User talk:TheOverflow
I'm TheOverflow. I'd rather not be red.
Notification of discussion[edit]
A few months ago, you participated in a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Did you know about Gibraltar-related DYKs on the Main Page. I am proposing that the temporary restrictions on such DYKs, which were imposed in September 2012, should be lifted and have set out a case for doing so at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs. If you have a view on this, please comment at that page. Prioryman (talk) 21:48, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thankyou for the notification. I have responded there. TheOverflow (talk) 00:13, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Lifting the Gibraltar DYK restrictions[edit]
A couple of months ago, you opposed a proposal to lift the restrictions on Gibraltar-related DYKs, which were imposed in September 2012. Could you possibly clarify (1) under what conditions you would support a lifting of the restrictions, and (2) when you think it would be appropriate to lift the restrictions? Prioryman (talk) 20:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
- (1) After it is confirmed that Gibraltarpedia funding is concluded, and all obligations of those engaged by the Government of Gibraltar as a result of that engagement have been met. (2) Twelve months after (1). The year is arbitrary, and I could possibly be convinced of a shorter time, but I think it is prudent to clearly seperate any and all publicity (including simply raising the profile of Gibraltar on Wikipedia) from whatever funding might have given rise to it (and yes, I know there wasn't any actual 'paid editing'). Thank you for your interest. TheOverflow (talk) 00:41, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the question and the recent corrections on some Gib articles (shows we have similar aims). Your question though needs a bit of unpicking. I see your conditions above and these don't have much logic to them. Not that they have to of course - this recently has had little to do with logic. Some have argued that you need to create a Witch hunt (ok its an anology) for Gibraltar just because the drama types (protectors of the wiki)? have gathered with pitchforks. I understand that the wiki community does this and no one is clever enough to stop it. I would argue however that you may start to have "witch trials" and "new arbitrary and prejudicial laws" because the community demands it. However you don't end the witch trials a year after the death of the last witch! You end the witch trials when you realise that you have created arbitrary and baseless laws that target a group unfairly. The community at this point removes the rules not principally because they unfairly discriminate again a group, but because the community realise that having unfair and arbitrary rules reflects badly on themselves. </think>
I'm a bit optimistic that such a debate has just started at DYK talk - which is great (given its poor start). Victuallers (talk) 08:50, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
- As I said, the year is arbitrary, and as I said, I could be convinced of a shorter time. In order to begin convincing me, could you tell me whether your contractual relationship with the Government of Gibraltar over? TheOverflow (talk) 07:31, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
- Oh but I would argue that a "shorter time" is just as arbitrary as a seven generation curse on anyone who has ever visited Iberia. I can understand that you can have irrational rules but its plain crazy to modify them as it implies that they had some logic associated with them. I'm hoping that this conversation is seeing you start on that route, but irrespective, thanks for the discussion. Victuallers (talk)
July 2013[edit]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Villa Arcadia, Parktown may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"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:
- a long veranda on the ground floor fronted by eleven arches with extensive views of the [[M1 (Johannesburg|M1 motorway]] and overlooking what was once the [[Sachsenwald (SA)|Sachsenwald]].
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:18, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi, is that you? I'm guessing not, but thought I'd ask. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:59, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, that is me. I have asked questions on WMUK. Still waiting for answers, though. TheOverflow (talk) 08:32, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 1[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pymble, New South Wales, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Blackbutt and Blue gum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:42, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 9[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Blokesworld, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ute (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
June 2014[edit]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ruthin 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:
- Th]] Ruthin railway line and station were closed in the 1960s. Prior to the closure, Ruthin was
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:31, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]
Hello, TheOverflow. 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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)
December 2016[edit]
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.