User talk:Kudpung/Archive Jun 2019

Thanks

		The Signpost Barnstar
		Thanks for everything Smallbones(smalltalk) 16:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your multi-faceted contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Adityavagarwal submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

I am very delighted to nominate Kudpung for the Editor of the Week award. One of the oldest and most well-known editors and administrators on Wikipedia, Kudpung is a very active contributor to an expansive array of tasks on Wikipedia such as significantly reviewing articles at the Articles for Creation, editing innumerable articles on Wikipedia, helping with immensely reducing the Criteria for Speedy Deletion, the Articles for Proposed Deletion, and the Articles for Deletion logs, assiduously helping and guiding other editors, and providing his valuable insights to numerous Request for Adminship candidates. For a time, he was the editor of The Signpost. Additionally, Kudpung has created a staggering number of 60 full length articles and a remarkable total of 72 articles on Wikipedia. His extremely valuable contributions have helped 8 articles gain a Good Article status: Hanley Castle High School, Malvern, Worcestershire, Malvern water, Malvern College, Milford Haven, Wellingborough, Julius Harrison, and Wellingborough. He is a proud translator of French and German languages to English and a member of numerous Wikiprojects such as WikiProject UK geography, Online Ambassador, WikiProject Education, WikiProject Schools, and WikiProject German districts. For more reasons than the aforementioned, I strongly advocate that Kudpung be declared the Editor of the Week. This nomination was seconded by User:John Cline and User:Mark Miller

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}

Thanks again for your efforts! ―Buster7 ☎ 20:34, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

I am totally surprised, and I am deeply humbled by this award. It comes precisely at a time when I need some encouragement to continue with my work on Wikipedia. Thank you so much Adityavagarwal, John Cline, and Mark Miller. Thank you also to Buster7 for continuing to maintain this award scheme for so many years.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:56, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Your work is extremely important to the stability and future of Wikipedia. Don't let the "naysayers" rob you of the reason (and probably the joy) of why you do what you do and why you are who you are. ―Buster7 ☎ 17:49, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Kudpung Due to you, not only directly but also indirectly many Wikipedians gain really valuable insights. For example, while nominating you, a resolution was made at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week to disguise usernames while nominating! It just shows how important you are to Wikipedia and unsurprisingly, in my opinion, almost each autopatrolled editor has learned something or the other from you. Adityavagarwal (talk) 15:14, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for these extraordinary kind words, Adityavagarwal. despite the controversies that occasionally surround my work, I'm just happy to see my years of efforts at NPR and the successful conclusion of ACTRIAL as milestones in the on-going endeavours of so many editors to make Wikipedia not only a first-class knowledge base, but like WER, also to improve its collaborative environment. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:48, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

We've certainly had our differences but I never forgot how much you inspired in me when I fist encountered your writings and opinion. Truly a HUGE net plus to the project. So glad we finally get to demonstrate the communities appreciation of your incredible work!--Mark Miller (talk) 06:44, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words, Mark. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:35, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Feedback request

Hi, I'm currently involved in a dispute regarding the BLP article William Lane Craig. It's been quite heated at times, and I think I'm going to take a step back. However, I've outlined my positions at Talk:William_Lane_Craig#Lack_of_consensus_and_some_theses_about_this_biography_article, and was wondering if you could give me some feedback on them so I can know if I'm on the right track or not. - Thanks, GretLomborg (talk) 05:25, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

GretLomborg, I'm sorry, but this is far too complex for me to delve into at the moment. It woud take hours of checking sources and the topic is also hardly my bailiwick. Perhaps you can still try to convince other contributors of your arguments through the talk pager or directly on the talk pages of the contributors with whom you may be in dispute. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:18, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for responding! I've tried that, but it doesn't seem to be working. We just go around and around on the same issues. It's exhausting. There's a dispute resolution request open, but that's doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

I guess my main goal with this was to figure out if I have a reasonable position for a biography from a policy and editorial perspective. I understand you are likely far too busy to get involved in the details dispute. - GretLomborg (talk) 14:26, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

I think you made a mistake when you edited Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll about me requesting to become one.

Hi Kudpung, I disagree with your message on the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll because when I got blocked and when I got the large warnings about disruptive editing I didn’t know much about Wikipedia now I know a lot about Wikipedia and what admins are required to do, I know things admins are required to do is welcome new users to the Wikipedia, revert vandalism, block and unblock users. I hope to become an administrator by 2020 or 2021 because I have started reverting vandalism and warning users about vandalism. Please can you check your work on the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll when you discussed me becoming one because I think it was a mistake because I have started to revert vandalism, knowing what admins are required to do and the block I got and the large warnings I got were when I didn’t know about Wikipedia and what to do, thank you. Lachlb (talk) 11:43, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Lachlb, what disqualifies you more than anything is that you do not read and follow instructions. Understanding our rules, policies. guidelines, and other instructions and reading them is a prerequisite for adminship. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:09, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Lachlb,I have now reviewed what I said at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll. There was no mistake. I would venture to suggest that you are making a significant mistake in your mnisinterpretation of what adminship is all about. Do keep up your work on vandalism, and if you progress well and when you have more experience you might even wish to look at WP:NPR and do that for a couple of years. These are the stepping stones to adminship. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:52, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Lachlb is not fit for the administration chair, his attitude and approach are clear cut reasons why.86.130.4.25 (talk) 13:41, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung, I accidentally misclicked when I edited Golden Hamster I thought that there was vandalism so I’m really sorry that I made the edits on it so I won’t do this again.

I think 86.130.4.25 made a mistake of me becoming an administor because I thought the edits were vandalism so I’m sorry That I misclicked when editing Golden Hamster and now I know not to, I think 2021 would be the best year for me to become an administrator because I’m learning how to revert vandalism, thank you. Lachlb (talk) 03:20, 27, June 2019 (UTC)

Lachlb, you cannot even get indentations right. It's clear you are not now suited to be an administrator. As far as two years from now goes, unless you are now quite young and will mature in two years, I'd have to see quantum leaps in your ability to edit collaboratively in that time. Just the fact that you chose to come here and make dramah rather than onboarding the constructive criticism you were given speaks worlds about your ability to lead. People destined for higher status in any organization learn from their errors. They don't argue about them and they especially do not try to shift blame. 03:42, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Trying to sort things out

I was enjoying my routine morning coffee , and reading about the Fram incident trying to sort things out in my mind which led me to the TP of a bureaucrat who wrote this article in Daily Dot. It's dated but still effective, don't you think? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 12:16, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Atsme, I have already read this some years ago. I was also at Christophe Henner's presentation in Hong Kong. These things were being said long before 2013 already, but what it does demonstrate is how terrifyingly slow Wikipedia is to do anything abot anything. Just look at ACTRIAL for example. It will also take a long time for any solutions to the issues raised by the FRAMBAN to be put in place. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:38, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Josephine_Saxton

Hi there. I'm delighted to be talking to you. I have a request. Might you have time to translate this article https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephine_Saxton into English? The subect of the page is an English author who has no equivalent Wikipedia English-language page, which seems to me to be a sad omission. Thank you for your kind attention Gyms (talk) 19:39, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Gyms, thank you for asking. The article first needs additional sources to comply with the English Wikipedia's stricter criteria for notability. I don't mind doing the translation, but I will not have time to research he article. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:51, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Ann E. Harrison

Well as I said on my talk page I just put a couple tags on Ann E. Harrison, wasn't sure if notable. I didn't patrol it though and was going to let someone else finish it-it felt too incomplete though. (had no clue it was copyright vio either-didn't notice that)Wgolf (talk) 01:01, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Wgolf, yes, it kinda confirms my claim that 'busy' reviewers aren't always as thorough as they should be. That's why I am never in favour of backlog drives. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:09, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

I tend to only patrol ones that I actually look through or that look fine. (The back log is nuts-some of them look okay, then you see it's a blocked user or some other issue) Wgolf (talk) 01:11, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Wgolf, in other words, you mean you only go for (what you believe to be) the low hanging fruit. That means that the toxic articles will not be addressed until very late and that our less experienced reviewers will be left struggling with them. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:18, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Well I sometimes go through the backlog also, I have gotten quite a few of those also (the other day I looked over a bunch even). Anyway thanks for the message. Wgolf (talk) 01:20, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

BTW I would actually notice the copyright vio ones better if they were in red like the ones that say stuff like "orphan" I usually check to see what links to the page also. (I usually do notice the copyright vio tag, I just missed it that time, at least I didn't patrol it though) I also check for other stuff in them to see if they were deleted before under other names. This one was one I was going to see if it needed to be deleted though as well. I look through most of them big time though. Just hope you don't think I miss them all because I messed up on that one once.Wgolf (talk) 01:26, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Sorry about the constant reply, it is just I tend to be very thorough with these, I just missed it this one time. Anyway sorry about that. Wgolf (talk) 02:08, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

I happened upon this article while checking out recent changes at AFC. The subject fulfills WP:NACADEMIC#5, but I couldn't find a way to describe her career neutrally, chronologically, and fully avoid copyvio. Vycl1994 (talk) 03:32, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

It looked like that as well when I checked it. (Just felt like I was being called out for one thing right then earlier-Even though I usually check and I didn't even patrol the page, I just tagged it-I tend to tag pages more then go off and try to csd/afd/prod or patrol them anyway. Oh well, I could of done worse) Wgolf (talk) 03:45, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Help

I was granted New page reviewer status (by you) in December 2018 and have helped out with reviewing off and on since then. Having just bought a new laptop and logged into wikipedia and to going to the New pages feed page, the list of articles to review appears OK but the review button in no longer present and if I click on the article my toolbar has also gone. So I'm not too sure whether I've have might status revoked or whether my new laptop is the problem or I'm missing something else. Could you offer me any advice on things to try? Cheers Hughesdarren (talk) 01:55, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Gosh, that was quick. Thanks for fixing it up, did I lose reviewer status for any reason or was it some sort of glitch? Cheers Hughesdarren (talk) 02:09, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Hughesdarren, the original perm was time limited and expired on 19 July. I have renewed it for a further 3 months. PR is a use-it-or-lose-it right. We have nearly 700 reviewers and only about 30 of them ever don anything. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:12, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Re your query at Arbcom

Regarding this, Jan's immediate superior is Maggie Dennis but she's on medical leave and uninvolved in any of this. In her absence, Valerie D’Costa is in charge, with Katherine above her (although I assume Katherine's only input in something like this would be rubber-stamping whatever T&S put in front of her). Ironically for an organisation that spends so much time talking about openness the WMF is incredibly opaque, but you can figure out the people who are actually making the decisions by starting at Leadership Team and seeing who's listed as an underling on each of the entries. ‑ Iridescent 09:39, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Iridescent, thanks, I should have thought to look it up myself, but my statement was more for impact rather than really wanting to know. I guess D’Costa is another high 6-figure salary that does more talking than doing. I have met Maggie several times and have regarded her, and Philippe before her, as friends and in a way the three of us were sometimes kind of a team, but oh, how times have changed. I've never been able to figure out American job description terminology - they all seem to be Chief this, and Senior that. Perhaps too many chiefs and not enough Indians. As I mentioned somewhere, Maher, on the WMF's own admission, 'spends most of her time in a metal tube in the sky'. Like you said, perhaps the only piece of office equipment she knows how to use is a rubber stamp - in departure lounges.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:01, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Perhaps too many chiefs and not enough Indians...that would be manifest destiny, presumably! ;) ——SerialNumber54129 10:09, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Dunno. It seems to me the current boss comes from Singapore. Possibly the very reason the WMF is such a disparate hotch-potch of people is due to the ethnic dichotomies that reign in the office... Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:19, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Please help me with my page plz restore it for me “ Sandy Choreographer”

Sir My client has entered into Biggboss 3 show And his concern is asking me why is the page being removed at this important phase Please understand my situation as I am their PR !! Please do the needful sir Doraxxx23 (talk) 08:10, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Doraxxx23, sorry, but no. Please see the message banner at the top of this talk page. We don't want promotional pages in this encyclopedia and we don't want people editing it who are being paid.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:09, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

NET Visi Media

Hi - I came across this page in the NPP feed - unsourced, totally blank except for an infobox - and was going to move it to draft, but I see you already did that once and the name is taken - can you delete the previous draft and move this there, or do whatever you think necessary? Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 14:28, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done. Girth Summit, please keep an eye on it though because the user is already autoconfirmed and I haven't salted the page name. This user is probably not a native English speaker or does not know they have a talk page. Let me know if you need any further admin action. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:01, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks - yes, I'll monitor it, and will drop them a note on their talk page about working up a draft before publishing. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 15:18, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Edit filter question

You got me working on the new pages feed again, and I noticed you're an edit filter manager so thought I'd ask your opinion. There's a nomination at RfD about some redirects that got around the edit filter. Is that something that can or should be updated? Wugapodes [t^hɑk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɹɪbz] 03:50, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Wugapodes, it's doing its job. If you see senseless redirects, don't hesitate to list them for deletion, but unless they are being used for sinister purposes, don't let it distract from patrolling new articles. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:21, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

read