User talk:AGK/Archive/22

The following user talk subpage an archive of archived discussions on User talk:AGK. Please do not modify it. New discussions should be raised through this link; to contact this user, see User:AGK/Contact. For an overview of old discussions, see User talk:AGK/Archive.

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

[edit] Doczilla's RfA

My pleasure :) AGK (talk) 12:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Can any of these cool admins help me?

Can any of these cool admins help me? I want to add one sentence to the world of Wikipedia. But I can't. The sentence is factual, provable, (based on the New York Times for goodness sake) but I can't get it on.

Fact: Circumcision decreases a man's risk of getting HIV Fact: Circmcision INcreases a man's risk of getting herpes and chlamydia.

The article on "circumcision" mentions the term HIV probably 100 times (I'm not joking) and mentions "herpes" or "chlamydia" not Once.

Can any of you cool administrators stop two guys named Avraham and Jakew from deleting my ONE sentence I want to add? Thanks, 70.114.38.167 (talk) 06:13, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Without looking into the specifics of the dispute, and without unduly taking up a bias in either school of thought in this dispute, I will say that there will, or should, be a sound reason or concern for Avraham and Jakew reverting your additions.

When editors encounter (an)other editor(s) who are opposed to changes they are trying to make, the course of action to be taken from that point onwards is dispute resolution: that is, discussing the disputed changes amongst themselves, and, if necessary, with uninvolved editors.

Simply post a note to those editors' talk pages (User talk:Avraham and User talk:Jakew) asking if they would like to open a discussion, and inviting them to start a new section on the article's talk page (they'll know how to do that).

Logically, that discussion should consist of those editors and yourself, each outlining why you think the change should (not) be made, and take it from there. It is essential that you bear in mind throughout dispute resolution that the end result of the discussions should be one that has the most positive effect on the encyclopedia. Bear that in mind, and I'm confident you will all be able to reach a satisfactory conclusion. Best of luck, AGK (talk) 21:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Binding mediation for Waterboarding

Hello AGK. Since you are on the Mediation Committee, I thought I'd approach you. I realize that the Mediation Committee isn't supposed to resolve content disputes. But here we have a content dispute directly arising from a misinterpretation of policy. A large number of editors are (in my humble opinion) misinterpreting WP:FRINGE to pretend that a very real dispute over the "waterboarding is torture" lead sentence, with several prominent adherents on both sides (see Sept. 2003 comments by Jimbo Wales in WP:WEIGHT), does not exist or has been resolved in favor of "waterboarding is torture." In my opinion, it's a blatant violation of WP:NPOV. Several other editors agree, but we're being indef blocked one at a time by admins who have adopted the "waterboarding is torture" position. I believe that "waterboarding is torture" is also being used as cover for America bashing by certain editors, with far too much frequency and far too much gusto.

It's been to ArbCom, but they didn't really do anything except make it easier for "waterboarding is torture" admins to get rid of people who have disagreed with them (via article probation). I have already received a warning on my User Talk page for some very mild comments. I propose an unorthodox solution: binding mediation moderated by the entire Arbitration Committee, with all Waterboarding editors who participate agreeing to abide by the majority vote of the Mediation Committee. I am placing the same message on the Talk page of WJBScribe. Please help us resolve this dispute in an amicable fashion, and repair what I believe to be an outrageous WP:NPOV violation in the lead sentence. Neutral Good (talk) 03:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for getting in touch. I think Mediation may be helpful here—in fact, content disputes are what the MedCom does do: it is conduct-related disputes that it does not handle. If you think Mediation may be helpful, you may wish to file a Request for Mediation. There are relevant instructions and links to very in-depth guides on that page, but if you have any queries, don't hesitate to drop me a note, requesting assistance. Regards, AGK (talk) 07:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SOS

RE: mrg3105 (talk · contribs)

Hi there. I found you through WP:EA and I'm hoping you might be able to give me some feedback on a dispute resolution issue I'm currently dealing with on WP:WQA. I thought I did the right thing at the time, but now I'm wondering.

Yesterday, someone posted a WQA about a user (mrg3105) who had added dispute tags to 57 different articles of various cities with diacritics in their names. mrg3105 appeared at WQA and admitted that the tags had been added solely to try to 'trawl' for feedback on the issue of diacritics, and that he did not mind that the tags for 56 of the articles had been removed. He was warned about WP:POINT and WP:CONSENSUS. [1] He then proceeded to file his own WQA, complaining about several editors on the Chişinău page who were removing his tag there. The issue does seems to have been discussed on that article's Talk Page and elsewhere and mrg3105 does not have any consensus at all on any forum. Several editors had been removing the tag whenever he tried to add it again. He didn't seem to be listening when he was told it was a content issue, and seemed to be trying to spin the discussion to get the WQA editors to agree with his point and participate in the content debate, so I firmly closed the WQA to keep it from going further. [2]

And now...he seems to be a little unhinged. The Chişinău article has been reverted again (and reverted back) and he's been leaving messages about how WQA doesn't agree with policy and how I said that using the dispute tag was "disruptive" and so on. [3] [4] [5]

I honestly do think that this editor is being disruptive, is going against consensus and isn't really listening to anything being said to him, and that there was nothing we could have done for him on WQA, but I'm wondering what I could have done differently to keep it from blowing up this way. I want to help on WQA--I don't want to upset people. Any feedback at all would be appreciated. Best, DanielEng (talk) 11:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rollbacker

So today I decided to undo my wrongings by helping undo vandalism..... 9hope thats a good thing), and I then looked up WP:Vandalism or something and I somehow got to here WP:RBK. And I was wondering what I should do and if I could get rollbacker ability... Thanks! --Talk to Stealth500 (talk) 23:50, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Reply is coming soon :) AGK (contact) 23:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:User Wikipedia en

A tag has been placed on Template:User Wikipedia en requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Fear not, I have pre-empted the embarrassment all Wikipedians feel in having one of their own pieces of work deleted, and purged it myself :) Thank you for the notification! AGK (talk) 19:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for the Barnstar, it was well received : ) - jc37 09:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure, you deserve it :) AGK (contact) 13:03, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template

Courtesy note; screenshot. I couldn't fix it with a couple of tweaks, so I gave up and reverted it until you can :) Cheers, Daniel (talk) 11:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear, all my hard work ruined :) I'll have a look, but thanks for reverting—I didn't realise I'd broken some pages. AGK (contact) 13:02, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Post-archival note, now Fixed. AGK (contact) 17:45, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] VandalSniper

Hello, I applied for access to use VandalSniper. The page said there that I could inform you here. This is me doing that. Have a nice day! Djk3 (talk) 17:45, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for getting in touch. I've whipped through the page's pending request, including yours. Welcome to VandalSniper :) Please see my post to your user talk page, for some useful information regarding the program. Regards, AGK (contact) 18:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] First Edit

Happy First Edit Day, AGK/Archive/22, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

• FROM YOUR FRIEND:

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:14, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much! AGK (contact) 07:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

	HAPPY FIRST EDIT DAY!	from the BIRTHDAYCOMMITTEE
	Wishing AGK/Archive/22 a very Happy First Edit Day! Have a fantastic day! From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee

--Nadir D Steinmetz 09:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Again, my thanks ;) It's much appreciated! AGK (contact) 16:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rollbacker

So today I decided to undo my wrongings by helping undo vandalism..... 9hope thats a good thing), and I then looked up WP:Vandalism or something and I somehow got to here WP:RBK. And I was wondering what I should do and if I could get rollbacker ability... Thanks! --Talk to Stealth500 (talk) 23:50, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Reply is coming soon :) AGK (contact) 23:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I just brought this back since Misza bot keeps archiving it..... --Talk to Stealth500 (talk) 22:47, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Y Done. Please use the tool wisely, and ensure you have read the documentation on rollbacking before you use it. Happy editing, AGK (contact) 23:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure I got it? I seem to have no new things..... --Talk to Stealth500 (talk) 01:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Yep, you definitely have it—see here :) Also, see Wikipedia:Rollback feature for an introduction to the tool's features, which shouldgo some way to helping you to recognise the changes—which, admittedly, are not blindingly obvious. AGK (contact) 07:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually I got it now. I did one eedit in which I rollbacked my own by mistake but I think I am good. Thanks! --Talk to Stealth500 (talk) 11:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, I do that occasionally as well—just be sure to fix your mistake as soon as possible :) Cheers, AGK (contact) 17:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Again thanks for doing this. Cheers! --Talk to Stealth500 (talk) 21:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi there, I would also like to apply for the rollbacker feature - I've been doing some vandal hunting recently, and come across a few that do two or three edits in a row to make it more difficult... hope this doesn't seem too impertinent :) BananaFiend (talk) 15:15, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Also Y Done for BananaFiend—all my advice and cautions to Stealth apply here as well: use the tools with consideration for others, and don't misuse them! Regards, AGK (contact) 16:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

With great power comes great responsibility, I'll do my best ;) Thanks for the rollback. BananaFiend (talk) 16:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! AGK (contact) 16:36, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I was reading the instructions and there is a way to change what it says in the description. I am thinking mine should say what the bots say (more or less), however after looking on my preferences I couldn't figure out HOW... Also, should I put the warning on the users page as I did here. Thanks. --Talk to Stealth500 (talk) 19:06, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I assume you mean the user's talk page, which you did in that link. If so, that is correct (as is this edit).

There is indeed a way to revert with a customised edit summary—two, in fact. The first is to use the "undo" button; this simply reverts to the revision before that which you are reverting (unlike rollback, which reverts the relevant revision, as well as all recent ones by the same editor). The second is to use a custom user script, located here. Hope this helps, AGK (contact) 19:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

So what exactly do I do with it? Im confused (prolly a noob anyway lol) --Talk to Stealth500 (talk) 19:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

In that case, I can install it for you, but I need your permission first. Would you like me to install the script I have just linked to you? AGK (contact) 19:51, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I think so, that is if you think it would be ok. If possible have it say essentially what the bots say. Thanks again! --Talk to Stealth500 (talk) 22:36, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I have enabled it for you. I have also tried it on my account, and there's no change; it may not be working any more... If so, I'm afraid you're just going to have to stick with clicking "rollback", and an automatic edit summary being used: that's what the administrators use, anyway :) AGK (contact) 22:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rollback

Hi, I would like to apply for permission to use the rollback facility. I have had a read of the WP:RBK article and understand (hopefully!) when the feature should and should not be used. I do though have a number of articles in my watchlist which regularly seem to get vandalised and this feature would help me to revert in those instances. Thank you.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 21:13, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Y Done. Please use the tools wisely—see my advice to the folks, above, that also applied. You seem experienced enough, and you've already read the relevant article (Wikipedia:Rollback) so you're almost set to go; just be careful, and remember: use it for blatant vandalism only! Cheers, AGK (contact) 21:18, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick! Cheers, I will though make sure I read the above advice and also use it only when it for blatant vandalism. Thanks again.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 21:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure :) Use the tools well! AGK (contact) 21:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Absence

AGK, to be honest, I'm pretty surprised you're not running at RFB. Any reason why not, or just too many things in real life? Regards, Rudget. 16:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

There are plenty of good candidates at RfB just now, as well as a highly-capable, existing team of bureaucrats. One might say now would be a good time to run, and I agree: I simply don't wish to do so :) It's not actually to do with R.L., although coincidentally, I'll be busy (see my user page, future absences ;-), I just have my hands full, what with the Work Group: if I ran just now, it would simply be picked up as status-seeking. Perhaps in the future :) AGK (contact) 16:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing. Rudget. 16:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for asking, anyway :) AGK (contact) 16:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thank you, AGK, for your support in my RfB. I appreciate your trust. Acalamari 22:02, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
My pleasure—I'm both pleased and proud to have done so ;) Cheers, AGK (contact) 22:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Note to self

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2/Evidence/by White Cat. AGK (contact) 00:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nancy Pelosi

Could you please unprotect Nanci Pelosi's page. It was to be protected until Feb 28 and it's near the end of business day on Feb 29. According to wiki it's March 1. §Reinoe (talk) 02:55, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Unprotected. You are correct in saying that the article's protection should have expired on February 28—however, after the article was protected (with an expiry of 28/2/08), another administrator later tweaked the protection on the article, to protect moving from sysop. accounts only, and in doing so, (presumably, accidentally) forgot to set an expiry date, meaning it default-set to indefinite. Thanks for noticing this—it was largely a clerical mistake, and I have now remedied it. Regards, AGK (contact) 11:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the note on my talk page. Unfortunately I have no desire to be an admin. I am not happy with the culture surrounding administrators on Wikipedia. Also, my criticism of the culture means I'd surely fail. Perhaps when the tides have turned. --JayHenry (talk) 17:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps another time then :) AGK (contact) 20:39, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Thank you very much for giving your support to my admin application, which recently closed successfully (36/3/1). I hope I can continue to justify the confidence that you have placed in me. If there is any way that I can help out more, or if you have any handy tips for a freshly-hatched admin, please drop me a line. Thanks again. - 52 Pickup (deal) 21:30, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad to have had the chance to support. You may be interested in User:AGK/Advice for new Administrators, which I occasionally point new additions to the Mop Crowd towards. Otherwise, good luck with the new buttons, and don't be afraid to ask for help!

Regards and best wishes, AGK (contact) 21:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2/Proposed decision

Don't see the need to wait when the page clearly states that only the arbs should be modifying it in the first place. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 23:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Nevertheless, it is the prerogative of the Arbitrators, not individual editors, to make that call. With the greatest respect, I have reinstated White Cat's change, until such times as a member of the Committee can make the final call. Best regards, AGK (contact) 23:52, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

For the public record, this is a continuation of my comment here; additionally, I have retitled this section, which was previously named "Arb page". AGK (contact) 00:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Snowball closure of my RfA

Thanks for the information. I am not downhearted as without a failed application I could not see where I needed to improve. Now that it has failed, I aim to satisfy the concerns of the other editors and reapply in around 6 months. αѕєηιηє ^t/_c 08:44, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way, whilst I'm here, could you delete Image:Gateshead Millennium Bridge, Front.JPG, Image:Sunshine at Dunstanburgh.JPG, and Image:Unlit Pyre, Swiss National Day 2007.JPG? I am the author of these images and I have subsequently uploaded them to the Commons now that I have an account there. Thanks a lot. αѕєηιηє ^t/_c 08:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

That's a very mature attitude to take: some editors who fail RfA seem to take it personally, and go into something of recluse mode. Taking a "ach well, it's a learning experience" attitude is highly responsible, and just goes to show you're already improving! On the topic of the images, they appear to have been deleted by Chris G under speedy deletion criterion I3, "exists at commons", so I hope that resolves the matter. Otherwise, happy editing! AGK (contact) 12:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC)