User talk:WJBscribe/Archive 18

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

Contents

BAG concerns

Per your concerns over my BAG membership, I have create the following templates User:MBisanz/MESSAGES for use in situations where there may be a perception that I am wearing a certain hat, even if I don't intend it to have that perception. MBisanz talk 05:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Andreasegde

This user seems to hold personal grudges. He began attacking me early this month.[1] Told to calm down but continued, calling me a vandal for apparently believing McCartney is dead.[2] I was new to such a long article and misguided by the size tag seen while editing. He and another user corrected me about this two months back. But now Andre is trying to claim the article as seen in the above diffs. He just abuses though I make lots of useful edits. He later called me "very clever, by seeming to be a concerned editor, and does not reply to accusations (not replying in any way at all) but continues to slowly destroy what a lot of people have worked on. It's a clever strategy, albeit very destructive. It's a new form of vandal."[3] I was on vacation when all this happened. User:Betty kerner said that I should be reported here but there are no signs of me trying to damage the article. I was just unaware on how to edit it. This is not only on the Talk but on Paul McCartney too. This was where I expanded a sec using its main article. It was perfectly neutral writing with proper sources[4] But he summarised the sec by an edit summary that I expand on Paul is dead, so I am a vandal.[5] He's also attacked on my talk as "I don't expect a reply from a vandal (who is registered, and gives himself so many awards)".[6] He then tried to provoke another user by calling me "a self-elected vandal, who likes awards, albeit given to himself. What a high-fallutin' dipstick."[7] (About awards, I have actually received all four and can show the diffs; the badges and ribbons are self-awards.) I am now just too intimidated to contact Andreasegde by sending him warning templates. I went to the Icidents noticeboard but the admin there is apparently his friend who points out his achievements! They're worthless if he misbehaves so much. Please block this user or I am leaving Wikipedia out of harassment. I can't tolerate his attacks anymore. Ultra! 16:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

CHU for Isaac Huml

Clearly I'm in a realm of uncertainty here - I have no access to the OTRS ticket for this, and right now I'm seeing someone desperate to change a name (to "whatever I like") on behalf of someone else. I'd appreciate both your action and your advice on how to deal with this. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorted - I've pointed out that a summary of the reason for the rename would be useful for bureaucrats that haven't signed up for OTRS. WjBscribe 00:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:SUL

The discussion at the bureaucrat notice board seems to have stalled. I believe that this is an issue that requires wide input, and imminently. When SUL moves beyond +sysop only accounts, en.wikipedia (as the largest wikipedia) is likely to receive a disproportinate number of requests at WP:CHU/U. Your thoughts on getting some opinions to derive a consensus on usurption in the event of SUL, and indeed the best venue to reinvigorate the debate (I noted previous stalled discussions across WP), are desired! Pedro :  Chat  21:43, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

At the moment, I am watching the progress of the discussion. My own attempt at gaining community input at WP:SUL/C also stalled. Should there be little further progress, my intention is to propose an expansion of the usurpation criteria where SUL is concerned and see whether objections are forthcoming. WjBscribe 00:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
This would be my view as well. In the event of an SUL request greater laxity than current may be given. However exactly how much laxity could do with discussion; although one could argue that the judgement of the individual bureaucrat will be sufficent certain guidelines would seem to be in order for reasons of consistency. Pedro :  Chat  07:04, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Naming controversy

I do believe that this naming controversy needs to be nipped once in for all. Based on the feedback you and the others have given me, please do let me know if you find my proposed solution Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Solutions? suitable to proceed further. =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Usurpation Request

WJBscribe thank you for taking a look at the request, but with all respect, i believe you forgot to WP:AGF on the case. I have asked during the proccess if someone had any questions or concerns and explained what the intended use of the account is and why i found it useful. I explained that there are a lot of templates/userboxes/scripts stored on userpages but the request was declined only in base of the voting templates (which i added on the userspace after searching and seeing that they were proposed for deletion and removed in the last years, and pointed clearly to the discussion pages to avoid having them recreated in the template space again). I do not see any problem in removing them from userspace too if it is requested, but this does not endorse that there is no legitimate use of that account. In fact, i expected it to be used for other templates/userboxes including those of other users (those that want to add them). I'm sorry that you are unconvinced that this a legitimate use, i've been not very long here -i'm just starting to learn how templates work yet-, and i won't take over templates from other users to illustrate the case. You said that If a template is useful, it belongs in the template namespace, and i agree with you, but a lot of templates / userboxes / scripts are actually stored on userpages and not in the template namespace Wikipedia:WikiProject_Hawaii/Shaka, User:Flaminglawyer/HapValDay!, User:Arknascar44/Love_Cabal/Template, User:UBX, User:js . I have no problem in having that account run by any other user, you can run it yourself if you wish. On the other hand it's possible that i'm wrong and that it's actually not useful at all to have that space, but nobody has given a rationale yet, or explained why templates on the userspace are bad Iunaw 02:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I remain unsure why a you want these templates located at subpages of User:- rather than in the template space. Having templates in the designated namespace is clearly preferable as they can be used using the code {{Foo}} as opposed to {{user:-/Foo}} - if a template won't survive in the template namespace I don't think it should exist outside it. Userbox migration was a compromise resolution of a particular issue and I don't think the templates you propose are limited to userspace. I'm sorry but I simply don't agree with what you're trying to do and don't think it justifies my allowing you to usurp the account your requested. WjBscribe 23:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
This reasoning looks a lot better! I'll make a further immersion in the WP-policy ocean -templates area- before answering, as i was just considering the fact that there are a lot of userspace templates (that gives the impression that unofficial and official templates coexist) and i'm now unsure whether i had a bad idea or not. Thank you! Iunaw 00:38, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorry if my comment seemed unkind - perhaps assumed you knew more about how templates work than is is the case. The template special is designed to make transclusions easier. So if you don't include the namespace in a transclusion code - {{Foo}} instead of {{User:Foo}} or {{Wikipedia:Foo}}, the software uses the page in the template namespace. The template namespace is thus generally preferred for templates. You are right that some templates nonetheless exist in userspace. This is a consequence of a period of Wikipedia history known as the "userbox wars". Briefly explained, Userboxes were originally in the template namespace. There were two camps - those who believed these had nothing to do with creating an encyclopedia and wanted them deleted, and those who felt they fostered a spirit of community and wanted them kept. The uneasy compromised that resolved this was that most userboxes without a collaborative purpose would be moved to userspace, distinguishing them from templates that had a direct role in creating content. Hence, why most templates used in userspace now exist on various user subpages. I hope that explains why I am uneasy to perform an action that may disturb the status quo in this area. Also, I have a general unwillingness to rename accounts to usernames that will not be used to actually edit the project. WjBscribe 00:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Commons

I see you haven't logged into Commons since the 19th, so you probably haven't read the message that I left. You can disregard my question because someone answered it, but how do I request an exception to only uploading 24 pix in one hour? I was on a roll last night until I hit that speed bump. APK yada yada 12:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that there was such an limit on uploads - not sure it's particularly helpful. I'll look into it. WjBscribe 23:23, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. APK yada yada 00:53, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Commons II

Hi WJB, I've noticed that several M. Lucas images have been tagged as missing sources [8]. I was unable to readd the info in as it's currently protected. Solinkov (talk) 15:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Nice

Thanks for being on time to close Gwen Gale's RfA. I'm glad I didn't have to play a game of "find a bureaucrat" today. :) Acalamari 23:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem - I remember when I used to have to play that game often. I would have been able to close Sp1's RfA on time if not for my home internet being down for 7 hours! I especially chose the viewing of the new Indiana Jones film I went to so I would be back in time to close it... WjBscribe 23:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Well timed then. :) In fact, I remembered that you used to contact bureaucrats if you needed them, so I decided to take a leaf out of your book. Hope you had a fun time at the cinema too. Acalamari 23:26, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Cheers from me too for that! All the best :) Gwen Gale (talk) 23:59, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Skyelarke / Scott Free

Regarding the name change of Scott Free (talk · contribs), there are some related ArbCom restrictions.[9] There should probably be a note added at the ArbCom page, and possibly Talk:John Buscema, which clarifies the name change. Would you like to do it, or shall I go ahead and add something? --Elonka 01:02, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Damn, I didn't realise they were under ArbCom restriction. Really should have consulted ArbCom first. Oh well, done now. I'm pretty tired and was hoping to head to bed - just wanted to clear the rename backlog. Would you mind adding notes in the appropriate places? WjBscribe 01:05, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Can and will do! Also, you might want to set Wikipedia:Editing restrictions as a hotbutton on your browser, it'll be easier to scan for these in the future.  :) --Elonka 01:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. WjBscribe 01:14, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Successful RfAs

Hello. I usually see you closing RfAs so I think your a good person to ask this. During your time in closing RfAs as successful or unsuccessful, what is the average percentage of a RfA passing? I have noticed personally that RfAs pass around 70% with a good amount of supporters. I am really curious about this. Comments? -- RyRy5 (talk) 04:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

RyRy5, I'm going to jump in with some quick statistics. The lowest RFA ever to pass was Carnildo's which was influenced by a pending RFAR iirc. Sceptre's at 72% was the highest fail I could find, but I think higher %s have failed. Other low passes were Krimpet at 67%, ^demon at 63% (was a resysopping), and Danny at 68% (also a resysopping).
As a general rule, RFAs under 70% will not succeed, RFAs over 75% almost certainly succeed, and the 5% in between is why folk like WJBscribe are given the crat flag to make the tough calls. I think an average passing rate, if anyone's even compiled it, would be distorted by the significant number of high % historical passes from when the project was smaller and RFA was easier to pass.
Of course I'm sure WJBscribe or any of the other active crats can expand further, but I figured I'd jump in with some of the history I am aware of. MBisanz talk 08:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, Mbisanz. I was very curious about this. In my personal opinion, I think that 69-70% is the average. But I feel that the # of supports take affect also. --RyRy5 (talk) 15:45, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

It's hard to judge on percentages alone. The guiding principle by which I operate is that th community generally expects that those with more than 80% will be successfull and that those without 70% will not be. That said, RfA is not purely a vote and much turn on individual circumstances and strength of argument. Statistically, I believe it has been a very long time since someone has failed an RfA with 75% or more of the votes, though I would be hesitant to conclude too much from this fact. There is a spectrum of opinion amongst the Wikipedia community as to how far bureaucrats should be guided by those expressing a given opinion on the outcome of an RfA. Although most bureaucrats are likely to sit towards the middle of that range, I expect there is a certain degree of variation in our thoughts on this matter. WjBscribe 07:08, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

JzG RFAR merged with Cla68-FM-SV case

Per the arb vote here the RFAR on User:JzG is now merged with this case and he is a named party. Also see my case disposition notes there. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

CHU

Hi. I see you renamed User: P m kocovski to User:PMK1, but in the process created User:PMK1 (renamed). Shouldn't this be deleted? It doesn't seem to serve a purpose. Thanks. BalkanFever 10:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Hu12 administrator apparent libel and abuse

Hello, this is a request to review an apparently libelous and abusive comment made about a living person at the talk page for Mount Hood, done by administrator Hu12. Toward the bottom at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mount_Hood#Climbing_Records--Saffron1x (talk) 15:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

The issue stems from, as you'll see in the article's history section, my interest in adding a simple climbing record listing for Dan Howitt, with the press article references.

Hu12's post: After going through the "google results" (a disturbing education of sorts[10]), there appears to be a long line of aliases for Dan Howitt, posting over various websites and forums promoting himself and besmirching the characters of fellow climbers and related. Appears this is an attempt to use wikipedia to import offsite conflicts and further an adjenda. It has been removed. I'd suggest that Dan Howitt read the following, Wikipedia:Wikipedia is in the real world and Law Of Unintended ConsequencesHu12

My reply: Please remove Hu12's Libel and Vandalism above and please report this user's abuse to Wikipedia administration. Also, Hu12 of the "google results" you searched most are in support of Dan Howitt, with tons of his official summit photos on Rainier, Adams, Hood, Shasta, and listings of his timing officials. You strangely give weight to the abusive chat-site gossip and unsupported libel, and your own post above is of that nature. Chat-sites with this sort of conduct are sad. I'm reporting your libel and abuse to the wiki administration.--Saffron1x (talk) 15:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Note Hu12 cites a link above as support for his allegations of Dan Howitt. In reading the chat-site thread, and note it's a mere chat-site and has a lot of personal attacks, gossip, unfounded content, libel, etc, you will, nevertheless, find considerable support for Howitt including climbing record photos, timing officials names, etc. Hu12 emphasizes the allegations about the use of aliases, and this is gossip and unsupported.

Note: This has already been reviewed at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Administrator Hu12 apparent abuse. Please review WP:CANVASS and avoid forum shopping. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

A Little Thank You

hey just a quick thanks for sorting out my rename from AceLink to Smiley. Most apreciated Smiley =) (talk) 15:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

E-mail

Hi. I sent you an e-mail recently, don't know if you got it or not. Everyking (talk) 17:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Got it but only just had a chance to read it. I missed those events completely - will look into it and get back to you. WjBscribe 23:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Changing_username/Archive45#Isaac_Huml_.E2.86.92_Blocked_vandal_.23.23.23

Regarding your comment at Wikipedia:Changing_username/Archive45#Isaac_Huml_.E2.86.92_Blocked_vandal_.23.23.23... I think "Someone by that name has requested it, as it appears in Google searches, and they don't want people to think it was them" or "It's a person's name, and they have requested that it be renamed. Since they do not own the account, and it is labelled as a sockpuppet, I don't see what the problem is" are reasonable explanation, no? – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, on reflection all the info was there you are quite right. WjBscribe 02:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Mediation committee

Hi WJB. I am interested in helping out a little more with mediation on Wikipedia. I have informally mediated a few article issues in the past and resolved them amicably, I believe. As there are currently no unassigned mediation requests, I can't take the advice of Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Nominations/Procedure to "show my stuff", and instead offer the work I did with disputing parties on Talk:Dane Rauschenberg as an example. Is the Mediation Committee looking for volunteers, and if so, do you think I might be suitable? Thanks. Neıl 龱 11:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Neil, as you can see, we normally ask users wanting to join the committee to take one of our cases to see how they get on. I honestly don't see this would be a problem for you, but it's still good to see how users get on in the formal mediation enviornment. Are you happy to wait until we have a new case for you to mediate? We do get them rather frequently. Ryan Postlethwaite 11:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
After looking at things, I'd certainly accept Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-04-25 Attachment theory when it's over as evidence of your mediation work given we haven't got any cases at the minute. Ryan Postlethwaite 11:37, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
You're not WJBscribe!!  :) Thanks Ryan. Seddon has already volunteered on the Attachment theory case, and I don't want to take the work away from him as I believe he's also trying to improve his mediation skills - I'll help out with the Attachment theory case, but yes, when a new case comes up for the Mediation Committee I would be happy to mediate that one - drop me a note on my talk page when a suitable opportunity arises. Neıl 龱 15:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

John Howard RfM trouble

Hello, WJBscribe. Once again I'm trying to encourage editors at the John Howard article to come to mediation due to continued edit wars. However, I'm being antagonised by the comments of an editor uninvolved in this particular content dispute, user:Sarah. Here's the link to the RfM talk page where she has been commenting. There are maybe 10 or 15 editors involved in this dispute, most partook in the edit war. But these comments that attempt to paint me and one other editor as the real problem are affecting the neutral atmosphere of the RfM. Editors waiting to get started on an RfM are in the perfect place for anyone who wanted to influence their perceptions of the dispute, but I don't think this sort of activity should be allowed on the RfM pages. Sincere regards, Lester 11:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:CHU

Oh, yeah. I completely forgot about that detail in the software. Thanks for refreshing my memory and I'll keep that in mind in the future. Useight (talk) 14:37, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Username Change

This morning you renamed a user and know there are a few more requests. I was wondering if you could attend to them? SimpsonsFan08 talk Sign Here Please and get Award 12:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Those pages are likely to be pretty busy at the moment. There are few bureaucrats tending to them and we'll get to them when we can - unfortunately people will just need to be patient in the meantime. WjBscribe 17:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Usernames with non-Roman letters

Was a time that I opposed usernames that used non-Roman alphabets. I felt that this is an English language Wikipedia and the names should reflect that. However, in light of the global accounts, I now support changes such as Tigermighty → כל יכול.

I bring this up only because I recall discussing this issue with you a few months ago, and I wanted you to understand the reasoning behind the change in my opinion on this matter.

Cheers, Kingturtle (talk) 17:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I agree that where SUL is concerned, these probably should be done. I suggest asking such users to use latin characters in their signatures to help others distinguish them from other users with non-latin names. WjBscribe 17:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Good idea. Kingturtle (talk) 18:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Changing username

Hi WJBscribe. I have a question regarding the namechange process. If I have my name changed, will all my edits be re-attributed to my new account-name? Does this include the images I uploaded and the pages I moved? Cheers, Face 18:17, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, all your edits will be re-attributed as well as logged actions such as image uploads and page moves. All your settings in "my preferences" will also remain the same. WjBscribe 18:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Usurp Request BrianGilliford/TGS

First off I'm not sure if this is the right place to respond but I figure its safer than editing the usurp page directly. I'm replying in reponse to your comment on the usurp page regarding my usurp request of the username TGS. It is not me in the german wiki. I actually hadn't realized that person was there until after I submitted the request when I checked into the contribs from other projects. If that has an impact on the request itself I'll understand as I'm not entirely sure how requests involving inter-wiki usernames are dealt with. I apologise again if this isn't the preferred method of replying. I'm at work and wasn't quite sure where to put it. BrianGilliford (talk) 03:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The process has begun to unify accounts across the various wikimedia projects. As there is already a user with this name on another project I'm afraid I can't let you have it here, as they will soon get the name on every project automatically. WjBscribe 07:31, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Two Things

First of all, your opinion here would probably be valuable. Secondly, why was this request performed so early? Thanks, seresin ( ¡? ) 07:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I performed the request based on an email I received before I saw the on-wiki request. Per my proposal at WP:BN#Modification of usurpation practice for SUL requests, I am going to start performing usurp requests immediately where it's for SUL compliance provided the target account has no significant edits. I'll take a look at the bot request. WjBscribe 07:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

Obviously I shouldn't have removed the template. My apologies. Spartaz Humbug! 10:46, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about it - no harm done. On reflection, of the things troubling me about that RfA, the removal of the templates comes pretty low on the list. WjBscribe 17:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Hilarity

LOL. Al Tally talk 21:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Hee Hee Hee! Pedro :  Chat  21:29, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Good one. :) Acalamari 21:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
LOL! I needed that chuckle :) dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:11, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:BN#Problematic_rename_by_a_steward

Just curious, was this resolved in any way? :) -- lucasbfr talk 23:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

It will not be possible to reverse that rename until bug #14330 is fixed given that it will require the deletion of a global account. WjBscribe 09:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 21 19 May 2008 About the Signpost
Pro-Israeli group's lobbying gets press, arbitration case Board elections: Voting information, new candidates 
Sister Projects Interview: Wikibooks WikiWorld: "Hodag" 
News and notes: Russian passes Swedish, milestones Wikipedia in the News 
Dispatches: Good article milestone Features and admins 
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation 
Volume 4, Issue 22 26 May 2008 About the Signpost
Board elections: Candidate questions Single User Login opt-in for all users 
Community-related news sources grow WikiWorld: "Tomcat and Bobcat" 
News and notes: Wikimedia DE lawsuit, milestones Wikipedia in the News 
Dispatches: Featured sounds Features and admins 
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation 
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Name change, a last step

Thank you for completing my username change. As you can see, I signed up under my old name in order to keep others from grabbing it. To clear the edit history (beyond what admins and bureaucrats can access, of course) which connects my real life name and the new username through the part where it mentions the page move, would you please delete my page at User:Travislangley? Thank you. Travislangley (talk) 11:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I just wanted to...

... direct your attention to my reply here. Thanks. MiCkE 11:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Just a quick thank you for processing my usurpation request so quickly. Coffee joe (talk) 09:03, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

SUL-related usurpation request

I see that WP now has a page to request SUL-related usurpations. I'm wondering if there are different rules for this? To refresh your memory, I'm trying to usurp User:Whiteknight, although he has about a dozen GFDL-significant edits, including two edits recently (in may). He hasn't responded at all to several requests on his user-talk page, can't receive emails, etc.

I really don't mean to harass you, but this is the last wiki that I need to finish my global account migration. I even managed to get a usurpation on vi.wikipedia and nl.wikipedia since we last talked (and I don't speak any neaderlands or vietnamese). I'm just trying to figure out what the status is with policy and everything. Again, I'm sorry to bother you, and i won't harass you anymore after this. --Whiteknight (talk) (books) 01:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about bothering me - I understand that enwiki's unwillingness to fulfill requests such as yours at this time is frustrating. Though things are moving in that direction, I don't think we're quite at a stage where that account can be renamed but discussions are ongoing. I have a list of all declined SUL rename requests so they can be actioned once local policy allows it (which I suspect it eventually would). It probably wouldn't be technically possible at the moment anyway as your global account needs to be deleted before you can be renamed here and a bug is preventing the stewards from performing most requests to delete global accounts at the moment. WjBscribe 06:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I actually don't want to be renamed: I also own the global account User:Wknight8111 (it's my bot account on en.wikibooks). All I need is User:Whiteknight to be usurped so I can unify the account. IE: you rename it to "Whiteknight (Usurped)", and then I can log right in to the account with my current global password, autocreating the account. This is how I've been doing conflicted SUL-related renames on en.wb, to help avoid involving the stewards every time somebody needs a rename. Whether that's the best way is open for debate, but it's been working well for me. Anyway, we can talk details later when the policy gets updated. --Whiteknight (talk) (books) 16:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Changing Username/SUL

Hi Will. I already answer in here. If possible, please just moved out User:Aday, so I can login using it. And also I request to delete my current Username, or can I just keep it?? :-) Adaywijaya (talk) 16:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Done - it's fine for you to keep both accounts. WjBscribe 16:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, as you can see now, I'm using Username Aday (talk) 16:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Usurpation of Pretzels

Many thanks for this. Much appreciated! Pretzelschatters 16:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Your comment

Dear WjBscribe. You gave an interpretation on my talk page which I found offensive when you referred to me as "digging up errors she made early in her time editing here which she clearly regrets in an apparent attempt to intimidate her". I wonder if you could please keep such private musings off-wiki in future? Many thanks, Mathsci (talk) 05:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Consensus on reasoning for LGBT Project Articles

A new discussion you may be interested in:Consensus on reasoning for LGBT Project Articles. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 07:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Second Intifada

Will, a few weeks ago, I emailed the Mediation Committee regarding a particular Mediation Cabal case, and i was told that the Committee was discussing it, and that the chair of the committee would email me regarding the discussion that the committee engaged in. I was just wondering if there was any progress on this at all, after all, while there is no severe rush, I still believe the mediation, or alternate options do need to progress. If you could notify me in some way of this progress, or on what the Committee decided, I'd be most appreciative. Thanks a lot. Steve Crossin (talk)(email) 13:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This is odd - I don't know anything about this and can't seem to find an email about this in the list archives. Did you email us directly or ask someone to forward your email (if so, who). Sorry about this - do send me the email so I can make sure the list has now got it. WjBscribe 13:44, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Scratch that - just found it. It has actually been discussed quite extensively. I confess I'm a little behind on MedCom business. I will get back to you asap about this. WjBscribe 13:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, >_<. Ignore the email I just sent you then. Thanks. Either by email or talk page would be great, thanks again. Steve Crossin (talk)(email) 13:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for processing my usurpation! --Jane Doe (talk) 12:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

SUL

Hi WJBscribe!

I'm Emkaer from Germany and have a wish to you as a bureaucrat: I read about[11] including an identically named account without edits into an Interwiki-Single-User-Login-account. In 2007, I created User:Emkaer to edit from time to time in en.wikipedia also. But there was a login-problem, so I never logged in correctly (my password didn't work), and I never edited as User:Emkaer. I talked about this issue on User talk:Emkaer, and was advised to make a new account. So I did, and now am User:TheUserFormallyKnownAsEmkaer, having contributed since 9 May 2007, mainly to articles related to German-American historians who fled Nazi-Regime.

When it is possible to get an account without edits into your Singe-User-Login-Account, that was not created by yourself (as User:SCPS got on pt.wikisource),[12] it should be possible to get my own account (of which I do not know the password). Would you please help me in a way, that you know better than I: maybe by renaming the account User:Emkaer, so I could proceed in extending my Single-User-Login to en.wikipedia. Or, by creating an new password for User:Emkaer, and mailing it to me using Wikimail. I hope I could write about my concern in English in a way you understand.

Thanks and greetings --Tufkae (talk) 14:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Hallo Emkaer.
WJBscribe bat mich, dir zu antworten. Er benennt gerne Emkaer in einen „Füllnamen“ um, und deinen neuen Account TheUserFormallyKnownAsEmkaer in Emkaer. Für den zweiten Schritt musst du aufgrund eines Bugs allerdings zunächst dein globales Konto von einem Steward löschen lassen. Gerne würde auch ich dies für dich machen, momentan hindert die Stewards allerdings ein anderer Bug daran. Dennoch kannst du auf meta:SRU schon deinen Antrag stellen, der dann abgearbeitet wird, wenn der Bug behoben ist. Liebe Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Single User Login Request

Hi WJBscribe: Can you help me please. The latest edition of the Wikipedia Signpost article Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-05-26/Single User Login offers an important option for regular Wikipedia editors. I have been an editor since 2002 and have over 54,000 edits to my credit [13] I now wish to have the User name "IZAK" work as my default whereby it will "allow a user to reserve an account on all public Wikimedia wikis simultaneously; that is, nobody can create an account with the same username as you, and you can log onto any wiki without having to explicitly create an account there. etc etc" However, "a user on another project has the same name as you, then only one of you will be able to create a single user login account for the time being (the software will choose based on permissions (i.e. bureaucrat, administrator, etc.) and edit count)." It is indeed the case that there is another user on the Afrikaans Wiki who uses the name "Izak" ("him")-- not "IZAK" ("me") as I do but the software reads them the same -- which creates a conflict. I looked up that other user and found that he has made only TEN edits [14] from 15 November 2005 to 20 July 2007 which is about as close as any user can get to being a near-to-dormant account. I would proceed to requesting a "usurpation" of that account based on Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-05-26/Single User Login: "Note that if the other user has no contributions, it may be possible to usurp their account to resolve the conflict; however, check the usurpation policy on the relevant wiki first." -- But I am not sure who to contact here or at the Afrikaans Wiki and I would appreciate your help in resolving this or in guiding me to the right person to deal with this issue, (note, in South Africa, English is one of the official languages). See http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help_talk:Unified_login for some discussions, and where I have cc'd this message and asked for more help, see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help_talk:Unified_login#IZAK_requests_about_Afrikaans_.22Izak.22 Thanks for your help in advance. IZAK (talk) 07:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, just to jump in, WJBscribe is a crat at en.wiki only, where you already have the name you want, so you need a steward at meta or if he is active, the local crat at the Afrikaans Wiki Alias. MBisanz talk 07:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
MBisanz is quite right - my ability to rename users doesn't extend beyond this wiki. That said, you are mistaken about the problem - there is also a user called IZAK on the Afrikaans wiki - [15] but as that user has no edits, you should find that the local bureaucrat is willing to rename it so you can have the name. WjBscribe 08:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

RFA offer

Hi. I now feel I'm ready for an RfA, and would be pleased to have you as a nominator. Many thanks, Epbr123 (talk) 13:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Your Personal Policy

Hello. As a future administrator, I hope, I wanted you to detail (if you have time) your personal criteria for removal of talk page content. Thanks! Beam 01:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Given some of the issues in your recent history, I'd advise you to put off ideas of becoming an administrator for awhile. No offense intended. AvruchT * ER 14:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sure if you read those issuers than you know what's up. Regardless, I'm talking next year not next month. Beam 15:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Epbr123

Would you mind if I co-nommed for his RFA? I nominated him a while back and I think I would like to do so again. bibliomaniac15 04:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Not at all, if you and Epbr123 would like that go ahead. It's really his show... :) WjBscribe 09:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Just a quick note to mention that a year has gone by since this and I wanted you to know I've not forgotten your kindness in changing your mind. It meant a lot to me at the time that my RfA was unopposed (though it's hard to admit because it's rather uncool, lol) and it was indeed good of you to reconsider. --Dweller (talk) 13:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanx

Webwizard works like a charm... Many thanks! --Webwizard (talk) 13:30, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Anti-vandal fighter

I was wondering if you might be willing to explain your support for the name Global sysop for the new gobal funtion of Anti-vandal fighter? As I understand it, sysop is the same as administrator, just another term, no difference in rights. The Anti-vandal fighter role does not have full administrator rights, but only a slect subset of those rights. Using the term Global sysop, appears to me, to be a misstatement of the function. Or am I totally out in left field? The term Gobal Sysop should be reserved for someone who actually has global administrator rights, if or when such a thing is ever introduced. Dbiel (Talk) 20:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I actually don't think what we call the right is very significant. The rules for obtaining and using it are far more important. I put my name to all the preference I like best - I do marginally prefer janitor to global sysop I suppose. But global sysop is an informative name as it is the right to block and delete/protect pages across all projects. None of the other names are as self-explanatory. I do think there is a risk of over-obsessing over finding a perfect name rather than developing an understanding of how this right would work if implemented. WjBscribe 09:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I agree with you that it does not make much difference what we call it, as long as the name does not mislead other users. I also agree that developing an understanding of how this right would work is far more important than what we call it. Thanks again for the reply. I maybe simply over concerned about other users assuming that a "Global Sysop" is a "Global Admininstrator" It is a right that could easily be abused if its user implemented in a language that they did not really understand. But that is a separate issue to be dealt with elsewhere. Thanks again. Dbiel (Talk) 18:33, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

WM commons ref

I have removed the implicit reference to WM commons as you requested, but have left the quote, since it was inaccurate and I wasn't offended by it. Cheers, Mathsci (talk) 11:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Koalorka seems effectively to have repeated his insult of June 2.[16] Cheers, Mathsci (talk) 16:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I went ahead and placed Koalorka under ArbCom restrictions (AA-2). With any further violations, he knows he'll be looking at a block. I'm also debating whether or not to place Mathsci under restrictions as well. --Elonka 17:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

My moved account

It is possible that you can close my redirect page from Despairing? — PsY.cHo!, 11:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure - done. WjBscribe 11:18, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I think that you have misunderstood me. I meant whether you can lock my redirect page (like here). I have used the wrong word. — PsY.cHo!, 11:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Ah, I see - done. WjBscribe 11:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. — PsY.cHo!, 11:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

CUU template

I'm not sure if you've already picked this up, but the "email target username" link which is created in the first save, is linking to the username they already have, not the target username. Regards, Rudget (Help?) 15:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Oops, that will be my fault from my recent changes to the template. WjBscribe 16:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Just thought I'd bring it to your attention, and we didn't send emails to wrong people. :) Thanks. Rudget (Help?) 16:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I've commented on your response to the CHU req. Rudget (Help?) 14:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

CHU/SUL template

I was wondering whether there was a template that you used to produce the comments like this: On hold - You will need to ask a steward to delete your global account before you can be renamed locally. Requests can be made at m:SR/SUL.

Or whether you just typed them out. If you want I can bundle them all into a template ({{CUS}}?) for you to save you typing them out every time! RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 15:09, June 6, 2008 (UTC)

At the moment I'm just copying and pasting. Feel free to turn it into a template if you like. WjBscribe 15:43, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Y Done: Template (and documentation) can be found at {{CUS}}. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 09:52, June 7, 2008 (UTC)

All set / Hornetman16

Hi Will! Thanks for agreeing to help on this one. Per m:Steward_requests/SUL_requests#User:ChristianMan16, we're about done and the global a/c has been deleted now. Can you possibly do the rename? I'll look after the bureaucracy (if you'll pardon :) ) and ensure the paper trail leads to the new account, and re-block, etc with the correct notices. Thanks again ;) - Alison ❤ 19:10, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for processing my usurpation request. Dave Rogers 00:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Reminder Sunday Lunchtime

Just a reminder about Wikipedia:Meetup/London 10 See you Sunday 1p.m.! -- Harry Wood (talk) 00:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

my account usurped

Hi. I have just seen that you renamed this account. It is my real name. After a vandal did some harassemets and personal attacks 2006 I created these accounts on some wikis, on en.wiki it was Mike Rosoft, who created the account and thrown the password away (see [17]). I wonder now why you renamed it in case of SUL. I really wanted to ask for it in some days as I already unificated the global account with this name, now I see you did it by your own. Did somebody asked for it? It could be important for me to know it, might be the vandal is active again. Anyway, I could log in there today, without that the global account had to be deleted. Please let me know here or on the cs.source or wikisource.org. Thx, -jkb- (cs.source) 10:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Once you unify a global account, only the holder of that name can sign in with that name on any wiki whether the name does not exist. What I did yesterday was to rename all the all accounts here that have the same name as a global account but aren't attached to that account. It allows the global account holder to sign in with that name here, but wouldn't allow anyone else to do so. All of these accounts would have needed renaming at some stage and it seemed more efficient to do them all in one go (there were about 400 of them) rather than wait for people to make the inevitable requests, especially as some users from other projects without good english struggle with making the requests. Does that make sense? WjBscribe 10:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure. I was surprised only a bit because I thought that it is not possible to rename / usurp an account while the global account exists already. But anyway, now it has been done without I had to request, it works - so I thank you on this way once more. -jkb- (cs.source) 13:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

It isn't possible to rename an account that is attached to a global account, or to rename an account to the same name as a global account. It is however possible to rename accounts that have the same name as a global account if they aren't attached to that account. And you're welcome :-) WjBscribe 14:15, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I see, :-), -jkb- (cs.source) 14:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)