User talk:sgeureka/Archive06

Two things to be aware of when commenting here: I prefer to continue discussions in one place, usually where they are started. {{Talkback}} templates are unnecessary, I use the watchlist. I refuse to fully read un- WP:ATTACKs . Polite disagreement spawns insight and collaborative compromise, while nastiness makes collaboration impossible.

Archives

Archive 1 (Feb 2007 – Dec 2007) Archive 2 (Jan 2008 – May 2008) Archive 3 (Jun 2008 – Oct 2008) Archive 4 (Nov 2008 – Jan 2009) Archive 5 (Feb 2009 – Oct 2010)

Welcome!

Hello, Sgeureka, and

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

Thanks for that. I've added an alternate form of the link using the fullurl parser function. Could you check that it works properly? The idea here is that it should work properly on either the en.wikipedia and the secure.wikimedia servers; i.e. you're not flipped to en if you're on secure. I did this to the other diffs that were hard-coded to use the secure server using {{diff}}. Most people use the en server and are not logged in to secure, so flipping people from one to the other typically results in them being on a server as an IP and the unwary can be tripped up and make some edit anonymously when that was not their intent. And for added lulz, read Firesheep. Picture some troll stalking a wiki-meetup and hijacking Jimmy's account; or an arb's, someone with oversight...

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Snottywong/RfC_draft
• https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/User:Snottywong/RfC_draft

Cheers, Jack Merridew 20:34, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your link works. – sgeureka ^t•c 08:24, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the confirmation, and sorry I forgot to check back here. Cheers, Jack Merridew 20:03, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sgeureka, this is regarding the name-change of a Wikipedia film article

It's already been moved to "Super (2010 Indian film)", which seems like the correct name in such a case. – sgeureka ^t•c 14:15, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As a frequent and recent discussant at

]

Nomination of season one episode articles of House for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articles

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paternity (House) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 14:45, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question

What do you think would be the best way to continue with this, keep the AfD, or shift to an RfC at List of House episodes? I have the feeling that a bunch of people are voting "keep" because they don't want them to be deleted for ever but don't vote "redirect". One of the arguments I hoped to avoid by doing the first season alone (and was thwarted by the motion to include all seven seasons) has already come up, which is "to many to fix in time, so keep", redirects would easily avoid that problem and when notability of the specific episode is established one could easily recreate the article. Thanks. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 15:36, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think Masem (whom I respect very highly) summarized the issue quite well in this comment. If you have the energy, I'd advice to start an TV RfC about how to deal with assumedly somewhat-notable episode articles that violate

WP:NOT#PLOT and where nowhere stands up to fix them. The RfC should be about such articles in general, and not just a specific show. Many of the hardcore fiction inclusionists/deletionists no longer edit wikipedia and we may actually be getting somewhere with a new attempt. I largely lack the time to actively deal with plot-only fiction articles anymore through merging/redirection, but I'd be very happy to see this issue be resolved in favor of quality instead of fancruft. – sgeureka ^t•c 10:39, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

I just came across Wikipedia:Television episodes/Review, which was basically about this, not sure why it died out all of a sudden. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 11:19, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That was shortly before I started getting interested in the behind-the-scenes of wikipedia, and I didn't really participate in that. The User:TTN debacle and the Fiction arbcom cases started shortly after this. I presume that there were too few fiction cleanup editors against too many fans and inclusionists, and too many battles on too many fronts. The process there works only for old shows or shows that don't have (m)any wikipedia editor-fans, but as you're experiencing right now, it's nearly impossible to clean up popular on-the-air shows. – sgeureka ^t•c 11:45, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just read the

WP:GETOVERIT around just a day in the AfD. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 12:41, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

... is back. At least I think so. See Unterman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log). Geschichte (talk) 22:15, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know that (banned) SU has been active through sock puppets in the past few weeks, but I do not have much time to edit wikipedia lately. Please use Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sheynhertz-Unbayg for matters related to him. – sgeureka ^t•c 10:46, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jfgslo has started an RFC on whether it would be appropriate to merge or redirect an article that you recently participated in an AFD for. Please join the discussion so that we may try to form a consensus at a centralized location. Shooterwalker (talk) 23:23, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sgeureka. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Billy Rosewood (2nd nomination).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:40, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	For your excellent work on the A Song of Ice and Fire article. Cheers, Magister Scientatalk 18:50, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Just wait for when it's finished...:-) – sgeureka ^t•c 11:05, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear sgeureka,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at [email protected] (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead. If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at [email protected]. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 20:30, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for merging my The Office-related AfDs. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:02, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mention it. :-) – sgeureka ^t•c 08:04, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because of the high number of edits that you have made at

Many thanks for your great work

Thanks. As for the {{

cn}} tags will (hopefully) just be temporary until I (or other helpful hands) get around to digging up the refs. – sgeureka ^t•c 05:53, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

When I clicked on the discuss link on the split tag, it took me to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_A_Song_of_Ice_and_Fire#Meta-article_restructuring. There it says that you are not going to pursue the change. It may be that I read the wrong discussion, but I can find no other discussion about this. This is why I thought the split tag was no longer required. Can I take it that you intend to make the split soon? Op47 (talk) 18:03, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I started four different discussions under this header. The second one, still open, is for the possible fandom article. I'll likely start such an article in the not-to-far future, but there are other wiki things one my plate now, and I'll leave the {{split section}} tag up in case there is opposition until then). – sgeureka ^t•c 06:16, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered,

Hello, Sgeureka. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ninja (Puppet Master).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 08:35, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

hiya, if you looke further down the list you will see the table disappears, if you look at befire fix at epsiode 823 teh table sort of disappears from ther eon. if it keeps epsiode 824 and before it shows the problem completely, which is the table disappears from 823 on wards, i hope that clarify itAndrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 17:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ! As you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afanc (Dungeons & Dragons), I thought you might be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ankheg (2nd nomination), another D&D monster.Folken de Fanel (talk) 20:07, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about falling through on the review. I replied to your email, but I saw somewhere else that you didn't get it so I thought I would leave a comment. Over the past several months I have been trying to reengage with Wikipedia, but its been emotionally hard to reengage. Sorry about any trouble that I caused, apparantly I am not ready to take on long term projects on wiki. Again, very sorry, I have had people fall through on me before on wiki as well, and I know it isn't fun :P Sadads (talk) 17:50, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you are still interested in these, would you please take a look at my comments at

Yes,

WP:DUCK, brought to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sheynhertz-Unbayg. – sgeureka ^t•c 15:16, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for that, I see they're blocked. I'm glad I wasn't being too paranoid! I knew about the puppetmaster but wasn't aware he was so active - loads at

talk) 15:48, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello, Sgeureka. You have new messages at TenTonParasol's talk page.
Message added 23:44, 16 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

~Cheers, TenTonParasol 23:44, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, regarding your recent revert, have you read the notes at File_talk:The_Genealogy_of_Bharata.png? This is not a new issue & the same image was deleted at Commons. - Sitush (talk) 07:49, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, I missed that and self-reverted, but even now, it's not obvious to me how this qualifies for speedy deletion... (The discussion can continue at the image's talkpage, if need be). – sgeureka ^t•c 08:00, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's ok, thanks. I was tempted to nominate for a more prolonged deletion process and in retrospect perhaps should have done. I just thought that speedy would be ok because of what happened at Commons. Of course, that is conflating two projects and so is not A Good Thing. I will pose the question on the talk page. - Sitush (talk) 08:02, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of Tiger mascots has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unencyclopaedic collection of indiscriminate information with very little use.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ncboy2010 (talk) 18:28, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Finished my read through and have left comments as I went. Feel free to debate the merits of them as you see fit. I made a few, hopefully minor, changes as I went that you might like to double check as well. I still have to check images and will probably do some more spot checks of references, but would imagine that the bulk of the review is completed. Don't let the number of comments throw you off, I really enjoyed reading the article and think it is generally very well written. AIRcorn (talk) 07:35, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I've had a busy week, but it seems I can pay full attention to your review today and tomorrow. I'll leave notes on the review page then. – sgeureka ^t•c 08:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess is american; I imagine or I suppose is english. Kittybrewster ☎ 11:37, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Finally got around to responding to your comments at the GA review. Sorry about the delay. AIRcorn (talk) 13:28, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We got there. Congratulations, it is a good Good article. AIRcorn (talk) 11:45, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if you've heard about Daniel Knauf's new project and whether or not you think it's notable enough for it's own article?--CyberGhostface (talk) 06:01, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm contacting you becaused you expressed an opinion in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Legend of Korra (Book 2). Because it appears likely that the AfD will not end with deletion, I've set up a request for comment (RfC) on the talk page of the article about the series about how to organize the topic into subarticles. If you are interested, I'd appreciate it if you would add your opinion in that RfC. Regards,  Sandstein  06:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of starships in Stargate is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of starships in Stargate until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Odie5533 (talk) 13:52, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject A Song of Ice and Fire for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 07:24, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sgeureka, I am trying to digest an interesting article which has been scanned and I cannot use google translate.... essentially what we are intrested is this - this mushroom -

I'll have a look at it. – sgeureka ^t•c 12:13, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks/much appreciated. Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:21, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Below is my summary of the paper, take what you need :-)

---

In the first part, they describe what specialist literature says about various mushrooms of the Coprinus family. Some of these mushrooms are known to contain a special kind of amino acid that the paper calls

Although some specialist literature says that Boletus luridus makes you feel sick as if Coprin was inside, there has been an experiment by HATFIELD a few years before that couldn't prove the existence of Coprin in B.L. Now the paper descibes how they did their own tests in detail.

They have several tests for aminoacids that have to do with ions and pH gradients and stuff. I don't really understand the science behind this, but there are a few basic facts:

• The isoelectric point of Coprin lies between the aminoacids Asparagine and Threonine, but the signals are hard to separate. Therefore, if we're talking about small amounts of Coprin, it's hard to determine if there is indeed little amount or none at all.
• Coprin is unstable in water solutions even at -20°C, so they couldn't really do the necessary long-time experiments.

So they tested a little more, but they found no hard evidence that there was Coprin in B.L. They used B.L. from many different locations and years, stored the mushrooms at a more stable -30°C, still no hard evidence.

So they offer two explanations:

• B.L. has another amino acid that causes you to feel sick.
• or there are other mushrooms with this effect, and the mushrooms look similar to B.L. There are a couple of them that actually do look similar to B.L., and they range from edible (no known side effects with alcohol consumption) to sometimes causing tummy aches (i.e. feeling sick even without drinking alcohol).

Boletus satanas had no traceable Coprin. However, Boletus torosus has many similarities with B.L. in look of the stype, color, shape, size and getting blue when cut. B.T. is hardly ever described in the usual mushroom books because (the paper thinks) it is an uncommon mushroom especially in North Germany. Specialist literature includes the B.T. but doesn't describe inedibility or side effects with or without alcohol.

So they did some more testing. Hard evidence is still hard to come by because of the Asparagine-Threonine issues. But there are secondary indicators for Coprin in B.T. that weren't there with B.L.

They summarize ("Zusammenfassung"):

"Our findings can hardly be interpreted differently than that B. torosus contains Coprin: This is the first proof of this amino acid outside of the Coprinaceae.

"Our results provide no evidence at all of Coprin in Boletus luridus. On the other hand, the results do not exclude that there are other substances in this mushroom that inhibit alcohol reduction/decomposition/degradation [don't know the medical word] and that aren't known so far. It cannot be fully determined if alcohol is a co-factor under special circumstances that led to the described intoxication incidents.

"The doppelgänger theory is a plausible explanation in line with all the evidence. We therefore advise that if there are more Antabuse intoxications with [mushrooms that look like B.L.], there should be a more exact mycological determination and if possible chemical examinations.

---

Good luck with your GA! – sgeureka ^t•c 13:35, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ahaaa, makes me wonder whether they've possibly been a tad hasty in their conclusions...this helps alot/thanks! Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:28, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We've found another article in German, this time from Switzerland. This is interesting as it will be good to see how it summarises and treats the previous study. We'd be grateful if you could get a gist of what it's saying. On the plus side, the article is shaping up really nicely, which would have been completely impossible on English sources alone.....If you're really stuck for time I can nag Eusebeus too :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:35, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on weekend vacation until Sunday evening (Europe). I can give it a shot then, or you can ask Eusebeus for quicker help. :-) – sgeureka ^t•c 12:49, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It can wait easily, no time pressure and you've already read the other so might be less work overall for you than him from scratch..cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:56, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FLAMMER's article refers to Boletus luridus only in the first paragraph, and then again in passing in the last paragraph. Nothing new at all here, the first paragraph is a very short summary of what I summarized above. The remainder of the article is a summary of the paper by FOURRÉ about Boletus torosus. I'll have a look if there is something new for the B.T. wiki article. – sgeureka ^t•c 13:19, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thx - we decided to buff

Boletus torosus for GA as well... :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:39, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

There is also a variation [the article calls it Nadelwaldform, "shape of edit: probably rather growing in a coniferous forest"] that has a brown-red cap and not-so-flamboyant yellow pores, but it's very rare in the named French departments and is comparable with the finding from the Jura. [It's not clear if they mean the Swiss Canton of Jura or the French Jura (department).]

Questions after questions: It is clear: B.T. is a heavy, compact mushroom with a high specific weight. After touching and infractions, it turns deep blue-black everywhere. This alone is not a monopole of our mushroom, neither is the butter-yellow flesh, the stipe with fine nets and yellow, red and dark violet components, the many-colored-spotted and bumpy cap with a color palette of yellow, grey, (the Nadelwaldform is wine reddish, browny,) olive, blue-black; and chrome-yellow tube openings [I believe they mean the spongy-tubey things under the cap] that change to orange or deep purple red in a stainy or plane way. This color mimicry is the same as with Boletus purpureus, rhodopurpureus, xanthocyaneus, robrosanguineus etc. Only when aged, the B.T. gets dark violet-black, grey, olive and appear more inviting.

Which of the named mushrooms have Coprin? Is it only individual clones and subgroups? What role do the trace elements and the heave metals play in the metabolism of these mushrooms and what is the cause of their play of colors? The samples collected by Stijve in 1998 had little Cadmium, lead and mercury, but much zinc (240-380 mg/kg oven-dry mass), similar to Macrolepiota provera and some ascomycetes.

Conclusion: So far, the Coprinus syndrome could only be shown explicitely in Coprinus astramentarius (2). The mix-up theory B.L. (free of Coprin) vs. B.T. (has Coprin) still needs more experiments. B.T. is toxic when raw, and is not advised to be eaten as as an edible mushroom when cooked because of frequent indigestions. It is to be avoided to make overhasty conclusions that sickness is correlated to alcohol and the coprinus syndrome. This is also true for Clitocybe clavipes, Coprinus comatus etc. The symptoms have to be the same as in the box below [explanations of the coprinus syndrome]. It is an important evidence if the feeling of sickness comes up suddenly after drinking alcohol, but it is a sure evidence for the coprinus syndrome if this happens again after 3-4 days when consumed with alcohol again.

---

– sgeureka ^t•c 14:40, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I love "polychromic quick-change artist "...makes it sound like a superhero or something...this is extremely helpful. Much appreciated...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:32, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed over 15 Good article nominations and are not part of WikiProject Good articles (the first message I sent out went to only WikiProject members). So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers: Recruiters: The main task of a recruiter is to teach users that have never reviewed a Good article nomination how to review one. To become a recruiter, all you have to do is meet this criteria. If we don't get at least 5-10 recruiters to start off with (at the time this message was sent out, 2 recruiters have volunteered), the Recruitment Centre will not open. If interested, make sure you meet the criteria, read the process and add your name to the list of recruiters. (One of the great things about being a recruiter is that there is no set requirement of what must be taught and when. Instead, all the content found in the process section is a guideline of the main points that should be addressed during a recruitment session...you can also take an entire different approach if you wish!) If you think you will not have the time to recruit any users at this time but are still interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters but just fill in the "Status" parameter with "Not Available". Co-Director: The current Director for the centre is me (Dom497). Another user that would be willing to help with some of the tasks would be helpful. Tasks include making sure recruiters are doing what they should be (teaching!), making sure all recruitments are archived correctly, updating pages as needed, answering any questions, and distributing the feedback form. If interested, please contact me (Dom497). Nominators, please read this: If you are not interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still help. In some cases a nominator may have an issue with an "inexperienced" editor (the recruitee) reviewing one of their nominations. To minimize the chances of this happening, if you are fine with a recruitee reviewing one of your nominations under the supervision of the recruiter, please add your name to the list at the bottom of this page. By adding your name to this list, chances are that your nomination will be reviewed more quickly as the recruitee will be asked to choose a nomination from the list of nominators that are OK with them reviewing the article. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along. A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.--Dom497 (talk) This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 14:40, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear sgeureka,

Someone at Wikibooks: Talk: Data Compression#lost data compression techniques suggested I talk to a Wikipedia administrator about getting a copy of a few articles. Normally I suspect that people advising me to "go bug an administrator" are trying to get me in trouble. However, the Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Access to deleted pages policy seems to confirm that this is the proper process: "Any user with a genuine reason to view a copy of a deleted page may request ... an administrator to supply a copy of the page".

I would like to transwiki some articles from Wikipedia to Wikibooks: Reduced Offset Lempel Ziv, Lempel–Ziv–Tamayo, Polar Tree, WinRK, NanoZip, Asymmetric binary system .

My understanding is that: These topics are not yet notable enough yet to meet Wikipedia's strict standards. (Which is why they all became redlinks). But I suspect some or all of them are notable enough to meet Wikibook's more relaxed notability standards. (Apparently someone thought that some of them were notable enough to add to Template:Compression methods ).

Please either

(a) Transwiki each article to Wikibooks (preserving the history and credit for each edit), so each article can become a module in Wikibooks: Data Compression. Or,

(b) Use the "Email this user" link on the left sidebar of every user page. Email to me your best guess at the "best" version of the article, before it was deleted. I will heavily paraphrase the parts of those articles (if any) that are relevant to the Data Compression Wikibook. What else do I need to do to avoid plagiarism?

p.s.: I randomly picked your name from the Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles. If you have no idea what "transwiki" is about, please feel free to forward this note to some other administrator that is more likely to know how to transwiki an article.

Thank you very much. Vielen Dank!

--DavidCary (talk) 20:20, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done and replied on your talk page. – sgeureka ^t•c 13:48, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Vielen Dank! --DavidCary (talk) 16:45, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be interested in merging

I'll be honest: I'll never get around to write about the KMM. I have stuff in my userspace about higher-priority things, and even there, I am completely backlogged. Take what you need, I don't want or need credit for anything. :-) – sgeureka ^t•c 07:53, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Emergency! characters is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Emergency! characters until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 22:11, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William Schmidt (TV writer) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Schmidt (TV writer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Launchballer 07:53, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Uniques (Florida band) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Uniques (Florida band) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Gbawden (talk) 09:47, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Pride and Prejudice (1995 TV series) for TFA, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:31, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pride and Prejudice
Thank you for quality articles such as Pride and Prejudice and A Song of Ice and Fire, for obviating fancruft and seeing "the benefits of ignoring all dramas", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:58, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1308 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:16, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Three years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:01, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Wuthering Heights may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Lincoln]],<ref name="imdb2009">{{IMDb title|id=1238834|title=Wuthering Heights|description=2009(TV))}}</ref> the [[Wuthering Heights (2011 film)|2011 film]] starring [[Kaya Scodelario]] and James
• 17 film]],<ref name="imdb2016">{{IMDb title|id=5184904|title=Wuthering Heights|description=2016)}}</ref> directed by [[Elisaveta Abrahall]] and starring [[Paul Eryk Atlas]] and [[Sha'ori Morris]],

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Translations of A Song of Ice and Fire is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Translations of A Song of Ice and Fire until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Hello, Sgeureka. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

"extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion

with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016,

a request for comment

established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:01, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that

TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Sgeureka.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available

here

but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at

WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

ArbCom Elections 2016

: Voting now open!

Hello, Sgeureka. Voting in the

2016 Arbitration Committee elections

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

---

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Sgeureka. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Friends

Friends, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 10:11, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Sgeureka. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

Why have I received this message? All administrators are receiving it. What prompted you to send this message? Recently, several Wikipedia admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were Request for Adminship (RfA) after losing control of their account. What do I need to do? Only to follow the instructions in this message. Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites). Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable). Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers. How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)? You can find out more about 2FA at m:2FA.

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:56, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are

two-factor authentication

remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]