talk) 05:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Locally, it seems to be "And then there were three" -- I don't know enough to give them a grade though.

Thanks for the help with that other rhyme! I have been thinking about my problems here and find myself wondering if the tea you are drinking is "Constant Comment"? -- carol (talk) 10:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know where and when! If you can let me know what you want to talk about, I can have a think about it too. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 10:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

replied at Sam's talk page... Privatemusings (talk) 01:56, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Privatemusings !

The topics for these episodes include:

• A near as real time gets on wikipedia discussion regarding the recent events involving
  WP:ARBCOM
• A short conversation with Wikimedia's newest board member

From the Not The Wikipedia Weekly team -- ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 15:25, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're receiving this message from

Good idea, but I think the page needs a shortcut. :)

Now will anyone bite? Guettarda (talk) 04:15, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We'll see! - now I'm off to make

WP:RfC/AC/AptoafQ - rolls off the tongue, don'tcha think? Privatemusings (talk) 04:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Have a look at the page history. Only a select few have ever edited that policy! :-) Carcharoth (talk) 04:38, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed! I had no idea I was joining a rarefied crowd! - I just tried to catch up with the discussion after a weekend away, but it all seems rather complicated now - I can't tell if the edit will make the policy or not! - but I hope it does - I thought you and Daniel did some good work there... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 04:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'll need a couple of days to work out what's going to be best -- I might be working in the evenings next week so I will let you know. Provided I can set Skype for Linux up, Skype will be fine. I'll have another look into that stuff before then. Best, Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 13:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

cool - I've been away all weekend, and I've now got an image of you happily paying with Skype on your linux machine! - My Skype ID is 'privatemusings' - so feel free to add me at any point... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 04:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you are interested or not, but I was informed that you might wish to know about http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Ethical_Management_of_the_English_Language_Wikipedia. WAS 4.250 (talk) 19:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested Was - thanks for the link... I'll read and comment when I have a useful thought! :-) Privatemusings (talk) 00:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You did not change the rationale and it's malformed. What is going on? — Rlevse • Talk • 23:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! - I totally recognise that I'm probably not filling in the forms correctly - I wanted to change the rationale from merely 'clerking' (filing without prejudice) to actually requesting the arb.s consider it (expressing a desire that they hear this...) - any help you can offer is much appreciated... thanks! Privatemusings (talk) 23:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't he just using an unblock template? Unblock is not a valid reason for an arbcase. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ah - my reading was that he sought an unblock to participate in the arb case concerning the more general matters raised - specifically the matter bolded in his statement. I see the arb case as significantly broader than the unblock issue. Privatemusings (talk) 23:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that. It seems more an AN issue, besides I doubt the arbs will take it as no DR has been tried other than unblock requests. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

<- It was at AN/I (per the evidence in the statement submitted here) with no unblock forthcoming prior to archiving... if you take a look at some of the admins' block reviews there does seem to be a bit of disagreement / conflation / confusion about the nature of the block which renders an admin consensus unlikely (in my view) to be formed - most especially in light of 'wheel warring' remaining a little undefined. P'raps there are some obvious format changes / explanations that would help? Maybe I should write up a short statement? thanks heaps for your help, Privatemusings (talk) 23:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll help you format it but don't count on it getting accepted. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks! - and whilst I'd hope it would be accepted and result in some resolution on important issues... I also am somewhat cynical about aspects of current process... still - I live in hope, and your assistance is much appreciated! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 23:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See 23:29 RFAR diff. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:30, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Carcharoth is going to fix some links at ANI that are now archived in your post at RFAR, he's just helping so don't worry or complain, okay? — Rlevse • Talk • 23:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I try not to do either, R! - thanks for the note... Privatemusings (talk) 23:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It might also be an idea to contact the Dutch Wikipedia editors on their Dutch talk pages, if you have single-user login (SUL) enabled yet and can do that. Rlevse, in the era of SUL, are cross-wiki notifications required in cases like this? Carcharoth (talk) 23:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do have the single login thing, and will happily copy the message to respective pages (if I can figure out where they are!) - I'll hold off pending further advice though... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 23:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For heaven's sake, don't get the nl-wiki editors more involved in GDB's case than they already are. Balko Kabo (talk) 01:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you could be right, Balko - I think Carcharoth was just seeking to ensure that editors here on en who are also editors at nl were appropriately informed... I'm hopeful that the arb case being rejected, and the temperature coming down a bit will get us to a good resolution in due course. :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 02:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestion is create a subscription icon at the top of the page. Try either of the two by "un-pre'ing" and let me know if you like the idea and if so which one you like better:

<div style="position:absolute; right:16px; top:10px;" class="metadata topicon" id="rss"><div style="position:relative; width:51px; height:20px; overflow:hidden;"><div style="position:absolute; font-size:20px; overflow:hidden; line-height:20px; letter-spacing:51px;">[http://ntww.dan.info/ntwwfeed.rss <span title="subscribe" style="text-decoration:none;">   </span>]]</div>[[Image:RSS icon.svg|51px]]</div></div>

<div style="position:absolute; right:16px; top:10px;" class="metadata topicon" id="rss"><div style="position:relative; width:20px; height:20px; overflow:hidden;"><div style="position:absolute; font-size:20px; overflow:hidden; line-height:20px; letter-spacing:20px;">[http://ntww.dan.info/ntwwfeed.rss <span title="subscribe" style="text-decoration:none;">   </span>]]</div>[[Image:Feed-icon.svg|20px]]</div></div>

user:Everyme 06:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've tweaked it and included some preliminary slogan. The icon must go into the /Header subpage though, for reasons of intricate page transclusion. The slogan can be changed or removed at

Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly/Header (very bottom of the code). The logo will always be aligned to the right side of the page, so there's no need for any other tweaking. user:Everyme 06:47, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

NotThewikipediaweekly

Next Skypecast:
end of July? Sign Up!! (

details/sign up

)

---

Latest: [[Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly#Our_latest_recorded_Skypecast|Episode

This WikiProject is defunct. Consider looking for related projects for help or ask at the Teahouse. If you feel this project may be worth reviving, please discuss with related projects first. Feel free to change this tag if the parameters were changed in error. Guide to WikiProjects Directory of WikiProjects

51]] Commons plugins, Flagged Revisions, BLP and other stuff.....

not|the|wikipedia|weekly

Next Skypecast:
end of July? Sign Up!! (

details/sign up

)

---

Latest: [[Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly#Our_latest_recorded_Skypecast|Episode

This WikiProject is defunct. Consider looking for related projects for help or ask at the Teahouse. If you feel this project may be worth reviving, please discuss with related projects first. Feel free to change this tag if the parameters were changed in error. Guide to WikiProjects Directory of WikiProjects

51]] Commons plugins, Flagged Revisions, BLP and other stuff.....

• On a related note, I've been considering designing a new logo for the NTWW subscription box. Not that it's that widely spread, but it's in the community portal, and the others (WW, Signpost) have such nice logos, and ours looks a tad crappy. I think designing an image would be overdoing it, but I've just wasted some time fiddling with normal font formatting. Now, without further ado (as if you haven't immediately glanced at the box and made up your mind already), here are my two favourite suggestions. Please note the depracating humor in having not and weekly stand out in black, which imho conveys the unofficial and ad-hoc philosophy behind the project. At any rate, do not feel pressured to humor me and accept just because I do all the formatting slavery! It's something that came out of simple boredom. I won't say which one I like better so as not to influence you. If you prefer the current logo that's fine as well. user:Everyme 12:00, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

love your work! - particular the sort of subliminal implication that not only are we not the wikipedia weekly, but we're not weekly either...! fits like a glove in my book. My choice would be the one on the left - and I would just go ahead and add it, but I've got a good track record in breaking such things! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 23:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)the 'cat feed' line raised a smile too.... tres droll![reply]

Thank you for participating in my RfB! I am very grateful for the confidence of the community shown at my RfB, which passed by a count of 154/7/2 (95.65%). I have read every word of the RfB and taken it all to heart. I truly appreciate everyone's input: supports, opposes, neutrals, and comments. Of course, I plan to conduct my cratship in service of the community. If you have any advice, questions, concerns, or need help, please let me know. Again, Thanks! — Rlevse • Talk • 08:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do I make them? I esp. like the colors and font of Image:Pathwordle.png. My wild idea right now is to create word clouds for things like the AN / ANI archives, or for the workshop pages of all ArbCom cases, then put them into a video slideshow, morphing from one image to the next so as to illustrate any potential development. Or I'll just play around with it for five minutes and then lose interest, haven't entirely made up my mind yet. user:Everyme 13:10, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it's over at http://wordle.net/ - I had to re-install my Java something or other to get it to work.. and it's a bit of a pain in the arse in that the only way I've figure out of grabbing the images created is to 'print screen' and paste... in terms of colours 'n stuff, I just hit 'Randomise' untill something I like comes up! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 05:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)ps. good on yer for signing up to my recent charity drive! It'd be awesome to break $100... and from there... who knows![reply]

I'm trying to enter the Not The Wikipedia Weekly Public Chat on Skype, and it says that the host has to accept me first. Do you know who I should contact to be accepted?--Danaman5 (talk) 15:17, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hmmmm... the public chat has moved around a bit, it seems... and the one that I was connected to via the link currently on the page seems dormant! - sorry about that! - I think User:Seddon is your best bet for a bit more help (I'll be pestering him later to try and get that link fixed!) - but if you'd like to add me as a Skype Contact, I think I can figure out how to 'add' you without too much trouble... my Skype ID is 'privatemusings' too.... it'll be nice to 'meet' you! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 05:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

note to self... managed to get danaman into the Skype chat ok... :-) Privatemusings (talk) 08:18, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, sorry, unprotected the talk. As I understood from Geni (talk · contribs), the page is edited in August before the election. Hopefully the unprotection has helped get things going anyway. :) Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 01:31, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Giovanni di Stefano (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is best left alone. He is engaged in prosecuting a case for criminal libel against the editor of the article in the Italian courts. Fred Talk 03:09, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yeah - I've seen some of the articles ref.d from the talk page - do you recall when we looked at some sort of template to try and be clear about this sort of thing? I'd be interested to hear your thoughts, because I'm not completely sold that the current solution is either the best, or the only one (to your credit, you've been clear all along that you're not sure either). I've been chatting about this a bit here too, where your thoughts are also most welcome... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 03:25, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently

not at all harsh, Sarc - and you're not alone in offering this advice..... I'm not really interested at the moment in working on that article at all.. it seems to me to be in good hands. I am interested in allowing folk to review a little bit about what went on towards the end of last year - particularly I'm interested to see if anyone might agree with me that mistakes were made. I won't engage at the AN/I thread because I suspect I'll only make things worse.... just for the record though, I haven't edited this article at all, nor do I intend to. Those interested in offering advice (or admonishment) are most welcome to take a stroll with me at my mentoring pages - where there is some relevant discussion. cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 00:07, 6 August 2008 (UTC)btw.. this is an example of the BLP editing referred to some edits after I returned from my 6 3 month ban earlier this year....[reply]

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For trying to 'raise some money for a good cause, and encourage progress in a difficult process,' and making me laugh. Tom Harrison Talk 17:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But really, if the arbs just did nothing, what would happen? Some people would get disgusted and stop editing, DanT would denounce yet another manifestation of BADSITES, people would be harassed and abused, and the project tomorrow would be a lot like the project yesterday. Contrast this with what would happen if the arbs did take action: Some people would get disgusted and stop editing, DanT would denounce yet another manifestation of BADSITES, people would be harassed and abused, and the project tomorrow would be a lot like the project yesterday. Tom Harrison ^Talk 18:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect there's quite a lot of wisdom in your comments, Tom - and I'm glad to raise a smile (even in a sensitive, serious situation)... Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose, I guess... :-) Privatemusings (talk) 23:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alastair Haines/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alastair Haines/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Coren ^(talk) 02:05, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note to self... Riana got there first it seems, but there's still some low hanging fruit, and these pics should be in articles, or my aunt's name isn't Mabel. Privatemusings (talk) 04:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

another one :-) (sending note to aussie mailing list too.....} Privatemusings (talk) 21:01, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per ruling of arbcom,

Congratulations on getting this far. Now let's put our heads together and find an interesting article to work on improving. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 00:20, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Continue to use Garden to work in, do you think? ++Lar: t/c 02:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so I am not a mentor. But hey, I wish you my support as well. Prodego ^talk 03:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks all! - everyone's welcome at my mentoring page, Prod (which is where I'd like most stuff to happen....) - I save further comment for over there........Privatemusings (talk) 03:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)although I may just say one small hooray!! - there![reply]

On WP:NLT http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:No_legal_threats#need_to_define_legal_threat , I have made a proposal. You also edited on that page. I am asking 2 people at random who edited on that page for comments to jumpstart the discussion. Thank you. Spevw (talk) 01:32, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

note to self - replied on linked page Privatemusings (talk) 00:01, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many people have been working hard on getting a new infobox up and running and we would like to have your thoughts on the subject here.  CorleoneSerpicoMontana  07:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the note, Corleone.. I'll take a look! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 07:16, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently semi-inactive on WUPDATE (and it appears, distressingly, to have ground to somewhat of a halt without me) but i'll add you on skype and spring along. I'd be interested in seeing what we can do to coordinate our projects and colaborate, although from what I can see there's little we can offer you; most of our listeners are also our contributors (very wiki-esque, really) so we're not much in terms of numbers, which tends to hinder us; I wanted to have an age & adminship discussion, for example, but it fell through due to lack of people willing to participate. Ironholds 04:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

well we might be able to sort of merge efforts somehow? - I've got you on Skype now, so will try and catch up real-time soon(ish) :-) Privatemusings (talk) 05:04, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there Privatemusings, I'd be interested in being involved in an episode of NTWW, having been an avid listener and having developed an interest in actually commenting on some of the types of issues which are frequently touched on in the Skypecast. My main problem comes in the fact that the Skypecast seems to be typically conducted during hours (and days) which I am not available, as I attend school from 900 to 1600 weekdays (Sydney time, UTC+10). I was wondering - is there any chance that some kind of weekend Skypecast could be arranged? or one done in the Sydney afternoon? If you'd be able to get back to me on this, I'd be hugely appreciate as I have eagerly desired to participate in what I think has grown into a very effective and interesting forum. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why we couldn't do a sensible time on an aussie weekend! (I'm in Sydney too...) - the morning's are probably the best - because Saturday morning would be late Fri night UK time, and Friday evening US time, which would probably work quite well..... if you're 'Skyped' up - do add me as a contact (ID Privatemusings) and drop me a message - I can then help you into what is now quite an active Skype Channel chatting about NTWW, and indeed all things Wikipedia related - look forward to chatting! best, Privatemusings (talk) 02:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, a Saturday morning Syd time sounds great, I'd be very happy to do that, and I immensely appreciate your flexibility in these regards. I will also make sure to add you to my contact list and drop you a line. Cheers, —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 17:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to tell you this, but there was a major screw up with the NotTheWikipediaWeekly. Your recorded episode is actual #31, not #30. Episode 30 was recorded on August 12, but was never put up. I wish this was given fair warning, but I had to move your recording to episode 31.Mitch32^(UP) 18:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ah, that's not a major screw up! No worries at all, Mitch - and sorry I forgot about the recording you did...! Do you want a hand getting it online? - I'll look for you on Skype, or drop a note in here if so! thanks for doing the moves etc.... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 02:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shoe has it unfortunately. I'd have to get it from him.Mitch32^(UP) 02:24, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great job PM! FYI, you mentioned that an arb clerk is a Scout leader, that's me. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All lower level leaders are volunteers, many upper level ones are. Few are paid professionals. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks very much, R! - I hope I was fairly accurate in what I mentioned! - my involvement with scouting took me as far as being a proud 'sixer' in short trousers...

I think I recall a comment, possibly from you, relating to the issue of volunteer responsibility - which is what I was referring to in a sort of roundabout way in the conversation - I'm interested (as you'll have heard) in trying to find ways to measure the effectiveness of folks in various roles - hopefully going further than the 'good faith volunteers who are donating their time' analysis in helpful ways.... thanks anyways for your comments - and can I persuade you along to a conversation at some point? :-) Privatemusings (talk) 02:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You want to interview me? What's so interesting about me? I don't know if I could talk for an hour. I thought you did a fine job of interviewing. Did you do this on Skype? I have never used Skype. Your Scout comments were fairly accurate. Scouting and Wiki would flop without volunteers, they're the cornerstone of both movements. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:52, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In your episode listing, why don't you add the topic/interviewee to it so we know what it's about? — Rlevse • Talk • 16:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

<- that's a good idea, R - in fact the whole 'archive' could probably be better managed - certainly helping people find the bits they might most be interested in would be a 'good thing' - although I confess at the mo. I'm a bit low on ideas how to best achieve this.... (feel free to edit away yourself, of course! - it's a wiki!) - in terms of persuading you along to a conversation - as well as interviews, we have pretty regular 'panel' discussions about all sorts of things - with typically 3 to 15 wikipedians talking away - the thoughts and comments of our most recent 'crat would certainly be most welcome! My central rationale personally lies firmly in the principle 'it's good to talk' - and I sincerely hope all sorts of valuable benefits flow form that...! :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 02:52, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Let me get set up on Skype. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:45, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See

I got some good practice in today with Skype. If you don't see me in IRC, email me or post to my talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sounds cool! - It's not all that hard to get used to really - and glad you're finding your feet ok.... I'm not really around much on weekends, so will try and touch base sometime next week... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 04:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

by the way (and I can't believe I forgot to mention it!) - the 'topics and participants' bit is absolutely fantastic! - it's exactly the sort of thing we need going forward - I guess in time it might actually spawn a subpage or subsection or something - but this is very very cool! thanks! Privatemusings (talk) 04:33, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, there's a good chance I'll be in Australia this November, in Melbourne. I'm not sure where that is in relationship to you, but if it's nearby, perhaps we'll have a beer. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 20:43, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

well Melbourne's about 600 miles away from Sydney! - but we have much nicer summers! - hop a plane (or drive if you fancy - the whole coastline is worth checking out!) - and there are several beers in it for you :-) Privatemusings (talk) 04:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt I'll have that freedom, I'm being flown out there for a convention, so I doubt I can pawn the flight to Sydney off on them. Plus depending on what days my flights are, I may actually only be in Melbourne a day at most (I'll probably be flying longer than I'm in the country). Oh well, maybe another time.⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 11:19, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely loved this. I felt bad for templating him after seeing it lol. THEN WHO WAS PHONE? (talk) 06:22, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

heh! - you used a friendly enough template! - I just thought the IP might be more interested in Samoan stuff than ancient Greek stuff! (I just caught the fact that he 'samoa'-ised Daedalus too!) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 06:53, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still want to do that interview? Possibilities are late today afternoon to evening, late Friday afternoon to evening, and Saturday, my time. Let me know. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sure do! - I'll see what time it is for you now... - there's no rush, and I look forward to chatting in due course.... :-) Privatemusings (talk) 01:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern USA. Too late for tonight, but Fri is possible. it's 10pm right now. compare to the timestamp in my sig. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:00, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, PM. Thanks for the heads up. I've responded on ANI and will be taking a short wikibreak until Sunday at least, possibly longer. I may be deployed to the Gulf Coast as part of Gustav-related efforts, so there is a chance I may be away for a while. Thanks for looking out for me :). Bstone (talk) 21:10, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, personally I really have no opnion, I just hate to see people get mocked for good faith concerns. Obviously the original poster of the discussion had good intentions, and the way the convo was going was distasteful at best. We can do better than that when discussing issues. Thanks for your comment. Cheers,

fantastic news!! - thanks so much, and I look forward with great anticipation to listening! - I'll fix up the pages now.... and thanks once again :-) Privatemusings (talk) 00:36, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's all online now - and I thought it was well worth a note on

WP:AN too.... feel free to drop me notes any time when you record more! (see what I did there? - hopefully this isn't an if thing!) :-) Privatemusings (talk) 03:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

note to self - upload the mp3 when the machine's back :-) Privatemusings (talk) 04:22, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you thought it was helpful. I'm hoping to organize another one in about six weeks or so. Perhaps "how to provide a helpful peer review" or something like that.

talk) 15:11, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I too thought he was great - and I hope this sort of thing may continue, and build a fantastic resource for sharing what might be called 'good wiki practice' (or something)... basically I just think it's cool. :-) Privatemusings (talk) 03:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

heyyy just saw your msg, thanks, man. I didn't mean to literally disappear from view, 'twas just an arbitrary IP change soon after. But i try to keep track of at least my last few talk pages, even if i am a little slack in checking 'em. Hope the mentoring is going well. 86.44.27.255 (talk) 05:17, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

heh! - I'm enjoying it, and find it quite valuable.. but a cursory browse of recent events indicates milage most certainly varies! - I posted something to AN which many felt was unwise, and it spread a bit... hopefully it's calming now though! Privatemusings (talk) 02:16, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to notify you when I did this. I'm sorry. link. NonvocalScream (talk) 02:53, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And there is also

thanks guys... I'll say something somewhere soon :-) Privatemusings (talk) 20:29, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PM, when you get a moment, can you just confirm whether or not you've agreed to mentorship terms that go beyond that which was mandated by the Committee? You don't need to worry about emails or anything at this point; just looking for a yea or nay. --

thanks for the note, bainer.... the answer is kinda sorta... you can see the correspondence here... I should have taken the time to respond more substantially to the tension between the arb mandate and the mentoring terms previously, and I really think that any miscommunication is my fault - hopefully we're moving on now on a good foot :-) I certainly wish to edit unencumbered by an arbcom restriction as soon as possible. :-) Privatemusings (talk) 01:31, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kindof sorta? Will you now consent totally or not? At this point in time, binary, are you consenting to this voluntarily. NonvocalScream (talk) 01:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC) NonvocalScream (talk) 01:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I posted something here, nonvoc, asking that we focus solely on the BLP matter from here on in, which I hope will work well. I'm thankful for your efforts in dotting the 'i's and crossing the 't's, and as you'll see if you review that page (and the talk page) I'm largely responsible for the mess! hopefully we can clear it up and I can be 'BLP only' mentored effectively moving forward :-) Privatemusings (talk) 01:41, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did not participate in that Arbitration Case for anything other than BLP, and I would not have for anything other than BLP. It is important to me that you become a good editor and I think you are making strides. the mentorship was never designed to include anything outside BLP edits, and I don't think it should. I don't want this arbitration remedy to be used for anything other than what its original intention. If it is, than I need to know, because in that case, then I have a few more things I need to say at the request for clarification. This is totally not something I am comfortable with, and I think it can all be cleared up if you will let up know - is this mentorship extension consensual? NonvocalScream (talk) 01:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

heh.. talk page posts crossed... any clearer? :-) Privatemusings (talk) 01:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Much clearer. I have added a bullet to my statement on the clarification section. NonvocalScream (talk) 02:18, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:-) Privatemusings (talk) 02:24, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		A barnstar for Privatemusings for getting the community to talk about the tough issues, instead of sticking their heads in the sand. In the end we are better for it, and I thank you. -- Ned Scott 03:07, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks heaps, Ned! - that's very cool :-) Privatemusings (talk) 06:16, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed in browsing my talk page history, that 86.132.248.199, who seems to be the now banned Peter Damian, asked me about my post to FT2's talk page.... for what it's worth I'm happy to allow such posts here (although I don't think I get to make that call?) - and the answer is that I've been clicking through some of the history of the stuff, and had some questions which were unresolved. FT made himself available for a long chat, which was very helpful, and I'm still chewing over some stuff :-) Privatemusings (talk) 02:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)well ok, I'm just getting distracted elsewhere... but that way sounds much better, no?[reply]

Buenos días.

definitely of interest, and would like to participate. I'm watching at the mo. and don't feel that I'm allowed to do much more.... good luck! Privatemusings (talk) 21:23, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...instead of edit warring. Jehochman ^Talk 03:19, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Responding to threats of harm, #wikipedia-en, email. These are all better places to discuss the policy. ANI is for administrator action. No action is possible, other than what has already been done. Jehochman ^Talk 03:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

responded on J's talk page - this was following a bit of perceived 'drama' around an AN/I thread relating to a suicide threat which I posted to a couple of times with some thoughts... there's a policy proposal now at VP, and discussion continuing around the wiki... Privatemusings (talk) 21:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It says on the

thanks heaps for offering to help - Dan (who has donated the web space) has been beavering away updating the RSS feed, but going forward it'd be great if you could help keep it up-to-date - we're editing it by hand at the mo. which is both kinda cool, and kinda clunky :-) - If you're up for adding a new ep. here and there, as and when - that'd certainly be very useful... I'll shoot you an email when I get some more files, and could do with a hand :-) thanks once again... Privatemusings (talk) 21:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Manly had it done before half-time. Great game to watch, thrashings aren't normally exciting but Manly just were amazing. Day final in Aus means it was a 6.30am start for us in the UK so not got too much else to do while the rest of the flat-mates are asleep. Great final, much better than last year. Glad you enjoyed it, GF victories don't come around too often. Well done Manly!Londo06 10:20, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Zagalejo^^^ 04:23, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'm glad we've got him, but ive not really seen him play, so cant comment, got any video clips. User talk:MadBullsFan 23:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey PM - I'm always up for a panel discussion, provided it's on a subject I know the first thing about (ideally also the second, but I'm not going to insist on that). Regarding the GFDL, based on everything I know about the GFDL, that article is indeed in violation of it. But that article is apparently very much on Mike Godwin's radar screen, and he's better-placed than I am to evaluate that (I am, after all, barely a month into law school - in a jurisdiction that's foreign to the WMF, no less). I'd appreciate an explanation as to why this isn't a GFDL violation at some point, but Godwin obviously doesn't have to explain himself to me. I'd also echo the advice of your mentors that you should possibly not worry so much about that article - there are thousands upon thousands of less delicate BLPs on which you could prove that your sanction should be lifted, and I frankly don't see why you're so interested in that one - but now I'm offering unsolicited advice.

replied at your talk :-) Privatemusings (talk) 03:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably best as a timeline thing, showing they were first selected in the train-on squad and then made the final cut. Always best to have references in the article as well.Londo06 11:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

okey dokey - I might try and reword it a bit though, to reduce 'clunk'... Privatemusings (talk) 03:57, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen a whiff of Alastair in over a week online, and I'm starting to get worried. Since you are in Australia, is there any way you can check up on him and see if he's okay -- and if there's anything he needs? Thanks. SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 14:16, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sorry a response has taken so long, Sky - I think I'll drop a note into Casliber, who I believe may have some contact with Alastair - I hope he's doing great - perhaps he just wants a bit of space? - Cas might be able to clue us in.... Privatemusings (talk) 03:57, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ah! - I see a large fire got in the way!! (very dramatic!) Glad all is well :-) Privatemusings (talk) 04:03, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive syntax, such as that you added to Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney. If you add greengrocers' apostrophes to Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. Andjam (talk) 12:25, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

good lord! My friend's would be shocked to learn of such disgrace. Everyone know's that its just stupid and lazy to allow poor grammar onto the wiki (or any other wiki's). I humbly beg forgiveness and offer my apology's. Privatemusings (talk) 04:00, 21 October 2008 (UTC)also known as Privatemusing's[reply]

It's nothing personal, PM.. I just don't think this is really helpful, as Steve can fight his own battles if he really wants to, and this is the kind of thing that your mentors don't want you doing, as it's not helpful and a distraction. Hope you understand. SirFozzie (talk) 07:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no worries, Foz - and though I disagree that this isn't helpful (and am happy to talk about why!) I totally understand that in many ways you're looking out for me in bringing it up... in that spirit, thanks...! best, Privatemusings (talk) 07:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

by way of a 'note to self' really, here's the material that I've read... I have a feeling that egg is heading toward my face, and that I've missed something obvious.. so will keep looking.

• arb case 31st August (oops... this was in fact a 'request for clarification' - mea culpa)
• AN Review 27th - 29th Sep
• Steve's talk page - same as review really.
• the original AN thread 24th August

I think I've missed a request for clarification, which is rather embarrassing, so will dig it out. Privatemusings (talk) 00:08, 23 October 2008 (UTC)I would like to quietly dispute that this is entirely left-field, poorly researched and frivolous though.[reply]

< and here's the best diff yet, by way of explanation. Took a bit of finding... and helps - but for me, some uncertainty remains... still sniffing around though :-) Privatemusings (talk) 01:46, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

had a good chat this morning in IRC with User:Daniel and User:MBisanz amongst others on this one - have now flicked arbcom an email, and hope for a response before too long... :-) Privatemusings (talk) 04:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm intrigued, what's the thought/plan? Cool Hand Luke 14:59, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it's rather lacking at the mo! - I have been, and remain, fiercely critical of some aspects of our arb system - in many ways I think we set some of our best users up to fail, which is unfair on all of us. It's my perception that a large part of wiki culture involves being willing to roll your sleeves up, and help, where you see problems, and it's really with that in mind that I've been thinking about sticking my hand up and sharing a few ideas :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 22:22, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

G'day monkey! - thanks for your help cleaning up the John Ogden bio - I've been working on that one offline for a while, and it's very cool to see improvements made so quickly - it's a wonderful wiki process! :-)

I wonder also if you might have a moment spare to offer your advice on my personal situation in regard to arbcom restrictions etc. - my mentoring has hit a rough patch, which is a shame, and kinda leaves me in a bit of an uncertain situation... if you get the chance I'd welcome your input here - I'll go vote on those good lookin' aussies now they've come to my attention, and thanks for your time anywhoo.... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 04:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think they want you to edit articles. I remember that you went to the SCG during last January's notorious Test. Would you like to write about cricket? YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 04:40, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite proud of my dodgy photography currently on quite a few cricket articles (the shot at Partnership_(cricket) would have been just before 'that' incident, I think) - and would be happy to try and help somewhere, if poss. - I've been thinking about trying to get some more video footage (see for example Brookvale Oval for the sort of thing I mean), but am also up for hearing more ideas! What's tweaking the yellow monkey's interest at the mo? Privatemusings (talk) 04:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)thanks heaps for coming by, and it would probably be remiss of me not to highlight the fact that my mentorship programme has discontinued at the request of my mentors[reply]

I know, I was just wondering whether you might resuscitate it with a more engrossing topic. YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 05:15, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm somewhat active in the images area, but I don't pretend to be an expert. That being said, I see your point as to personality rights and the bridal image in particular. However, I'd be hesitent to try adding it to the CSD image policies, as there are already enough landmines and sore feelings there. Unasserted personality rights are a gray area, and I could see a lot of pointless bickering over it. These things are better handled, in my opinion, on a case by case basis or through IFD.

This particular image ought to get deleted. If it was a new image, I'd be tempted to invoke

good points, Kubi - and you could well be right that the

'IAR' solution is better than the policy one... but I'm still thinking about it. I guess the most serious issue is that 'personality rights' can legitimately lead to exposure to legal action (I'd say this image is a case in point, I think it's reasonable to assume that a person might be embarrassed / caused harm or distress by the publication of the image) - that's not really an 'editors' call' I guess - but this is rapidly moving into a chat more suited to a policy page :-) good to talk - cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 05:35, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Fair point. My major concern would be that you could make some variation on that argument with respect to any image that depicts people (unless you have a clear release from the people depicted).

Anyway, off to bed. Drop me a note if you open a policy discussion, as I think it's an interesting issue. Cheers.--

talk) 05:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

An invite for you

The 36th and final NotTheWikipediaWeekly Come for the final episode under this name on Sunday, November 2. The whole episode will be about recapping and discussing previous episodes. I am hosting this and look forward to as many of the more experienced NTWW's come to this episode. Plus, we may get a new guest, but we'll see. Anyway, its tomorrow @ 20:00 UTC. Please come! Mitch32(UP) 12:44, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

dammit, I missed it! - but then, maybe you did too? :-) Privatemusings (talk) 07:47, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello PM, thanks for dropping me a line. As far as the Steve thing goes, I'm not sure how many specific details you have; it's hard to keep track of what was revealed on-wiki versus on IRC or some other medium. I had extensive contact with Steve and the other central figures in the debacle throughout, and strongly feel that Steve's behavior merits a ban, though admittedly that's unrelated to what may or may not be actually proper. IIRC, Steve did actually ask to be placed on his ban, or agreed to it following a discussion one on of the noticeboards (honestly, I don't feel like digging up the relevant threads and diffs; apologies), and ArbCom agreed to this. They had been involved since Steve email logs to them of a Skype conversation between him, myself, Chet (now

Happened to spot this on my watchlist. Might as well be candid: Steve and I are still in occasional contact; we were much closer before that went down of course. I've been encouraging him to contribute to another WMF project similar to what you did during your ban. If he builds up a good record I might be able to justify bringing him back here perhaps a month early. It's up to him to provide good reasons to present to the community. Simply wanting to return isn't enough; what the community will want to see is productive and drama-free behavior. Premature requests for return may ultimately hurt his chances that his block would be shortened at all, because those requests will look like more drama to some Wikipedians. Durova^Charge! 19:15, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add on that I think well over two dozen people, admins and non-admins, involved and uninvolved, have reviewed this situation and suggested you find other ways to spend your time. At this point, it is looking a lot like

WP:TEND. MBisanz ^talk 01:37, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

< Thanks for coming by, Glass et al - your comment (glass) wasn't at all offensive - more concise than curt! - and I totally understand that you have strong feelings in this matter.. I think I probably would too in your shoes. I'm afraid re: Durova and MB, I still see this situation as unresolved - and I hope that's not being misread by many people (certainly not the two dozen mentioned!) as being disruptive - in fact, in reading the above posts, it's not immediately clear to me whether Durova believes Steve is under an arbcom ban or not (presumably, the "reasons presented to the community" you refer to would occur on an arb page? maybe!). If any of you guys (or anyone else!) has a mo. take a quick look at the below (which represents all the material I've reviewed), and see what you think about my questions on the matter....

• the original AN thread 24th August
• Arb Clarification 31st August
• AN Review 27th - 29th Sep (see also Steve's talk page from the same period.
• Flo's Comment on Ned Scott's talkpage (referring to 'internal committee vote')

spelling it out with a smile ;-)

I'm concerned that the 'internal committee vote' referred to in Flo's comments might have been a bit of a miscommunication on the arb mailing list, and might not represent a formal arb 'injunction'. If indeed the requisite no. of arbs support a ban for Steve in this matter, the kindest, clearest, (and drop dead simplest 'n easiest!) thing, in my view, is for this to be 'certified' / documented 'on-wiki'. The presence of a relatively severe arb sanction without a formal case is unusual, and this matter is currently unresolved. Privatemusings (talk) 23:31, 2 November 2008 (UTC)I haven't heard from any arb yet, in response to my mail, so will flick them another... I don't think there's any rush on this, or anything, but it would be great to get it sorted out :-)[reply]

As stated several times already, and Steve Crossin knows, the Committee voted to ban him for 6 months. We agreed to have the ban "not enforced by a block" but instead by an agreement (with a wikibreak enforcer in place as well). It was made clear to him that there was no difference between this sanction and a ban except that a block would not be used up front. The Committee has been asked to clarify this several times, including on the RFArb page and on the mailing list, so any internal confusion of the Committee would have been corrected by now. FloNight♥♥♥ 00:07, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you'd certainly hope so! - I would think it would be 'best practice' for the committee to record their votes publicly on an arb page, for the record (and I don't really see the downside!). As it stands, what you refer to as having been stated several times, a formal committee vote and sanction on Steve, is only referred to 'on wiki' on this page, and on Ned's talk page! As I've mentioned above, the presence of a committee sanction with no formal case (so no evidence pages, no workshop etc.) is a bit unusual, and I confess to being intrigued as to the level of support for such an action within the committee.

please please please write up the most simple something on an arb subpage - this kind of 'record keeping' really helps communications and clarity, in my view. cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 00:15, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ps. I'm in IRC at the moment, if you'd like to catch up 'real time' about anything at all :-) Privatemusings (talk) 00:17, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is Steven Crossin disputing what FloNight has said above? Does he feel that more clarification is required? If he wishes to have an "unblock" review, he can appeal to arbcom. It has been explained to you on several occasions that the person wishing to be unblocked needs to represent themself. Your meddling is not advisable, as it makes the community wonder whether he is behind this or not. If he is, then this is the wrong forum, and you are the wrong advocate. If he is not, then this is idlemusings!

chat) 01:59, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

G'day Jay :-) - I'll certainly try and ask Steve about his thoughts, and should folk be getting the idea that the fey hand of Crossin is behind my machinations, then I'll continue to do all I can to dispel that scurrilous rumour! - I assure you that it's someone else entirely pulling my strings I'm entirely independent, in this, and pretty much ever other matter too ;-)

Lar made what I think is pretty much your point too, and asked me where I felt the 'value' was added in my posts about all this, and I responded to him by saying pretty much what I've said above (I think) - that this is an unusual situation (an arb ban without a case), that I don't feel it's communicated clearly 'on-wiki' (it's not really per our 'norms' in my view for a committee vote to be recorded only on two talk pages?!), and that all in all, it would be best if the arbcom formally signed off on such a thing in an open and transparent manner - which should a) be very very easy, and b) would leave no room for any 'idle musing' ;-) - I've now sat staring at this screen for about ten minutes trying to return the compliment, and make a pun of your last name, and I just can't do it! - I guess I just have to (van den) berg-er off now, then?! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 03:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)sticks fingers in ears to drown out groans..... sorry![reply]

This isnt as unusual case as you might think. Senior Wikipedians often make arrangements like this with a party that otherwise end up community banned. e.g.

chat) 04:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

< yeah - I'm aware of some other such arrangements (and no doubt unaware of many more!) - but the weakness of the approach is exposed, and exacerbated, when the restriction is rather severe, coupled with a fairly reasonable and predictable change of heart / change of mind - ie. Steve seeking to edit again as soon as possible. The issues also seem to be akin to a slippery fish in some ways - this isn't only a private, solid arbcom decision, but possibly an arrangement between senior wikipedians, an agreement which Steve supports / supported, and maybe even be a community supported ban / action? Now some of the ways of the wiki will forever remain fluid, and occasionally muddy - that's the way things are, and should be... arbcom decisions however should be recorded and supported by the arbs on wiki, in my view. There's a ton of reasons beyond the kindness and clarity due in this specific case why I would argue that position. best, Privatemusings (talk) 04:48, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If Steve wants to edit sooner, there are other projects where can put his skills to good use. Frankly, I am surprised he did not end up permanently banned. It is due to quick and careful handling that this did not end up as a BLP issue, ala

chat) 08:05, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

At the point Deskana publicly announced the incident, I was prepared to block, and it was only the pleading of two other users I respect for Steve's health and to give him a chance to respond that stayed my hand from placing an indef block. While I'm sure it would have been controversial, I can say with a near categorical certainty that there would have never been a consensus or even a lone-administrator interested in reducing it. That ArbCom later intervened and removed the issue from the community debate by only placing a 6 month ban is something I list more among their faults (this specific emphasis on the quality of the redemption of mankind) than among their accomplishments. MBisanz ^talk 09:58, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm at a loss why you are still worrying at this bone so, Privatemusings. It's been explained to you before, over and over, I think, hasn't it? As recently as less than 2 weeks ago if I am not mistaken. This sort of thing is exactly what we warned you about over and over, as well. No good will come of it, for anyone. On the other hand, your find of those Powerhouse pictures was brilliant. Why can't you do more of that and less of this? ++Lar: t/c 16:24, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

rather embarassingly, this is actually the same conversation still rumbling around the wiki, Lar. I'm not sure that the concerns I've raised in the 'spelling it out with a smile' section above have really been addressed - but I'm getting the picture loud and clear that what I'm asking isn't helping - as I said on another talk page, my own muddy communication must surely be culpable to a degree. I'll try again simply - I don't think 'best practice' has been followed here - we have a formal arb sanction without a formal arb vote or a formal arb case. I believe this is worth sorting out regardless of the additional priority that we give good faith contributors a fair go. I guess the matter at hand may just boil down to this question; 'Which arb.s supported a 6 month ban for Steve?' Given that he would like to edit again as soon as possible, I think it's worth answering. :-) best, Privatemusings (talk) 02:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)thanks for your kind words about the pic.s too, it really is incredibly fun to pop over to the gallery and bung a high quality historical pic in an article or two! go on! do it now! (and please leave me a note - I'd love to hear about it :-)[reply]

".. but I'm getting the picture loud and clear that what I'm asking isn't helping" .. "I'll try again simply.."

It seems you just cant constrain yourself from prodding and poking, and digging.

You keep harping on about what Steve wanting to edit as soon as possible.. are you suggesting that he wants to edit before the six months is up? Is he appealing the six month ban via you? You keep suggesting obliquely that he wants the answers to the questions that you are asking. If he isnt clear about what he agreed to, then this merits further investigation, but there is no need for you and the rest of the world to be abreast of the details simply for curiosities sake.

chat) 08:09, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

though I prefer to think of myself more as a banger than a harper, I'll try and answer your questions :-) - both this thread, and brief conversations I've had with Steve on IRC indicate to me that he would like to edit as soon as possible, so yes - before the 6 month mark. I believe steve's understanding tallies with my own, that he is currently under a formal 6 month arbitration ban. Yes, he would prefer not to be. He's also indicated to me that he'd like to have a formal arb case, essentially to allow him to make a statement, and for others to comment as per our norms in dispute resolution. Am I advocating though? - I'd say no - I've tried to consistently point out that a) the presence of a formal ban is unusual without a case or public vote, b) there remains a (small, if you're being nice ;-) possibility of committee miscommunication, and c) it's hard to see that Steve has been offered a 'fair go' - something which I think we should aim for (this is the 'we're not following best practice here' bit). I think a six month ban deserves some rigour and care in application, and I don't really think it's fair to categorise that approach as unconstrained poking and prodding - to my mind by far the kindest and clearest course of action would be for the arb.s to hear a full case, or at least formally publicly certify their ban. There's a whole bunch of other reasons I've yet to bang (or harp) on about as to why I think this would be a 'good thing' - and I'm happy to go further if you, or anyone, would like :-) best, Privatemusings (talk) 04:03, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dont have time to look into this further, but ... if this had been left in the hands of the community, he would likely have been permanently banned. ya know, for life. Honestly I think he should sit out for the six months as agreed upon, and do something productive in the meantime so that he doesnt come back with such a dark cloud over his head. Many people have said as much. If there was a chance of a committee miscommunication, he can email arbcom-l to check that they really did agree to what FloNight has said above (It is distasteful that you are calling her a liar, but if she is .. that would make a great story wouldnt it?)

chat) 05:20, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

< ? I don't agree with your reading of the community's mood, and I don't think it's acceptable for you to categorise my position as calling Flo a liar (for the record, and embarrassed that I should have to say so clearly - I do not believe that Flo is a liar.)- otoh I totally understand that this conversation probably pisses you off because you'd rather be elsewhere, and I totally respect your right to spend time in happier corners of the wiki. I'm sorry for time you feel has been wasted, and remain open to further discussion if anything should change... meantime, I'll go proofread 5 pages of Poems partly because it's fun, and partly to try and return your gruntle :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 07:21, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ok - so this is one of the most fun things I've figured out how to do on wiki! - If you head here or here, and take a look at the historic imagery I've uploaded to commons, the articles which would benefit from having these pictures included just scream out of the screen! (the clue is usually in the filename!) - I've done about 10 so far, and I'm particularly pleased with

Hi, do you still remember this? when I wanted to a apply against some restrictions concerning the mention of the eponym Sisak in the Artsakh article? I tried to speak with Rlevse, unfortunately I'm not satisfied yet. Can you give me an advise where I can ask for help or an explanation on this? Thank you beforehand. --Vacio (talk) 06:17, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy. Perhaps I can interest you in

chat) 11:22, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

doing some work on a related article might be a good way of de-stressing about the whole situation - and otherwise, there's quite a bit to read, so give me a short while to try and understand what the goings on are, and I'll drop you a note with some ideas :-) - my absolute first impression is that R asked some really good questions, which I think he may have intended as being ways you could communicate to him why the restrictions weren't a good idea - but I know communication isn't easy when things have broken down a bit. I'll read up on stuff a bit and comment further, most likely :-) best, Privatemusings (talk) 07:13, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I think you are right, I will take some time and do something else :-)

John Vandenberg, unfortunately I can't find anything about Sisak in art. You have made a very good article :-) By the way, did you know that this Sisak was the forefather of two very important Armenian royal houses? The Syunid dynasty and the Aranshahik dynasy, the latter a branch of the first. Greets --Vacio (talk) 10:49, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

everything always seems a bit clearer (and often less important / stressful!) after a break, Vac - so I'm glad you're up for working elsewhere for a bit - thanks for coming by here, and feel free to pop back any time :-) Privatemusings (talk) 21:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which recently passed with 126 in support, 22 in opposition and 6 neutral votes. Thanks for your support in my RFA PM!!! *hands you a cup of tea in return* • If you want to reply to this message please use my talk page as watch listing about 150 pages is a bit messy • ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 22:56, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no worries, Add - be circumspect, and uncontroversial in your admin-ing, and you'll go great, I'm sure :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 23:18, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

sounds interesting, MB - I'll go check it out immediately... thanks for the note. :-) Privatemusings (talk) 01:36, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

small ps. - it would have been fine for you to note that you were also the filing party, you know... the 'passive voice' can be quite a hurdle in communication in this context, I'd say.. anywhoo.. I'll respond with due seriousness presently... Privatemusings (talk) 01:43, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

and another small note! - I'm disinclined to say too much more on that particular RfC, but am happy to chat more here if anyone would like - or feel free to poke me for a particular response if you'd like :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 08:55, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would advise against taking a passive approach on this discussion. If I may say so, there are issues here that will have very few negative consequences only if you yourself demonstrate a recognition of where your judgement regarding your handling of the Crossin matter was lacking. If you want any advice, my Skype is open, Privatemusings. Regards,

AGK 16:58, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Addendum: I wouldn't fault MBisanz for using neutral wording in his notifying you of the Request for Comment; the RfC process instructs filers to use {{

AGK 17:00, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello! Thanks for showing an interest in Wikimedia UK v2.0. Formation of the company is currently underway under the official name "Wiki UK Limited", and we are hoping to start accepting membership in the near future. We have been drawing up a set of membership guidelines, determining what membership levels we'll have (we plan on starting off with just standard Membership, formerly known as Guarantor Membership, with supporting membership / friends scheme coming later), who can apply for membership (everyone), what information we'll collect on the application form, why applications may be rejected, and data retention. Your input on all of this would be appreciated. We're especially after the community's thoughts on what the membership fee should be. Please leave a message on the talk page with your thoughts.

Also, we're currently setting up a monthly newsletter to keep everyone informed about the to-be-Chapter's progress. If you would like to receive this newsletter, please put your username down on this page.

Thanks again. Mike Peel (talk) 19:55, 8 November 2008 (UTC) (Membership Secretary, Wikimedia UK [Proposed])[reply]

I recorded Awadewit's group discussing editing, and it is about 2 hours worth now and 50 MB of ogg file. What should I do with it? --Filll (talk | wpc) 23:23, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

fantastic! - could you upload it to mediafire.com maybe (fairly simply process, but feel free to ask if you need a hand), and flick me an email with the link? - I'll have a listen and see about editing / chopping up etc. - great stuff :-) Privatemusings (talk) 01:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure I did it properly but I think it is in the folder here.--Filll (talk | wpc) 03:53, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

got it safe and sound, Filll - I'll update you when I've had the chance to have a play :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 19:54, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks to you both for handling the tech stuff involved with this. We appreciate it! Scartol • Tok 01:13, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no worries, Scartol - and just as a 'note to self' - this is all online now - but the mp3 still needs doing... Privatemusings (talk) 01:15, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm leaving this note here for you as a courtesy, but given the history of things I suggest you don't get involved too deeply here. Maybe just respond here for now if you feel the need to say anything, and wait and see if a discussion develops, and try and judge if any input is needed from you (in what was quite obviously a failed mentorship). As I said, I'm hoping that people that comment there will do so briefly and move on, allowing this particular incident to 'heal'. I did, however, want to get something down over there on the record, as a basis for later discussion. You will note that I haven't added this personal message to the other four people I notified about this. That is in part because I think they can restrain themselves from frivolous or off-topic comments, and you may not. Apologies for that assumption of bad faith - I hope you will understand why I said that. Anyway, following up the RfC, I've started a thread at WT:MENTOR

I've plenty to say on some things (and it worries me that you feel I have trouble constraining myself from frivolous off-topic comments - but that's another conversation too....) - p'raps the best thing is for anyone that has any questions to swing by and ask away :-) I'll sit on my hands otherwise.... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 19:56, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In my ongoing attempt to complete the MP3/iTunes/RSS archives of

Updated list based on ones I've now received, and one more new one I haven't yet. *Dan T.* (talk) 18:46, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers mate, was having no joy logging into the system earlier on. Will follow it up at some point.Londo06 01:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There will be 2 formats being run over the next 2 weeks. The first will be general discussion with a small number candidates at a time with several experienced hosts from Wikivoices. Each candidate will be given 2-3 minutes to introduce themselves then the main body of the cast will begin. The topics discussed will vary in each recording to ensure fairness however the atmosphere will be generally free flowing. These will be running throughout the two weeks starting tomorrow. Specific signup times can be found here at our meta page.

The second format will be based on a similar style to election debates. Questions will be suggested here by the community. A selection of these will then be put to a panel of larger panel candidates with short and concise 1-2 minute responses. Other than an introduction and hello from each candidate, there will be no opportunity for a lengthier introductions. Specific signup times can be found here at our meta page.

It is recommended that candidates attend both formats of casts and we will try to be as flexible as possible. We are looking for the greatest participation but also for shows with enough members to keep it interesting but not too many that it causes bandwidth and general running issues. I look forward to working with all candidates in the coming weeks.

01:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiVoices

Seddσn ^{talk Editor Review}

Missed the darn meetup again.

Do you work in the city? -

P.S. you have got to keep your head down when it comes to dispute resolution, especially when it isn't your dispute! I've met you a few times now in person, and I reckon you are a very nice guy with an extremely passionate sense of justice, but with respect, you seem to get lost in the details. If I could suggest (and not knowing all the details of the case myself) it might be worthwhile leaving it be. If the user in question has a problem, they'll pursue it further themselves. Take this as you will! -

talk 09:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

you missed a good one, ta bu :-) - at this rate, we'll probably have some sort of christmas shindig, so your attendance will be compulsory...! - maybe we should have a more family friendly afternoon barbie, or something? - I know a great reserve on the harbour if I could persuade folks north of the harbour?.... hmmmm....

on the other stuff, your words are appreciated - it's actually very cool how many really nice people have dropped me a line in one way or another and suggested I take it easy - I'm happy to talk through all concerns, and maybe that's the direction my current 'RfC' will take, I dunno.... I won't say any more about the specifics in that particular case, because I've promise not to - I reckon everything will come out in the wash ok - and look forward to seeing you in Dec if you can make it :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 03:13, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

oh, and to answer your question - I'm in the city semi-regularly, yeah :-) - Liam's mentioned being up for a drink sometime, so if you're around p'raps we can grab a cold 'n frosty? :-) Privatemusings (talk) 03:15, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi privatemusings, just a question about your view on Arbcom: Can you honestly (As in, real honesty, not the: "I'm so angry at them, that even if it's not true, I'm still going to say yes" type of "honesty") say that, if you weren't the subject of Arbcom sanctions (and anything else that Arbcom might have afflicted you with), would you still find fault with the way things are run with Arbcom at the moment? One of the things that I noticed in the cadidate list was that a couple of users have been involved in Arbcom cases before, which would obviously lead to very strong COI and bias. Personally, I would try to !vote for someone based on their level headedness, fairness, and neutrality etc. But it might be difficult to !vote for someone who has an open bias against Arbcom. I can understand the need for change; but are you wanting change because it's time for a change, or are you wanting change because Arbcom "screwed you over" last time? Just some thoughts. Thanks in advance!

Out in the real world (some of us occasionally go there), do you ever see convicted felons running for the position of judge (in jurisdictions where judges are elected)? I can't recall any. I expect the stigma of being a "felon" (even if the conviction was unjust in the first place) would prevent such a person winning. *Dan T.* (talk) 13:09, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't quite understand whom you are addressing? And I don't quite understand your analogy; privatemusings is a Wiki felon? Since when?

Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 14:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm not 100% sure what Dan means either, Scarian! - but if he's hinting that my campaign stands little chance of success anyways, because of my history of sanctions etc. - then I suspect he's probably right... that is the way of the world, and understandably and reasonably so. I'm standing because I genuinely believe that I can help the project by serving on arbcom - it's my perception that the wiki should avoid continuing to evolve with some of the problems of a 'one party state' - I hope that I've got an independent mind, a civil tongue, and I certainly hope to be able to cut through some of the systemic problems with some simple, but powerful ideas (you'll get to read about my 'big ideas' before too long, on my longer statement page).

Obviously my previous interactions with arbcom are part of my background - but I don't really feel that they're actually that influential in my decision making, except in a 'we're all the sum of our experiences' sort of way - and whilst I feel mistakes were made, and I believe some of those mistakes are based on systemic problems which remain, I certainly don't feel 'screwed over' at all... I don't think I'd stick around if I did.....

thanks heaps for coming by, S - your post was thoughtful, and it's good to get some of this stuff out on the table... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 03:26, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, fellow candidate! Just so you know, in an effort to announce our candidacies and raise further awareness of the election, I have created the template {{

thanks for the note, Hers.... I'll give some thought to using it :-) Privatemusings (talk) 03:27, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whilst it's quite likely you'll have heard this news on the grapevine, in your email inbox, or even in person - I thought that it was sufficiently exciting to warrant giving each of you a 'new messages' orange bar! This particular orange bar has been brought to you to let you know that Wikimedia Australia is now open for members!

I'm not on the committee or anything, and that's where the credit is due in getting everything to this point, but I think it would be absolutely fantastic for folks who wish to support the australian wiki community, to go ahead and sign up - we're quite likely to be the world's fatest growing chapter at the moment! Join Us :-)

Here's a little more about membership, and the mailing list in particular is well worth signing up to as well, and is a good forum to get answers to any questions answered, or to share any ideas. I've dropped these notes in under my own steam, and you've received one because you're on this list - feel free to ask me any questions, or anything - I can certainly point you in the right direction :-) cheers all, Privatemusings (talk) 04:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• cough* Nice to see you made sure that you made yourself aware of it ;) And having taken care of my own application already, I am certainly looking forward to getting things confirmed nice and quick. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 04:46, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification, although I'm already well aware and have been involved (not as much as I'd like to have been due to outside commitments) in the planning stages since November of last year. Orderinchaos 04:47, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

heh! - I hadn't even noticed I was talking to myself.... oh dear. Glad to hear folk are signing up! - I gather you did heaps behind the scenes, OiC - so thanks for that, and hopefully before too long we'll have some sort of aussie wide wiki shindig :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 04:58, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just looked at your contribs. I would STRONGLY suggest self-reverting - it would be seen as spam by more than a few recipients. Orderinchaos 04:51, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

oh god. - I really hope not! - I kind of thought notifying folk on wiki who have signed up as being interested in being kept informed would work out ok... I'm really sorry if it bugged you (or anyone) unduly. Privatemusings (talk) 04:58, 13 November 2008 (UTC)I think self-reverting may compound the error / annoyance, and I hold out some hope that the good outweighs the bad. If folk feel it's of appropriate significance to avoid problems, then I certainly won't kick up a stink about any reversions, though I hope that's not where we head.....[reply]

I don't mean to be rude, PM, but I find your recent spamming really irritating and it's kind of offensive spamming committee members imploring them to join the chapter and offering to answer their questions about the Australian chapter. I realise you were just going down a list but I don't think it's really appropriate for you to take this upon yourself without discussion and then to do it in such a mindless way. I mean, you've spammed all committee members, including those who kicked in money out of their own pocket to cover costs to get us to this point, plus members who have been involved with the organisational discussions for two-and-a-half years and people who have already paid their membership fees! Sarah 05:01, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise for any offense caused. I'm embarrassed that my comments may be construed as lacking respect, and they certainly weren't intended as such. To be honest, I felt those who were well informed, and intimately involved would smile to see such a post - a(nother) misjudgment, I'm afraid. Privatemusings (talk) 08:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Not to mention indef-blocked users who likely don't read their talk pages any more) Orderinchaos 05:02, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I told Privatemusings on IRC before he did this, Brianna has already contacted everyone who had expressed interest. She filtered the list appropriately, and emailed them. I cant fathom why, knowing this, privatemusings then proceeded to send his own message, and without the same level of care.

chat) 06:13, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I felt it might help... thought maybe some folk could miss an email, and (per above) failed to foresee the irritance factor. Lulled by a positive reaction to such notes in the past, I seriously misjudged the reception, for which I apologise. Privatemusings (talk) 08:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys, give it a break, I think PM has gotten the message by now =). Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:57, 13 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for the note PM, I haven't checked my Wikipedia e-mail in yonks so it's nice to get a heads-up. I'll see how I can contribute. Cheers, ~ Riana ⁂ 04:36, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was kinda wondering if someone might be in that boat, Riana (I too don't bother to check my wiki email for weeks on end on occasion!) - I'm happy it helped - and I should also let you know that I noticed you uploaded a bunch of The Powerhouse Museum's photos from flickr - I think you were also even in touch with them too? - I've popped in briefly to see them recently, and I think they've been pleasantly surprised by how pro-active wiki folks have been in making sure they're cool with us grabbing their images and using them :-) I'm hopeful we might be able to persuade such an institution to work with the chapter in due course, which would be great..... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 04:44, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciated it to. Thanks. Nicholas Perkins (T•C) 08:24, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Send anything unsolicited to my talk page like what you just did - I happen to be on wikibreak (very close to - it is on the talk page saying that) and i still get one! Please try to find something that doesnt get up peoples noses so easily and please do not reply

well enjoy your wikibreak, Satu... (I'm reading your 'do not reply' to refer to your talkpage :-) - you remain on a list at meta as someone who would like to be kept informed, which was the rationale for my post - I like the picture on your talk page and if I could work out how to spell it I'd make the dog noise thing that goes with it..... sorry you got pissed off. Privatemusings (talk) 08:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just came back to check for your reply (Thanks btw, I will keep an eye out for your extended statement) and I find the above: Wow! I must applaud your reply, privatemusings. Any lesser man would've Wiki-metaphorically "gone ape" at this guy. But, wow, how rude of him. Not nice at all.

Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 08:54, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

No problems Privatemusings - it is a dingo. Scarian - the talk page has sufficient above to explain

Suro 13:54, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Simply notifying users that you're going on a wikibreak is enough to tell them that messages left on your talk page might not be received. It's as simple as that! No need for the bitey attitude, friend :-)

Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 17:58, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Good morning. I know you've answered some of these already, but I'd like to ask you to post the remaining General Questions to your Questions for the Candidate page. I attempted to do so earlier, but it messed with the formatting; Rather than turn your Questions page into a sandbox, I'd prefer to have you post the questions and format them as you see fit. As you know, the list is here. So long as they all get posted, it's unimportant how and where they go. Thanks in advance, and sorry for the inconvenience. Best, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 15:18, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the note, Ultra - I'll copy the questions across now, and will be updating my responses soon :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 00:22, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

It gives me great pleasure to announce that Wiki UK Limited is now inviting membership applications! You can download the application form in PDF format from meta:Image:Wiki_UK_Ltd_membership_application_form.pdf

Information is given on the form about membership fees (£12/year standard, £6 for concessions); these need to be paid by cheque initially, although we hope to accept other forms of payment in the future. Applications should be submitted to me at the address given on the form. If you have any queries about the application process, please let me know.

We will formally start accepting members once we have a bank account, as we cannot process membership fees until that time. We will be submitting our application for a bank account in the very near future, and we hope to have this set up by the end of December at the latest.

Thank you for your support so far; I look forward to receiving your membership application.

Mike Peel (talk) 21:47, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Membership Secretary, Wiki UK Limited

P.S. if you haven't already, please subscribe to our newsletter! See meta:Wikimedia_UK_v2.0/Newsletter for more information and to subscribe.

Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.

This is him James W. Holsinger. DuncanHill (talk) 04:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ah! - and thanks for taking him out of the 'sexology' cat. (if indeed that was you...) best, Privatemusings (talk) 04:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)for the curious, this chap came up in a discussion at Wikipedia Review about explicit images on wikipedia...[reply]

No, wasn't me who took him out. DuncanHill (talk) 04:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

curiouser and curiouser! - It was hbdragon88 who removed the cat, but it would seem that it was originally added by a somewhat odd thinking robot! - I've asked the bot's creator what might've happened! best, Privatemusings (talk) 05:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's a medical man with some apparently rather peculiar views on the nature and origins of homosexuality, so actually "sexology" (the study of sexual interests, behavior, and function) would sound not inappropriate to me. DuncanHill (talk) 05:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

me neither now you point it out - although on balance I agree with the removal of the category (which isn't really being used in a broad sense at the mo), I've mentioned this to the bot's creater too... seems the robot was smarter than I thought :-) best, Privatemusings (talk) 05:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never having looked at any sex-related categories on Commons I wouldn't be able to comment on how they are applied there :) DuncanHill (talk) 05:42, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been to an MfD for ages, roux! - I'll go check out the talk page, and the deletion discussion, but I'd hope that we can hold off on the deletion :-) Privatemusings (talk) 20:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm Ral315, editor of the Wikipedia Signpost. We're interviewing all ArbCom candidates for an article this week, and your response is requested.

1. What positions do you hold (adminship, mediation, etc.), on this or other wikis?

2. Have you been involved in any arbitration cases? In what capacity?

3. Why are you running for the Arbitration Committee?

4. How do you feel the Arbitration Committee has handled cases and other situations over the last year? Can you provide an examples of situations where you feel the Committee handled a situation exceptionally well, and why? Any you feel they handled poorly, and why?

5. What is your opinion on confidentiality? If evidence is submitted privately to the Committee, would you share it with other parties in the case? Would you make a decision based on confidential information without making it public?

6. Why do you think users should vote for you?

Please respond on my talk page. We'll probably go to press on Tuesday, but late responses will be added as they're submitted. Thanks, Ral315 (talk) 10:25, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/?diff=253667611&oldid=253644711.
As detailed therein, I had to temporarily delist your !vote. As the RfA is now open, you're free to re-cast it at your leisure.
Apologies for the inconvenience, PM!

Hey there PM.. We did a podcast last night, about controversial articles. Filll said I might want to ask you if we need to break it up before uploading. Right now it's an OGG file of 51.6 MB of pure discussion-based goodness. Shall I post it to Commons? Scartol • Tok 00:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The breaking of the the files up was primarily driven by the size limit which used to be 20MB (I think it's 100 now?) - however, I personally quite like having bite size chunks, so there might be some benefit to splitting up a recording beyond getting it under the size limit - that's totally your call though! I've been quite busy around the place lately, so haven't really checked in on how the meta pages are shaping up, so would likely suggest that you bung the file/s on commons and update the template on the community portal - I think that's how quite a lot of folk hear the project :-) - If you want a hand doing any of this, I'm happy to file the paperwork etc. - and I look forward to hearing the fruits of your labours... :-) great stuff..... Privatemusings (talk) 02:39, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I'll have to take care of it tomorrow, but I'll let you know. Alas, this one is almost entirely the fruit of

Awadewit's labors – I had very little to do with it. Cheers. Scartol • Tok 03:34, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Glad to hear it was a smooth labour, and as long as the mother and podcast child are happy and healthy, other's involvement is indeed secondary ;-) - look forward to listening.... Privatemusings (talk) 03:57, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've uploaded it. I don't know much about the post-uploading side of things, so if your offer to handle that part still stands, I'm hereby taking you up on it. Otherwise just lemme know and I'll figure it out. Cheers! Scartol • Tok 15:36, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've done most of the boring stuff - though your comment reminds me that we really have to get a bit better organised (I'm afraid I haven't updated the pages on 'meta' because I haven't really had the time to see how that's all going yet....) - all I do here on 'en' is create

WP:NTWW

page which I just add a bit of info too - and that's it! - because I sort of 'know the ropes' it's a five minute job for me, which I'm happy to do any time - though I'd certainly encourage you to give it a go, and in particular make any suggestions for any improvements to our little system - perhaps we should be looking to codify it a bit in the new year to encourage more folk brave the microphone!

I've been rather busy with the arbcom elections of late (vote for me!) - so apologies that this took a little longer than it has on occasion - I haven't even had the chance to have a listen yet - something I'll rectify now! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 00:52, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really sorry, but I can't hear what you're talking about. (Raul isn't talking at 37:00!) I went to the original MOV that my Skype recorder saves as for some reason, and I hear the same thing as when I fire up the OGG on Commons. Maybe it was a glitch in your setup?

Thanks so much for handling the post-production stuff. I will indeed drop notes on the talk pages of our participants. You rock! Scartol • Tok 02:09, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[2]: Could you please give me an update on the situation? I'm currently somewhat "restricted" and just caught this by chance when checking RFAR on a hunch. (I read my mail as well.) 78.34.144.169 (talk) 23:14, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

heh! - as long as you're back in time to vote for me! ;-) - I may write something up about the big huge warning signs this throws up for the project, in my view, in due course - but at the mo. Hans' summary is actually pretty much on the money. - We may yet have a roundtable chat of some sort re: arbcom / the elections etc. at some point, so keep an eye out for that too.... hope you're good otherwise :-) Privatemusings (talk) 00:40, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and hopefully my block will expire (and not be reset because of forbidden editing like this (maybe you should tell on me just to be sure it doesn't become a lightning rod for your AC campaign)) so that I can vote in the elections. We clearly need a "renegade" in there, if just for checks and balances. You, or one of the other unfortunately many "change candidates". 78.34.132.28 (talk) 22:53, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see this set off a bit of a wiki-slapstick routine.... I hope the pie in the face didn't hurt too much! - how silly.... Privatemusings (talk) 20:18, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to be as the top of Risker's votes: I think she's the best candidate (myself included). Sorry for stealing your first vote. Cool Hand Luke 01:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you're most welcome to the first vote bragging rights - just a bit of fun ;-) - The election seems very tight, which is exciting from the peanut gallery, and I hope not too exciting for you, and the other candidates so closely matched... good luck :-) Privatemusings (talk) 20:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]