User talk:Doug Weller/Archive 36

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 30 ← Archive 34 Archive 35 Archive 36 Archive 37 Archive 38 → Archive 40

Orion (constellation)

The text I added already says Orion was connected with Osiris, so there's no reason for the IP to keep adding it back, unless he or she really thinks Osiris is a sun god like Mackenzie claimed. The cited text in Redford, the entry on Osiris by J. Gwyn Griffiths, does not say Osiris is a sun god and doesn't say much about Osiris' connection with Orion. Nor does any current RS say Osiris was essentially a sun god. He had solar connections because of the nightly union with Ra in the underworld, but that's not the same thing. Conceptions of God in Egypt by Erik Hornung says at one point "…how many gods and goddesses may be embodied in the form of a lion—or in the sun, in which one may adore almost any of the great deities, including even Osiris!" (p. 126). That clearly implies that Osiris had solar connections but they were not central to his character.

I also think the "Africa" section should be deleted, unless the Egypt section is moved there or somebody provides sources for the mythology of Orion in other parts of Africa. A. Parrot (talk) 19:13, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

A. Parrot Agreed, could you put this on the talk page? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 19:17, 5 November 2014 (UTC)


Doug: I appreciate what you're saying, but you are not correct. I'm not involved in a revert war. I'm involved in adding context that make sensitive users uncomfortable. But it's an uncomfortable subject after all, so it's to be expected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Villaged (talk • contribs) 19:24, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

New Wikipedia Library Accounts Now Available (November 2014)

Hello Wikimedians!

The TWL OWL says sign up today :)

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

  • DeGruyter: 1000 new accounts for English and German-language research. Sign up on one of two language Wikipedias:
  • Fold3: 100 new accounts for American history and military archives
  • Scotland's People: 100 new accounts for Scottish genealogy database
  • British Newspaper Archive: expanded by 100+ accounts for British newspapers
  • Highbeam: 100+ remaining accounts for newspaper and magazine archives
  • Questia: 100+ remaining accounts for journal and social science articles
  • JSTOR: 100+ remaining accounts for journal archives

Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team 23:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).
This message was delivered via the Mass Message to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

The Signpost: 05 November 2014

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Shriners

I wonder if you have time to check a whole slew of edits to Shriners. I don't know if they are appropriate or not. CorinneSD (talk) 04:07, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Probably ok.Dougweller (talk) 20:57, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Buddhism by country

Dear Dougweller, There is an IP user from Italy (79.54.84.104, 87.9.87.1704,) has been rewriting Buddhism by country with only single source of the Pew Forum without discussion and ignored all another sources. I think it is violating Wikipedia:Neutral point of view by forcing readers to trust in only one single source. I hope you will add this article to your watchlist. Thank you. Angelo De La Paz (talk) 17:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

I checked WP:RSN and Pew is considered a reliable source, sorry. Dougweller (talk) 21:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

About silk road

Sorry, I don't know what is the copyright problem I have in my previous edition. Can you explain it? Thank you Miracle dream (talk)

if those aren't all your own words it's copyvio, if they are put it back. User:Miracle dream Dougweller (talk) 22:27, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Megalith edit - Micronesian megalith sites

Thank you for your concern on my entry on megalith structures in Micronesia. I understand that the current entry is unsourced and will add some references in the near future. None of the material is copied but represents what I learned from sources and my recent visit to the sites mentioned in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JonMartell (talk • contribs) 12:46, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

IP editor deleting your comments on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aadarsh Mishra

I've already done a bit of refactoring on the page, so I'll deign not doing what I'd normally do and revert the blanking. Would you look again at the process, and see if you shouldn't add a signature while undoing the blanking by the ip editor? BusterD (talk) 14:57, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The IPs (there were two) removed more than that, they gutted the whole discussion. I've gone back to the revision by David Eppstein and added Dougweller's two latest edits by hand (and your sig, Doug). And blocked the IPs for a couple of days. They're supposedly static, but I guess not really, since it's obviously the same individual. Bishonen | talk 16:15, 9 November 2014 (UTC).
Thanks to both of you. Dougweller (talk) 16:17, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Big History template

If you read the Big History article that's kind of the point. To encompass everything into a subject. But I tried to make the template as small and clear as possible. The 8 thresholds of Big History seem like a major component of it and that's why it's part of the template. As the Sixth Threshold on the Big History article reads: "The development of our species, Homo sapiens, about 250,000 years ago, covering the Paleolithic era of human history." This is good enough reason to have the Paleolithic era in the template. Soulbust (talk) 16:52, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Soulbust, where else do you plan to add it? I still say that it is not relevant enough to be added to the article (ignoring the odd figure of 250,000 years) and that if you are going to start adding it to articles you should discuss it at the appropriate Wiki Project and article talk pages. Dougweller (talk) 16:58, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
I already added it to all of the linked articles on the template. I wouldn't see why to add it to any other articles outside of the template. I wouldn't mind if there was discussion started about the inclusion or exclusion of the template on its linked articles. Soulbust (talk) 17:02, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

RfC/U

You may be interested in this. I not even clear on what grounds this RfC/U has been brought. ~ P123ct1 (talk) 21:08, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Tower of Babel

Ok, you edit it so that it's not biased. But there's not denying that it's biased at the moment. It presents the Tower of Babel as a story, a myth if you will. I, do believe in this account, however, it was not my intention to write a biased article. Quite th opposite. I wish to make this page neutral, which at the moment, it is not.

A truly neutral article would not promote ANY belief or idea as true. All would only be suggested. If you do not write a satisfingly neutral article within a reasonable time period, I may well be back to do it myself.

Please use your head before you write anything, either on my talk page or on the Babel article.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiNonBoffin (talk • contribs) 16:44, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Sorry for splitting the conversation, but I responded on the user's talk page, as the gaps in their edit history lead me to believe they're more likely to get the message there. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:48, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Do you expose socks?

Hi Dougweller. There is a sock editing a number of pages that you are also working on. I have all the evidence, but the time to read up on how to open an investigation. He has been ivestigated before but has since created a new name. Is this the kind of thing that you do? Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 10:54, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

User:Rui Gabriel Correia I should be able to help. Email me the evidence (click on the drop down 'User' menu). I hope you have 'diffs', links to edits. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 11:20, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

DellJVC

I would like to get unbanned and would follow your suggestions. Thanks User:Delljvc. I am just using this to get my old account back. NewDellJVC (talk) 01:47, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Know who this is?

MonaPisser

Obviously a returning sock, who will need to be blocked sooner or later. Recognize the sockmaster? Pinging @Sitush and RegentsPark:. Abecedare (talk) 18:07, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

I think it will turn out to be another IAC job. Wait for them to spring. - Sitush (talk) 18:11, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Could be. Has User:Fowler&fowler too had run-ins with them? Abecedare (talk) 18:15, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Not sure about IAC. Fowler hasn't crossed those guys. This seems a bit older. @SpacemanSpiff and Spiff: would know (but where is Spiff)?--regentspark (comment) 18:19, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
I think so, a good while ago. Remember that IAC are big supporters of Hindutva stuff and at least some of their socks/whatever have been keen on the "calumny" word which, at least over here, is pretty archaic. Anyway, they're already on the edge of being blocked for disruption, so perhaps it will not matter. - Sitush (talk) 18:21, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
The fact that they went to Fowler's page first is suggestive. Zuggernaut, RealHistoryBuff, they are some of Fowler's friends. But, as you say, it probably doesn't matter. --regentspark (comment) 22:17, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

I posted here before I saw this. --NeilN talk to me 22:19, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

User:Xn4 is another possibility. The editor is blocked but let's see where they go when they return. --regentspark (comment) 16:26, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Sorry guys, I haven't a clue, I was hoping one of you would come up with the answer! Spiff hasn't been around for 4 months, worrying. Dougweller (talk) 16:31, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

User:Sitush's instincts were right: an IAC meatpuppet. Abecedare (talk) 05:50, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Sitush's instincts were right like a broken clock, me. ;) I think I have spotted another possible long-term sleeper account but there isn't enough to pursue it just yet. - Sitush (talk) 13:14, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Irrelevant to this thread but it looks like problems are escalating at Rajput. I can't do much about it until my landline web access gets fixed. - Sitush (talk) 13:35, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration declined

This is a courtesy notice to inform you that a request for arbitration, which named you as a party, has been declined. Feel free to see the Arbitrators' opinions for potential suggestions on moving forward.

For the Arbitration Committee, → Call me Hahc21 15:36, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Twitter

Are we allowed to add twitter link to biography of a dead person? Bladesmulti (talk) 09:10, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

See WP:ELMINOFFICIAL. Dougweller (talk) 16:24, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Orion constellation

Hi Doug, you forgot to put a blue link to Osiris in the Orion constellation page. Thank you. 76.201.60.184 (talk) 17:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Albigensian Crusade

I have removed what appear to be questionable sources.

Your thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:44, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

No to both User:Kansas Bear. I also note that bedejournal contains copyvio, eg "During the siege of Toulouse in 1217-18, captured crusaders could expect to have their eyes put out," is from [1]. The 2nd link could be used to find reliable sources as it seems to list a lot. The necrometrics website also fails WP:RS but might be useful to find sources that you can use (so long as you check the source yourself of course. Dougweller (talk) 16:22, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Good to know. Thank you sir. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:31, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music/Guidelines

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music/Guidelines. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Azerbaijani people

Hello, thank you for the eradication of vandalism. Please remove "or Azerbaijani Turks" and cancel the last edit "09:28, 15 November 2014‎ 178.237.75.15 (talk)‎ . . (94,502 bytes) (-91)‎" V.N.Ali

User:V.N.Ali Reverted the IP, but the citation "Thernstrom, Stephan; Orlov, Ann; Handlin, Oscar (1981). Harvard Encyclopedia of American ethnic groups. Harvard University Press. p. 171. "In their homeland the Azerbaijanis, or Azerbaijani Turks as they are sometimes called..." is to a reliable source by our criteria at WP:RS. Dougweller (talk) 20:07, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

In the beginning of the article... :User:V.N.Ali 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Arbcom?

Hi, Doug. Please consider running for arbcom. There are nine slots to be filled, only four candidates as of this moment, and less than three days left of the nomination period. You'd be perfect for the job in so many ways, and also, it's of concern that more good people offer themselves (=make the sacrifice). If there's a slew of unsuitable candidates at the last minute, as is only too likely as more people realise the situation, some or many of them will get in. In fact I already see one candidate that would be, hmm, wrong for the job IMO. This is part of a selective campaign; I've asked two other people. Bishonen | talk 08:18, 16 November 2014 (UTC).

Ouch. Do I need the headaches? Is this the best way I can help Wikipedia for the next year or two? Dougweller (talk) 11:25, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
In normal circumstances, I'd say that it was not. Right now though, given the people who have put their hat in the ring, you'd probably be doing everyone a favour. Bish knows more about this stuff than me and I notice that someone has put themselves forward with a proviso - ie: they may withdraw if better candidates appear. - Sitush (talk) 11:29, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
I think if I toss my hat in it should probably stay in. Dougweller (talk) 11:54, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
If you don't, then I will. Think of the children Doug. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:03, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
You would be perfect Doug. I promise to vote early and vote often if you run! — Preceding unsigned comment added by RegentsPark (talk • contribs) 13:18, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Offer yourself as a sacrifice... Ealdgyth - Talk 14:00, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Yes, please. "Do I need the headaches?" certainly not, though things seem quieter there than in the past. "Is this the best way I can help Wikipedia for the next year or two?" maybe. Johnbod (talk) 14:56, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Do you need the headaches? Of course not. Noone needs the headaches of being an arbitrator, anymore than they "need" to drink battery acid by the quart for their health. You would probably be one of the best qualified individuals available to run, though, and I really, really hope that we don't wind up with some people of at best dubious judgment winning and really making this place a worse hell than it already is. Having said that, I think @Bishonen:, and almost certainly if he wanted it @EdJohnston:, might make a reasonable candidate as well, and would support that candidacy as well.
I really wish that we maybe found a way to double the number of arbitrators, so that they could each have a month-on/month-off schedule that with luck wouldn't result in as many burnout cases, but to do that we would need to have at least enough really qualified people in place initially. Maybe we should propose something like that, and I'd be willing to if anyone thought it would help, but first we need to have people in ArbCom who won't potentially disgrace the position. John Carter (talk) 17:18, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 November 2014

Hi Dougweller, unfortunately, the phrase has not been translated in its exactly original meaning. Therefore the phrase: "Without any doubt, they represent the product of a Culture that captured the irradiation center of absolute positive energy in the Universe." must be read, as in Italian version: "Without any doubt, they represent the product of a Culture that identified the Universe as the centre of irradiation of absolute positive energy." As for the rest of the paragraph, around "a unified culture", I think, actually, that it is a "Unified culture", wich adapted in region, in the wake of the Neolithic "peoples of the missionary" suggested by V.Gordon Childe on "The Prehistory of European Society". Thanks.

Indus script

Hi, I have not suggested that he has found the proof. It was as per the report in The Hindu. I dont know whether you are familiar with Indian publications, but in India "The Hindu" is considered to be fairly reputed. Please go through the reference provided. Anyway I have reworded the article since you find the word "proof" disturbing. Regarding being "published academically" I don't know how much information given here have been "published academically". Sarvagyana guru (talk) 11:56, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

New change looks better than the previous one. Bladesmulti (talk) 11:58, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
I removed it. Something like this needs a more scholarly citation. Sarvagyana, the reason why we prefer scholarly citations is that they are peer reviewed and the 'proof' accepted as plausible by other scholars. Otherwise we have no way of knowing how authentic a proof is. The Hindu is a reliable source for factual claims but should not be used to support claims that require scholarly expertise. --regentspark (comment) 14:57, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews

Hello Doug Weller. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I added you to the list:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:22, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

ermagerd!

Who do I thank for bribing you um... drugging you enough to talking you into running for ArbCom? This is most excellent news! KillerChihuahua 15:18, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

We've actually set up a conspiracy to forge candidate statements for anybody who's unwilling to write their own. Yours will be posted in a few minutes. Jehochman Talk 15:28, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Oh heck no! I think I'd rather get cancer again. Nice try, Hochman. KillerChihuahua 15:52, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Neutral point of view

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Neutral point of view. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Editorial dispute

There are serious POV problems with the article 2014 Jerusalem synagogue massacre, starting with the name, for example, because of which I have place a POV tag at the top of the article. It has been repeatedly removed with no discussion. Rather than engage in a lengthy edit war, and having made my third final revert of the tag's removal, I am bringing the matter to you as an administrator. Chuck Hamilton (talk) 17:59, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Grete trakl

The author of this page blanked the article itself. Now as a new pages patrolled, what m i supposed to do? Just CSD the article by A3 or.... plz explain? thanks Night Fury (A good day to Die Hard) 13:12, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

I see it was G7'd. Dougweller (talk) 17:11, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Comment

Re the spelling of "Civilisation: I must take issue with you on this. The excellent Wikipedia article on "Civilisation" points out the provenance of the word, from the Latin "civis, civitas" and later the French civilisé, and the spelling "Civilisation" is almost universally used, other than in the USA. The word has a continuous lineage, and there is no reason to use the variant American spelling in this case. Wikipedia's guidelines state that no one variant of English should take precedence.

Yes, I am happy to help edit/correct grammar or spelling. I already do a quantity of this work for the University where I'm employed. Johnolbrich (talk) 04:00, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Further explained our guidelines on the talk page and commented that the OED says "Civilization (or civilisation) - note that it does not say one is American and the other British, and that it gives the 'z' spelling priority, just as it does with "civilize". Oxford is quite explicit about this. Read Oxford spelling which makes this clear and states that "Apart from OUP, British dictionary publishers that use Oxford spelling include Cassell, Collins and Longman.[3] It is also used by the London-based scientific journal Nature, The Times Literary Supplement, and by the style guides of international organizations belonging to the United Nations System." Dougweller (talk) 06:49, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Ararat again

I know you're really busy at the moment, but Sirius and heliacal rising could use semi-protection, as he's edit-warring there. A. Parrot (talk) 07:41, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Or maybe a rangeblock, as he's willing to expand to any related article, and all of the edits lately have been from similar IP ranges. A. Parrot (talk) 08:10, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
A. Parrot, done. Dougweller (talk) 08:13, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Oops, you'll have to ask elsewhere for a range block. Guidance is to ask on the Administrators' noticeboard or on IRC. They are tricky and it's best to get someone with experience. Dougweller (talk) 08:16, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. I might do that. He's at Egyptian mythology now and obviously willing to go elsewhere if that gets protected. Although a rangeblock wouldn't necessarily solve the problem either, as the IPs he was using a few days ago weren't in that range. A. Parrot (talk) 08:23, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
And now it's Hyksos. A. Parrot (talk) 08:43, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
I dropped a note on ANI; if that's redundant, my apologies. Drmies (talk) 16:59, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 17:17, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Aspromonte goat

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Aspromonte goat. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

86.171.207.38

86.171.207.38 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), a user you warned for copyvio, continues what looks as nothing but copy-paste additions to Ismaili related articles. Best, Sam Sing! 10:32, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Sam thanks for letting me know, 72 hour block. Dougweller (talk) 11:59, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

RevDel request

Requesting RevDel on [2] and [3]. Nasty BLP vandalism that was undone by the same editor who put it in. Meters (talk) 23:09, 23 November 2014 (UTC) User:Meters Done, sorry it took so long. I also blocked the editor. Do you know about Wikipedia:Requests for oversight? Dougweller (talk) 12:05, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

I didn't. Thank you for the pointer. Meters (talk) 18:06, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Good luck

Just wanted to say good luck in this year's ARBCOM election! I'm honestly not very impressed with the choice of candidates this cycle and you're one of three I voted for—glad to see you're running. Noformation Talk 08:16, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm pleased your supporting me. Dougweller (talk) 13:35, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
If everyone who, like me, votes for you drops off "I voted for you" messages, your talk page is gonna get really long here. John Carter (talk) 16:27, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
While I hope that we'll be colleagues, I'm not entirely holding my breath on my chances. In any sense, I wish you luck as I too voted for you :) Dusti*Let's talk!* 16:48, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Dusti. Dougweller (talk) 19:14, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Shel Silverstein

I just noticed that an editor changed the date of birth of Shel Silverstein in the article about him. CorinneSD (talk) 17:39, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

CorinneSD most sources say 1930, see the links I added at the talk page. I've changed the infobox also, but if you want to put both dates in feel free, with sources. Dougweller (talk) 19:13, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
O.K. Thanks for your reply. CorinneSD (talk) 21:34, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Went to go welcome that user who edited on Islamophobia and explain the revert and was happy to see you already did! I know you're busy so I offered to field questions from that user if they have any. Cheers for not biting the newbie.

EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:59, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Expertise Needed in Discussion for Talk Page of Gornaya Shoria Megaliths

Doug, your expertise with what are and are not acceptable sources for Wikipedia content, what constitutes a fringe idea / claim, the proper presentation of controvercial claims lacking reliable / credible source material, and pseudoarchaeology can be used in the current discussion taking place in the talk page for the Gornaya Shoria megaliths. Other people, who want two post their own opinion and add to the discussion, are also welcome. Paul H. (talk) 03:14, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Cro-Magnon

Hi Doug. I'm embarrassed that after we got consensus earlier this year to move the Cro-Magnon article, I never followed up. An editor has shown up with great interest in the article and has begun working on the EEMH article with the intent of making it the more general article and retaining Cro-Magnon as a subset of EEMH. He seems to be knowledgeable about the subject and about WP policies, and eager to put in some time on it. A good bit of the discussion has been on my Talk page.[4] Just wanted to alert you, since you were involved in the earlier discussions. I've encouraged him to go ahead. Thanks. TimidGuy (talk) 16:06, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Repeated bad edits with factually incorrect information and self made facts

Hi Dougweller, The user ‎80.56.86.118 is continuously editing the page Afghana with factually incorrect information and self made facts despite clarification on my part about wikipedia rules. The number of errors in these edits is such that I think this amounts to repeated bad intention edits and vandalism. Please undo his edits (completely removing the section Jews of Herat, Kabul and Afghana under Indian empire) for which I might add there is no reference and also provide the page Afghana with protection. Thank you. Dr Pukhtunyar Afghan (talk) 15:32, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Dr Pukhtunyar Afghan Looks to be under control at the moment. If you want to request protection it would be better to ask at WP:RPP as I've reverted the IP, but at the moment I'd suggest waiting. Dougweller (talk) 17:00, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
Yes, thanks. All the edits have been undone. For the moment its right. As you said, lets wait. Dr Pukhtunyar Afghan (talk) 06:20, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Reliable source?

Has it been determined whether the Medlands Projects is a reliable source? --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:50, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Off the top of my head, no, it's not reliable. Their own site says they are under construction and "One further point is important to emphasise: what Medieval Lands is really providing is a record that "source X" says "Y". The project is not necessarily taking the next step of concluding that "Y" is therefore factually correct. Given the nature of the sources with which we are dealing in the medieval period, and the various different purposes for which those sources were compiled, the drawing of such conclusions would not always be appropriate." - see here. Also RSN archive and another RSN archive Ealdgyth - Talk 23:02, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. Wasn't sure. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Magical vs Mystical

I started a discussion about using "mystical" instead of "magical" on religious pages over in the Wikiproject:Occult. You had some stuff posted there so I assume you would want to be notified. --FUNKAMATIC ~talk 01:56, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Tajik mafia

Your thoughts about this article? It was created by an editor with anti-Tajik/pro-Pashtoon POV.[5][6] --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:33, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

AfD? Dougweller (talk) 15:30, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
I would agree, though I do not know how. Would you care to do the honors? --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:59, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 November 2014

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Bureaucrats

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Bureaucrats. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Moving a page

I couldn't move this myself. You should move Purusha sukta to Purusha Sukta, citations have capitalized the S of Sukta.[7]-[8]-[9]-[10]-[11] Bladesmulti (talk) 15:50, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Disruptive editing across multiple pages by 2 IPs

 – Bladesmulti (talk) 15:23, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Editing 'Odisha' page

Dear Dougweller,

The sentence you put in the Etymology part of the 'Odisha' doesn't cite any reference. I just want to know how 'the name Orissa is closer to the actual Oriya pronunciation of the name, whereas Odisha is an "intentionally archaising" transcription'.

Being natives of the state, we Odias know the proper transcription of any word in our language. There are many instances where our pronunciation doesn't comply with the transcription. That is the peculiarity of the language. But, in writing we always use proper transcripts those reflect the spelling in the Odia script. Bishupriyaparam (talk) 05:07, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

December 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Odisha 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:
  • ' is the transcription introduced by the British, similar to many other place names of the state (e.g. Baleshwar-Balasore, Katak-Cuttack, Brahmapur-Berhampur,{{cn}} whereas ''Odisha'' is the

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:03, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

David Wilcock

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 03:05, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

George Ho, let's wait, but let me know if there is a problem after it expires. Dougweller (talk) 21:50, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Really, um, interesting, user name

I'm wondering whether User:Skrewwing up info might be maybe showing his hand a little too much with that name? He's only had one edit to date, a problematic one at John the Baptist, but I think WP:U might apply here. Opinions? John Carter (talk) 22:35, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

@John Carter: Blocked, sorry it took so long. Dougweller (talk) 19:22, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Please do not apologize, and thank you for your action. John Carter (talk) 19:36, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 December 2014

User Turalhemidli

Dougweller, can you please look at this users [12] recent edits. In the Nagorno-Karabakh War article he keeps adding, without proper sources, how Lezgins, Talysh, Iran helped Armenia during the war. [13] I reverted the edit and let the user know it had already been discussed in the talk page. I also told him, on his talk page, how he did not add sources to his additions. He ignored my post and reverted to his addition without adding sources. Also the user is involved in edit warring on the article. Thank You.Ninetoyadome (talk) 20:04, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

There has already been a discussion regarding adding Iran as a party to the conflict and the consensus was Iran's role was not significant enough to be added. [14]. As for the addition of Lezgin and Talysh parties, the sources added mention nothing about helping Armenia. I let the user know but he did not care, he just reverted my change and said he added sources. Because of the 3RR i have not reverted his last edit and have asked for assistance from an admin. Also can i revert to the last neutral edit for the article or will i be banned for violating the 3RR rule?Ninetoyadome (talk) 22:07, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (academics)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (academics). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Proper way to cite internally

I noticed you deleted the media blackout stuff I added, and wasnt sure how to properly include references to those two examples. Can you help explain? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hippypink (talk • contribs) 09:49, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

User:Hippypink, sorry I haven't had time today as I've been away. I'll get back to you tomorrow sometime. Dougweller (talk) 21:36, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Replying on his talk page now. Dougweller (talk) 15:11, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Animal sacrifice in Hinduism and User:Delibzr

Hello Dougweller. Recently, while editing the above article two editors have been continuously reverting my edits without valid reason. You can read about this at Talk:Animal Sacrifice in Hinduism. These reverts mostly concern the lead and the In history and Hindu mythology subsection of the Practice section. Out of them User:Delibzr has been making destructive edits and is imposing his opinion. He has at 2 times told me that I have to necessarily discuss with him before making any edits even though there might not be any problem with the edits. Infact, I've mentioned the edit summary in the talk page before entering any new info about animal sacrifice practice in ancient India. I don't have any problem in discussing with him but he is basically trying to boss me around. You can see from the article and talk page of the article that they are properly sourced and there's nothing wrong with them. Delibzr has time and time again also given really ridiculous reasons for reverting my edits. For example while removing my edit. For example in the talk page he says that I can't add more info about Ashvamedha because it is an old rite. However I had only added the scriptures where the sacrifice is mentioned and the instances where it was performed. He had also removed many other verifiable edits without any valid reasons. The lead has also been a major problem but for now i have stopped editing it. The lead says Hinduism forbids animal sacrifice which I later changed to Most Hindu scriptures and sect forbid animal sacrifice. Earlier, I also had added a line Sone Hindu scriptures permit it but it was removed because it didn't explictly say anywhere in the sources that the some of the scriptures permit it. The edit of Modt Hindu scriptures and sect forbid animal sacrifice was reverted saying the sources refer to Hinduism forbidding as a whole. However when I checked the sources in the lead I found out that they only said about it being forbidden in certain sects and scriptures and none of them ever explicitly said Hinduism forbids animal sacrifice. When I started removing them they were added back with a new ridiculous reason from Delibzr that unless I proved another scripture permitted it I couldn't say animal sacrifice wasn't forbidden everywhere in Hinduism. However this is not the main problem but the section about animal sacrifice in ancient India. From his edits it apperas that either User:Delibzr is either quite inexpereinced or is spinning lies (I am not making any accusations). Either way he is induldging in destructive behaviour and is imposing his own opinion. I wanted to complain about him at ANI. He has been warned for edit-warring in a short time after joining Wikipedia. However I wouldn't like to lengthen this issue at ANI which will waste everybody's time and might also lead Delibzr being blocked. Therefore I request you to intervene as an administrator and put a check on his behaviour since you will be neutral. Thank you. KahnJohn27 (talk) 06:03, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Kahnjohn72 falsely accuses others of lying, and reverts upto 4 times. He just want to claim that Hinduism allows animal sacrifice, when it doesn't. And Kahnjohn72, yes it was removed just like you have admitted because none of your refs say that any of the scriptures allowed. Also none of your refs assert 'most of the scriptures', they don't even mention a sect and you talk about 'most of the sects' while all others,[15] says that it indeed forbids and some of them also mention how it is forbidden. Shouting on some talk pages, canvassing and edit warring for a 150 year old reference is what disruptive, unlike you, my page is not full of warnings. You are not following Bold-Revert-Discuss, because you believe that it is a harrasement.[16] Delibzr (talk) 06:44, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
@User:Delibzr I want to prove Hinduism allows animal sacrifices huh? I just came to edit but you unnecessarily started an edit war and not only that you kept removing even the legit edits. You are an inexperienced editor and instead of edit warring should try to learn as much as you can. Even though I'm a Jew I cared to edit a Hindu article. I had created an article about Bahlika (Mahabharata) although I couldn't find any sources.You should stop imposing your opinion and try to cooperate. I've been here for 7 years and have never heard such disrespect. KahnJohn27 (talk) 09:40, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Also using a 150 yr old is not forbidden and it is not unreliable. A source is a source no matter how old. Besides old sources might be less biased. KahnJohn27 (talk) 09:42, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
You misunderstood some of my removal but I am fine now that you have cooperated well now. Delibzr (talk) 10:20, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Chronicles of Eri

Dude, what the hell is this: Chronicles of Eri. Wikipedia has allowed extreme fringe editors to go on there and upload nonsense unchecked for months. HerodotusReader (talk) 17:19, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

do I have permission to delete/revert 99.9% of it? HerodotusReader (talk) 17:21, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
New to me. Just found [17] which might help. Really you don't need my permission, HerodotusReader but will say more on your talk page. Dougweller (talk) 19:16, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Content forking

Dear User:Dougweller, User:Imkan125 has repeatedly blanked the Dhar (surname) and Bhat clan articles without discussion and created content forks of the articles--Dar (Ethnic Kashmiri tribe) and Butt (Ethnic kashmiri surname) despite being warned not to do so several times at his talk page. His previous content forks were nominated for deletion, here. Since you are an administrator involved in watching South Asian-related articles, I thought I would inform you of the case. I, like several other editors, reverted him although I think I'll just be reverted back. Have a great day! With regards, AnupamTalk 14:29, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

I wanted to thank you for taking care of the matter so quickly. I really appreciate it. This fork still needs deleted, however. From looking around Wikipedia a little more, we have three articles (Bhat clan, Bhat caste, and Bhat) that deal with information that could be merged into one single article titled Bhat. I will probably undertake the merge process later this week. In addition, I wanted to inform you that earlier today User:Imkan125 left a very vile ethnocentrist message on my talk page in Hindi-Urdu, here, after I left two templates on his talk page asking him to stop content forking and inappropriately moving articles. I would appreciate if you could please address this--I have emailed you a translation of that message. Thank you, AnupamTalk 23:33, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
It looks like another admin addressed the latter issue. I'll take care to try to fix the issue of multiple articles on the same topic soon. Thanks for your time and help. With regards, AnupamTalk 02:39, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Griffin

Hello, Dougweller. I just wanted to ask you about your recent edit at Griffin. Based on your edit summary, it appears you were responding to three edits made by Alinematzadeh, but you also reverted one of mine as well. Did you intend to? Egsan Bacon (talk) 21:22, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Oops, no, sorry Egsan Bacon - forgot to fix it, I've fixed it now. Dougweller (talk) 21:28, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Not a problem. I figured it was something like that. Thanks. Egsan Bacon (talk) 22:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Civility

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Civility. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Iravatham Mahadevan

Mr. Dougweller. Please note that the claim made in the earlier version that Mahadevan "tentatively supports the view that Brahmi originated from Indus Script rather than Aramaic..." is completely unsubstantiated. The Wiki article cites two other authors, including Asko Parpola, to support the claim but avoids citing Iravatham Mahadevan himself. I am a student of Iravatham Mahadevan, and know his position in this regard very well. Yet, I took care to check this with him over the phone yesterday, and he vehemently denies that he ever supported such a view. I request you to not reinstate the claim as you had done before.

Please note that the following line was earlier introduced by me under the section, Significant Contributions (the whole section was in fact introduced by me), which had been deleted by you. I have reinstated the sentence with appropriate citations and this I hope is more acceptable.

He has been instrumental in firmly establishing the view of K.V. Subrahmanya Aiyer that the writings found in the caves of Tamilnadu in a script similar to Brahmi is a variant of Brahmi, which Mahadevan calls Tamil Brahmi, and in ascertaining that the language of the script is indeed Tamil [4]. Mahadevan went onto read the names and titles of several generations of Pantiya and Cera kings in Tamil Brahmi writings[5], all corroborated in early Tamil literature [6].

(Mvbhaska (talk) 10:30, 11 December 2014 (UTC)).

Mvbhaska Fine, but Wikipedia shouldn't use the word 'firmly'. I'm not going to argue about the claim you say is unsubstantiated, but if sources meeting WP:RS say he does, some would argue that the sources could be used so long as we attribute the views to them in the article, not just the reference. Dougweller (talk) 15:13, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Mongol Empire

Hello, I'd like to have an admin review the edit warring, disruptive editing, and possible sock puppetry by User:Uniquark9, possibly aka User:Sparta300+1 (contribs). See Mongol Empire revision history, talk page, and user talk page. The user has violated 3RR, removed another user's comment from a talk page revealing evidence of sock puppetry, and continues to add disputed material that is simply copied from another article. Thank you, Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 02:18, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Another editor has opened a sockpuppet investigation into the matter, so hopefully that will resolve the situation. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 15:24, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Sorry Laszlo Panaflex, I knew that and was going to ask you about it, but busy in RL and forgot. Christmas party planning. Dougweller (talk) 17:27, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Marxist slogans

So you take Marxist slogans at face value for their "truth", huh? Leftists (as I wrote, and as you deleted) in fact expend their activities towards equality of *outcome*, not equality of opportunity. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" is meaningless drivel when one recognizes the fact that under such a Marxist theory there is no safeguard for measuring whether someone is actually expending effort commensurate with their own "ability" to provide for themselves. Without such a safeguard, their slogan regarding "ability" is meaningless propaganda. Leftists are notorious for adopting the strategy of projecting / saying to the populace the exact OPPOSITE of what they are actually *doing*. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digitaldoofus (talk • contribs) 17:39, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Help with history merge

Dear Doug, I've been pointed in your direction after I asked a question at the administrators notice board. Please see [18]. I have completed my work (well, done enough anyway) on the page User:Athomeinkobe/Kato so I believe it is now ready to replace the article Kosuke Kato. I've checked the current version of the live article, and the only significant contribution I can see is the addition of a category by a user Tsubame, which I added to my draft and attributed to that user yesterday. Please let me know if there is anything I need to do. Thank you in advance for your help, AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 09:14, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

AtHomeIn神戸 Done. but you should add a WP:SORTKEY. Dougweller (talk) 15:42, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I had a look at the sortkey page, and found that there was a "DEFAULTSORT" within the < nowiki > categories at the bottom of the article. But it had an errant colon in it, so I think I have fixed it. Is that what you were referring to? AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 23:05, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
User talk:Athomeinkobe sorry, I meant look at, not add. Dougweller (talk) 15:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
That's ok. It was good to read the page and learn more about why we have the keys. Thanks once again for your help. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 22:43, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

The Shiite Emirates of Ottoman Syria

Professor Stefan Winter states in his book The Shiite Emirates of Ottoman Syria (MID 17th –MID 18th Century),page 236:

“The abrupt disappearance of the Harfush emirate left the shiite community of baalbek bereft of any anciently – rooted , indigenous social leadership , making it that much more of likely venue for the rise of foreign-inspired ideological mass movements such as communism, Nasirism ext…in Lebanon’s tumultuous 20th century” I kindly advice you to read the above mentioned book, where I’m sure that this book will change all the miss concept of the history of the Ottoman in Baalback and Bekaa Families, bearing in mind that Harfush’s family ruled Baalback and Bekaa for 350 years. --Mharfouche (talk) 07:26, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Mharfouche

John Forbes Nash, Jr.

Hi, Doug -- Could you take a look at John Forbes Nash, Jr. and see what's going on? Some edits were undone, but it seems to have gone back, perhaps inadvertently, to an edit with inappropriate language. CorinneSD (talk) 18:17, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Seems to have been fixed. CorinneSD (talk) 18:19, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

More Ararat

I know you're probably really busy, but the blocks for the Ararat IPs 66.92.44.189 and 68.119.236.39 have expired, and they're doing the same old thing. Could you block them again? A. Parrot (talk) 21:09, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

And 64.134.235.46, too. A. Parrot (talk) 21:16, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
A. Parrot - thanks, done. Easier to deal with than the new SPAs that keep reverting me. Dougweller (talk) 21:40, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Then perhaps you'll be happy to see 74.1.179.230. Not previously blocked like the others, but there's no doubt about its identity. A. Parrot (talk) 21:52, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
And 75.22.82.168. A. Parrot (talk) 22:16, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Better to protect the pages, let me know which and I'll do it tomorrow. Dougweller (talk) 22:22, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Ay. I haven't seen any others so far, but we'll see. A. Parrot (talk) 22:24, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Plus Amarna Period.
And now Seker and Khepri. A. Parrot (talk) 20:33, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Ptah. A. Parrot (talk) 00:24, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Pharaoh and Giza Necropolis. A. Parrot (talk) 00:03, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Egyptian temple, New Kingdom of Egypt, Eye of Ra, and Eye of Horus. A. Parrot (talk) 19:48, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Those have been protected, but now it's Maat. A. Parrot (talk) 02:52, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 December 2014

Happy Saint Lucia's Day!

Special Saint Lucia's Day celebration: Lucia coffee (two cups for you!) and buns from festively arrayed Bishzilla Lucia! ['Zilla twirls to display her becoming Lucia crown in the round.] bishzilla ROARR!! 15:11, 13 December 2014 (UTC).

  • Bishzilla Lucia
    Bishzilla Lucia
  • Double espresso
    Double espresso
  • Gingerbread
    Gingerbread
  • Saffron buns
    Saffron buns
  • Little helper bearing gift
    Little helper bearing gift

AuthorHouse

Was AuthorHouse decided to be an unreliable publishing source? --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:00, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Kansas Bear - AuthorHouse, CreateSpace, Lulu, Trafford, all the self-publishing houses. We have a list at Wikipedia:List of companies engaged in the self-publishing business. Global Vision isn't on it but uses our articles, so its encyclopedias, etc fail as well. Dougweller (talk) 21:26, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Doug! I thought you had mentioned something about AuthorHouse earlier, but could not find anything. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:30, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

problem

I was just checking Special:CreateAccount, i made another account by the name of Night Furry thinking that it will be alike as that similar accounts made by other editors but it not so i think. what are your suggestions for me. thanks --Night Fury (Talk to me) 20:33, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Night Fury Sounds like you should follow the instructions at WP:DOPPELGANGER. Dougweller (talk) 21:34, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Honorary Aryan

There is a very convincing argument to be made to refute the claim that Hitler would every think it meaningful to call anyone an "honorary Aryan". Perhaps nothing could tell us more about what went on in Hitler's mind with greater accuracy than Mein Kampf, seeing that Hitler described Mein Kampf in its Introduction as, "a description not only of the aims of our Movement but also of its development". Nowhere in Mein Kampf does Hitler mention the concept of an "honorary Aryan". Instead, what he said in Mein Kampf was[1]:

"If we divide mankind into three categories - founders of culture, bearers of culture, and destroyers of culture - the Aryan alone can be considered as representing the first category. It was he who laid the groundwork and erected the walls of every great structure in human culture."(Murphy's translation, p. 226)

It is clear Hitler saw some human beings as inferior genetically speaking:

"The favourable preliminary to this improvement is not to mate individuals of higher and lower orders of being but rather to allow the complete triumph of the higher order."(Murphy's translation, p. 222)

Even when we think of the very idea of someone bestowing the title of "honorary Aryan" on nonwhites, we're talking about the presumption of that individual that white people are superior to begin with. Logic tells us that must be the case in that person's mind, otherwise he would not think of it as a compliment to give someone such a title. Some believe that "honorary Aryan" translates to German as Ehrenarier, but one would be hard-pressed to find instances in which it is used in German writings, and that particular compound word does not appear once in the German original version of Mein Kampf.[2]

In German, a compound word can be put together at the drop of a hat, and that is why one can actually debate whether a certain compound word or another "exists" in German, even though someone out there might use them. It appears that in the case of Ehrenarier, during the course of history, someone put together the word Ehren, the plural of "honor", with the word Arier or "Aryan".[3] So one could wonder if we should really interpret that to mean "honorable Aryan", instead of "honorary Aryan", as some would have us believe. Another relevant example is the word Ehrenmord, which means "honor killing". Perhaps that sheds some light on the issue of how German compound words work. One can see clearly that Ehrenmord doesn't mean "honorary killing", as that would be meaningless.

So should Ehrenarier mean "honorary Aryan"? I'll let the reader decide. Doug, I've noticed that if one types the compound word Ehrenarier in at least some German dictionaries, the word doesn't come up, whereas a compound word like Ehrenmord does, which goes to show that some compound words are thought to exist in the German language by German intellectuals, and others aren't.[4][5] Normally the word Ehren and the word Arier both show up in the dictionary, but in my experience, not any compound word to the likes of Ehrenarier.[6][7]

Timothycrice (talk) 01:41, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Interesting theory.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 04:42, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Acts of the Apostles

Hello Dougweller, sorry to bother you. Please clarify on my talk page under section Was Acts Authored by Luke about this edit [19]. I have explained the violations such as WP:WTW etc. Cheers! — JudeccaXIII (talk) 04:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

You're going to need this

Congratulations are in order to you for having gotten the highest percentage of support in the recent elections. Thanks are also due to you for having indicated you are willing to put up with dealing with editors in arbitration cases who would make the people on The Jerry Springer Show look like shy and retiring wallflowers. Have fun with this drink, but I hope the duties of the new role don't make you take recourse to such as often as they would almost certainly make me do. John Carter (talk) 01:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
I think I want Pepsi Max or even RC, they give me the energy to push through things. But I try to avoid fizzy now, and for some reason, although I like most beers the fizz is too much for me. Dougweller (talk) 11:55, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

AA2 notification?

Would it be possible to notify user:Fmelikov of editing restrictions in the area of AA2? Fmelikov has reverted the Lavash article 3 times and once as an IP on 16th December. --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:55, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi User:Kansas Bear. The new system allows anyone to do this. The editor has been blocked for 60 hours but you can do the alert. See Template:Ds/alert and specifically {{subst:alert|a-a}}. It doesn't have to be logged anywhere. Dougweller (talk) 15:02, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

To the Japanese (subsection of Honorary Aryan)

Hitler regarded the Aryan as superior to everyone. Furthermore, Hitler spoke specifically about the Japanese, more than he spoke about other nonwhite ethnic groups, and it is clear he would describe them as irremediably inferior to his own white race:

"It is not true, as some believe, that Japan adds European technique to a culture of her own. The truth rather is that European science and technics are just decked out with the peculiar characteristics of Japanese civilization. The foundations of actual life in Japan to-day are not those of the native Japanese culture, although this characterizes the external features of the country, which features strike the eye of European observers on account of their fundamental difference from us; but the real foundations of contemporary Japanese life are the enormous scientific and technical achievements of Europe and America, that is to say, of Aryan peoples."(Murphy's translation, p. 227)

So really what I like to do is write something that the reader can use to compare with every relevant bit of evidence pertaining to a particular subject; in this case, the subject of whether the notion that the Japanese people en masse could truly become "honorary Aryans" existed as a reality in Hitler's mind, and whether it existed and exists as a reality in the minds of his deceased and current followers. By the way Doug, I've written this in response to your message on the noticeboard about what I posted on Honorary Aryan, because I thought I was maybe not being thorough enough in my contribution on the topic, and maybe that is why my posts were taken down.[8]

Timothycrice (talk) 01:42, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Timothycrice. This is one of the hardest things for some editors to grasp, expecially those used to writing academic papers. I struggled with it at first. Basically we need to use sources meeting our criteria at WP:RS that discuss the phrase "Honarary Aryan". It's not like a normal essay, journal paper, etc where you can use sources to build a case. The case needs to have already been built. Wikipedia articles are meant to present already existing ideas/concepts etc. They also need to be significant, ie if only one person has ever mentioned it, then WP:UNDUE strongly suggests it shouldn't be mentioned in an article. You can ask more either her, or at WP:NORN if you'd like further input from other editors. As I said, I had edits reverted until I figured out how this policy works. Dougweller (talk) 13:05, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Doug, the difficulty I was encountering was that "Ehrenarier", the supposed German word for "honorary Aryan", doesn't appear in the dictionary, by my experience.[9] German compound words can be very quickly put together, and some are used, but they aren't not very common, or have fallen out of use over time. So someone could speculate and think that if the word "Ehrenarier" was never considered part of the German language by Hitler's followers, maybe they embraced the concept. But if one wants to be led by something other than speculation, one option we have at hand is to read and have a correct understanding of what Hitler wrote, and I've given extensive proof on my talk page that the contents of the Political Testament of Hitler are sometimes misunderstood.
Some people think that in the fifth section of the Political Testament of Hitler, he was saying that the Chinese and Japanese were not inferior to white people, but we cannot say unequivocally that that is the only interpretation of what he said, or that it is the only credible one. In the original German, he said they were not "minderwertig", which can be interpreted to mean "not rubbishy" rather than "not inferior", but no matter how it is interpreted, there is no conclusive evidence that he meant "not inferior to white people".[10]
If he would have meant to say they were not inferior to white people, he would have maybe said they were not "minderwertiger als", and then made a reference to white people, such as "die weiße Rasse".[11] Typically what is done in German, when you want to make a comparison using an adjective, is that you append the suffix "-er" to it, and then place the word "als" after that now-modified word. So as was said before, if you were seeing a comparison being made, you might see an adjective like "mindwertiger" followed by the word "als", and in a situation where a comparison is made, "mindwertiger als" would mean "inferior to". The word "mindwertiger" means "more substandard", and the word "als", in a context where it is used to make a comparison, would mean "than" or its equivalent in that context.
All of this is to say that if you use an adjective like "minderwertig" by itself, you might not be making a comparison, rather you might simply be describing something without clarifying whether other things are of a higher or lower standard, or have more or less than what you're describing. So Hitler could have meant he thought the Chinese and Japanese were not rubbishy, but maybe he didn't mean he thought they weren't rubbishy compared to white people, as he didn't even mention white people in the sentence in question. Here is the quote:

Ich war nie der Meinung, daß etwa Chinesen oder Japaner rassisch minderwertig wären.

— Hitlers Politisches Testament (fünfter Abschnitt)[12]

I have never regarded the Chinese or the Japanese as being inferior to ourselves.

— Political Testament of Adolf Hitler (fifth section)[13]
Since Hitler made no mention of "ourselves" in the German original quote above, my understanding of it would be that he said, "I was never of the opinion that the Chinese or the Japanese are rubbishy in regard to their race." One thing that we were keenly aware of as we read this is that he considered the Chinese and Japanese to be closely related to each other. Seeing that China and Japan are so geographically close, there is no question that over the millennia there would have been countless cases of intermixing. He didn't think they were rubbishy in regard to their race, but it's obvious he had at least a measure of contempt for them judging by the following:

But it is almost inconceivable how such a mistake could be made as to think that a Nigger or a Chinaman will become a German because he has learned the German language and is willing to speak German for the future, and even to cast his vote for a German political party.

— Mein Kampf (Murphy's translation, p. 303)

Timothycrice (talk) 04:12, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://ia601405.us.archive.org/1/items/MeinKampf_483/HitlerAdolf-MeinKampf-VolumeIIi1939525P..pdf
  2. ^ http://ia601408.us.archive.org/34/items/AdolfHitler-MeinKampf/AdolfHitler-MeinKampf-Band1Und2855.Auflage1943818S..pdf
  3. ^ http://german.about.com/od/nounsandcases/a/German-Compound-Words.htm
  4. ^ http://www.dict.cc/?s=Ehrenarier
  5. ^ http://www.duden.de/suchen/dudenonline/Ehrenmord
  6. ^ http://www.dict.cc/?s=Ehren
  7. ^ http://www.dict.cc/?s=Arier
  8. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard#Honorary_Aryan
  9. ^ http://www.dict.cc/?s=Ehrenarier
  10. ^ http://www.dict.cc/?s=minderwertig
  11. ^ http://www.linguee.de/deutsch-englisch/search?source=auto&query=minderwertiger+als
  12. ^ https://ia601403.us.archive.org/33/items/HitlersPolitischesTestament/PTAHG.pdf
  13. ^ https://ia902205.us.archive.org/16/items/PoliticalTestamentOfAdolfHitler/PTAH.pdf

Ancient astronaut hypothesis

Please note, since you reverted the edit, this did not work very well: {{DEFAULTSORT:Ancient Astronauts}} It made the article not visible in some categories. Barkborre (talk) 15:28, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

And there we are

OK, you've done it now, commiserations. Bishonen | talk 01:36, 17 December 2014 (UTC).

Indeed. Another one who will have to disappear from my greetings card list for a while :( - Sitush (talk) 01:39, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Well you asked for it. Popular fellow, aren't you? Or maybe your enemies voted for you to punish you. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 02:19, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
I was going to say congratulations! but wiser words have been spoken. Now we just need to track down the 100 opposers. Johnuniq (talk) 02:24, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Congratulations! RGloucester — ☎ 04:03, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I came also for congratulations! So far arbitration was (for me at least) a synonym for waste of time, and ideally it shouldn't even be needed, - let's work on that ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:06, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Hallo Dough, congrats! Alex2006 (talk) 09:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Congrats, or condolences: your choice. Mangoe (talk) 11:47, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Both I think. The vote came as a real shock. I thought I might squeak through, but not that well! Dougweller (talk) 11:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
I was rather surprised that you beat DGG myself, but I think that your prior experience as an ArbCom clerk helped there. That and, honestly, the fact that you are one of the most reasoonable and I think most effective people I know of for dealing with confrontations.
Oh, and, regarding clerking, I seem to remember that User:Bishzilla is considering maybe taking on some clerk duties nest year. Her warm, sunny, agreeable, charming presence, and the not unreasonable fear it might inspire in some, may help keep the dramah levels down if she does take on the clerk role. John Carter (talk) 17:22, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
That would be a great idea. As for DGG, he did get more votes than I did, but more opposes as well. So a close run thing. Yes, it would be great if she became a clerk but for some odd reason I think it unlikely. Dougweller (talk) 17:35, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Style clerk, was suggestion. Improve arbitration style.[20] Little Newyorkbrad exclaim... sorry, no, explain, round of clerk recruitment after elections. But have doubts, upon checking clerk page, mainly stunningly dull chores. Zilla clerk insist on creative, artistic chores, or nothing. bishzilla ROARR!! 18:00, 17 December 2014 (UTC).
I have no idea how the clerking appointment system etc works and only a slight idea of what the clerks are supposed to do. They were notably absent for almost the entire GGTF case, although at least one of them found time to stand in the election itself. It strikes me that clerks either need to be pretty tough and regularly present, else the role might as well be left to the arbs (as effectively happened in that case). - Sitush (talk) 17:40, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Congrats, friend. And based on your vote, you appear to be the BMOC. It is a tough and thankless job, but I'm confident you have the patience and good old fashioned common sense to actually do some good there. You have some good company as well. Farmer Brown 2¢ 12:50, 17 December 2014 (UTC) (dennis)
  • On vacation but got Internet and saw this. Congratulations and sympathies. --NeilN talk to me 05:56, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 December 2014

Seasonal Greets!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015 !!!

Hello Dougweller, May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New year 2015.
Happy editing,
JudeccaXIII (talk) 21:54, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

David Macritchie

I see David MacRitchie was re-done with scholarly sources. however the edits were reverted. do you think the page is now better? I created a talk on the page. MacRitchieFan (talk) 05:34, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

well I reverted the revert for now. MacRitchieFan (talk) 05:34, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Induction to the 2015 Arbitration Committee

A Poodle in for you
Also Peaches, Grapes, and Bees

Congratulations on your success in the elections and welcome onto the 2015 Arbitration Committee. In the next few days we will induct you and the other new arbitrators. Please email arbcom-en-c@lists.wikimedia.org from the email address you wish to use for registration on the various private wikis and mailing lists. Please also indicate which, if any, of the checkuser and oversight permissions you wish to be assigned for your term (if you don't already hold both).

Over the coming days, you will receive a small number of emails. Please carefully read them. If they are automated registration emails, please follow the instructions in them to finalise registration. You can contact me or GorillaWarfare (the designated newbie contacts) directly if you have difficulty with the induction process. Lastly, you must identify to the Wikimedia Foundation prior to being appointed. Please promptly go to the Identification Noticeboard and follow the instructions linked there if you are not already identified.

Thank you for volunteering to serve on the committee. We very much look forward to working with you this term.

For the Arbitration Committee,
AGK [•] 08:35, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Another victim! Congrats! --Stephan Schulz (talk) 09:30, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Congrats Dougweller! Bladesmulti (talk) 13:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Congrats Dougweller! Hafspajen (talk) 18:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Congratulations, Dougweller! I'm sure you'll do great as an arbitrator, as I thought during the voting period. :) -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 04:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Congrats, well deserved. Have fun, arbitrate and all that jazz :) §FreeRangeFrogcroak 06:18, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Congratulations and best wishes. - - MrBill3 (talk) 17:56, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Congratulations, Dougweller. The appointment is well-deserved. CorinneSD (talk) 18:51, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Mwahaha, now's the time to stri- Er, uh, congrats! Ian.thomson (talk) 18:57, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • The last time I saw you, you were partially-reverting me, and before that you were arguing against me. So I voted for you. Payback! ;-) Seriously though, congrats! Xenophrenic (talk) 20:39, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Congratulations and best wishes.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:56, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes, congratulations, & I hope things stay relatively tranquil there. All the best, Johnbod (talk) 05:08, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Congratulations Dougweller. I knew you'd be a great fit as soon as I learned you'd thrown your hat in. And look at that, you even won with the highest percentage of supporting votes. Thanks for all your advice so far, I have appreciated and benefited from it. Cheers, John Shandy` • talk 23:29, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I would like to strike the harp and join the chorus of those congratulating you. Well deserved and best wishes. MarnetteD|Talk 23:56, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pleased to add my voice to this chorus of good wishes. I have often valued your steady approach and wish you calm seas and fair sailing. Ben MacDui 17:16, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Merry

To you and yours

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:31, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Chronicles of Eri

Hi Dougweller Thank you for your feedback. I appreciate that you along with other wiki moderators are doing a lot of work, probably unpaid, to ensure your standards are maintained. I am grateful for your general advice and will try to revise my page to accommodate those areas of concern to you in due course. Please bear in mind that due to the success of wiki in extending its scope, pages such as mine are touching subjects with very little in the way of established research, so I hope you understand that some of the usual protocols are not so easy to follow in this instance [relating to former research].

I would like to ask you for a little more info on your feedback:

quote: You didn't actually create the page, although you did "upload" a lot of material. I am the one who removed it, with an edit summary saying "removing a load of pov text, unsourced, original research, etc - looks like someone may have added their essay to it. I'll put some links on your page.

You allege I did not create the page, this baffles me totally- it follows a huge research going back over 12 years+, who do you suggest created the page? I am alone in pursuing this project, have seen the source scrolls and created the wiki page due to your old page being a chief obstacle when trying to approach academics with the new evidence which was only being rejected on the basis of Macalister's dubious allegations.

quote: I'm also concerned about the possibility it was copied from somewhere. We consider R. A. Stewart Macalister a reliable source.

I know your time must be limited as I had a brief look at the huge volume of material that your team process on a daily basis, however in this case all I can ask is that you read the section 'contentions upon authenticity' as it goes into much detail as to why Macalister could not have been familiar with the chronicle. He did not claim to be reviewing it [he was reviewing another book of the Briitish isrealite tradition]. In fact he simultaneously misrepresents the language the chronicle is written in [it is Gaelic, not phonetician as he asserts], its author [the translator Roger O'Connor never claimed to be its author as Macalister claims and Roger gives the names of all the ollamhs who the chronicle claims were its authors] and its basic content as explained on my original page. When I posted this subject on forums I learnt of other reasons why your claim 'R. A. Stewart Macalister a reliable source' is mistaken and would advise you further if you are not satisfied by the evidence relating to my earlier points which is all easily available online.

Please be careful with this- it has the tendency to attract the worst in people's prejudice. i am just concerned with simple evidence that an ancient iron age source is in need of reevaluation on the basis of evidence which I can substantiate objectively as your protocols seek.

Regards Chief Inspector of Irish Iron Age (talk) 20:56, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Chief Inspector of Irish Iron Age, Wikipedia is not for original research; it's a tertiary source. Please read our policy about that, No original research (click on the link). (Dougweller, you might want to avoid the alphabet soup when talking to a new user.) The policy isn't negotiable; Wikipedia simply isn't a place for publishing your own conclusions. It actually doesn't make any difference how good your evidence for them is. Did you notice Dougweller told you on your page that he has raised the matter at the No original research noticeboard? That's a venue for discussing issues such as this. Just click on the link, and describe your side of it there. The noticeboard is better for the purpose than this userpage, because more people will see it. Bishonen | talk 21:22, 22 December 2014 (UTC).

Best wishes for a happy holiday season

Happy Holiday Cheer
Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys!Hafspajen (talk) 02:39, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Help

I live in the boys hostel of my college, its regular that college authorities put the block on some of top websites on the internet including, facebook, youtube and wikipedia. I can read the articles of wikipedia but i cant login into it. I don't know what type of block is that. It becomes difficult for me to edit wikipedia many times. So it lefts me an option of using tor browser because it bypasses all the blocks. So i want to know where i can request ip block exemption so that i can contribute using tor or any other way for the problem.

thanks Owais Khursheed (Talk to me) 17:47, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Replied at talk page. Dougweller (talk) 21:54, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Reliable Source?

Mark Strage, Women of Power: The Life and Times of Catherine de' Medici. According to a review of his book, "Cape to Cairo:Rape of a Continent", Strage is said to be a magazine editor and free-lance writer.[21] Your thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:49, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Tricky. Reliably published. Do other reliable sources use it as a source/reference? Dougweller (talk) 21:57, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
I found one mention, in a journal.[22] --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

3RR problem/casteism

Since you seem to be around, do you mind dealing with RishabhFOREVER, who is repeatedly removing well-sourced, long-discussed info at Yadav in favour of poorly sourced caste puffery? AN3 could deal with it but things are slow at the moment. - Sitush (talk) 10:49, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 11:02, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Newport Tower

Please see response on my talk, Thank you. HalfGig talk 12:34, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Seasonal Greets!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello Dougweller, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015.
Happy editing,
CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 22:27, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

The Signpost: 24 December 2014

Happy Holidays

Happy Holidays
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. - Ealdgyth - Talk 15:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Changes of Herod the Great

You reverted changes that were done by a friend of mine, a bible PhD regarding Herod. Herod was not Arab. Not completely, anyway. On his father side he was an Edomite, from a family long connected to Judea, who also converted to Judaism. Herod himself was born a Jew. His mother was Nabataean, which is an ancient Arab people. Back then a person's identity was based upon the father, hence Herod was Edomite Jewish. That's how he saw himself also according to Jesephus Flavius. I hope we can reach an agreement that will portray this topic in the correct way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tal69 (talk • contribs) 20:48, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi User:Tal69 - the way you added/changed the sentence made it appear that your changes were in the cited sources. If there are divided views, we have to present them in proportion to their acceptance in mainstream sources. In any case, we need citations of sources meeting WP:RS = if you don't understand what I've said, just ask me to explain - which I can do tomorrow. Dougweller (talk) 22:05, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Your comments about my edits

Dear Dougweller,

I note your comment about not altering articles written in American English to British. I have, to date, only standardised spelling in an article. If there was a 'favourite' already in the text, it made no sense then to spell centre 'centre'. I would therefore be grateful if you would not revert my corrections. In addition, I note you reverted Bosphorus to Bosporus. Since the main Wikipedia article is also entitled Bosphorus, which is the more popular usage, especially in Istanbul where the Bosphorus is located, you may, again, take the trouble to reinstate my correction.

I would be delighted to work as an editor on Wikipedia once my high pile of workload is reduced to a manageable size.

Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year,

All the best,

Phasers Are On Stun — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phasers Are On Stun (talk • contribs) 16:59, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

User:Phasers Are On Stun Did you read WP:ENGVAR, particularly WP:RETAIN? Again, those are not corrections, they are changes in spelling from one accepted spelling to another. Labelling them as corrections, especially where you are actually making a real correction or two, is confusing. It's also a good idea to do separate edits for separate tasks - which is how Bosphorus went back to Bosporus. From what I could see in at least one example, you standardised spelling not to any earlier standard but to British English spelling, at times changing large numbers of words. The existence of one word with British English is not a reason to change a number of words to British English. Dougweller (talk) 19:02, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

User:Chaoyangopterus

Happy holidays, Doug. Could you please take a look at this editor's talk page and latest edits? It seems like they are promoting some marginal views about PIE mythology. In any case, they do not engage in constuctive discussion. --Omnipaedista (talk) 03:55, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Cover

How to add a cover image to a book. It appeared like this [23] but i think it is not the proper way or correct format because of this [[File:|125px|]].

thanks Owais Khursheed (Talk to me) 07:52, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

User:Owais Khursheed Not my forte, sorry, try WP:HELP DESK. Dougweller (talk) 13:07, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
It looks like the format got messed up. Lucasjohansson (talk) 01:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Book of Enoch

Hallo Dougweller, you reverted my took-out edit of Jewish in the statement the book of enoch was a jewish religious work. You may let it out, as I suggested. Why? Because 2, 3 sentences further down it is more spec. reffered to as anyhow as: "It is not part of the biblical canon as used by Jews, apart from Beta Israel. Most Christian denominations and traditions may accept the Books of Enoch as having some historical or theological interest" -- If this was the hole truth, how would this qualify the Book of Enoch as a Jewish religious work, if Judaism does not accept it, but Christianity would. Notice, please, not every thing an (alleged) Jew does or writes makes it jewish, especially when connected with Judaism! Thank you for reconsidering it. Please take it back to my version if you may or I may convinced you, thanks a lot! --78.55.25.35 (talk) 17:58, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

OK, this one is a bit of a problem. From what I can tell, the work seems to have been written by perhaps members of a Jewish community, which would qualify it as being a "Jewish religious work," or religious work of Jewish origin or extraction. The fact that a religious work written by Jews is accepted by the EOC as canonical does not make it less Jewish in origin, any more than the Book of Jubilees, which also apparently arose from the Jewish community but is accepted only by Christians as canonical, does not make that work not Jewish, at least in origin. I hope that makes sense. John Carter (talk) 18:50, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
If it's used by any Jewish group it's a Jewish religious work. But I've taken the article off my watchlist now as part of my general purge to leave me with time for my Arb work. Dougweller (talk) 19:08, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Nancy Lieder

I think we're safe for now; all she's done so far is change a source from Phil Plait's site to her site, and if I can mine her site for her quotes, I'm pretty sure she can. If she starts actually altering content, then maybe it would become an issue. But then, when has Wikipedia ever really cared if people are who they say they are? Serendipodous 19:20, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Bad page moves

I noticed this diff (MJH92 moved page Fedora to Fedora on my head: *tips fedora*). When I went to User talk:MJH92 I noticed your comment: "if you move a page maliciously again...". Perhaps a talk page watcher might patch things up. Johnuniq (talk) 08:12, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Issue resolved: page move fixed and user blocked as a sock. Johnuniq (talk) 10:58, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Johnuniq - yes, I noticed that the editor was a sock and followed that up. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Dougweller (talk) 11:01, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year Dougweller!

Happy New Year!

Dougweller,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Hafspajen (talk) 10:12, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year

User:Bababa67/newyeardispla/editnotice--Bababa67 (talk) 13:50, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year Dougweller!

Happy New Year!

Dougweller,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:18, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.

Rarevogel again

Rarevogel is back to removing source(s) and sourced information in articles under false or misleading edit summaries.[24]
This being the section he removed, including the source:

  • However, Martin Litchfield West states that "phonologically, the match between Europa's name and any form of the Semitic word is very poor". ~~M. L. West (1997). The east face of Helicon: west Asiatic elements in Greek poetry and myth. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 451. ISBN 0-19-815221-3. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:24, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Questions about how Wikipedia operates, how to fix pages without a huge effort when they contain basic factual error and/or obvious bias

Hi Doug, we had some interactions back in August. I have questions about how Wikipedia operates. Yes, I read your vandalism page first, and I certainly don't fit in those descriptions. So, I have tried a couple of times to make more significant edits (more than just a grammar correction or link correction). Both times did not go well.

First, some years ago on the nuclear physics page almost the entire page had been replaced with a nut theory. As I was directing people there I removed the nut theory and wrote a pretty good entry. It was simply deleted by someone else and the nut theory reinstated. Finally it was fixed a long time later, and by someone else. How should I have fixed it? What do you do when a Wikipedia page contains basic and obvious factual errors, in particular in the sciences?

Second, our interaction regarding the really very forward-thinking university (Columbia Pacific University) was less than positive in my view. When I tried to make factual corrections, most was removed. I had to discuss quite a bit with you for even something minor. Now I have found still basic factual errors in the page. I went ahead and compared the University of Phoenix entry to Columbia Pacific entry. It looks to me like a living institution can keep rewriting its history to look positive, while a defunct one is at the mercy of whatever person wants to go after it. For example, the CPU page still states 4 difficulties with valid degrees. It does not state that in 46 states the degrees it issued are valid. It quotes the most negative possible thing during the court case, which is a simply a statement of opinion by the prosecuting attorney. You will not find such things on the University of Phoenix page. There is not even a controversy section, despite the fact that the accusation of "diploma mill" was made many times by many famous people including a major government investigation which hit the front page of the NY Times a few year's back. I do know the complete inside story of why CPU was closed, and it is not remotely as represented on the page. However, it doesn't seem worth the high level of effort to correct it at this point.

Overall these experiences have made me apt to issue warnings to my students using Wikipedia -- warnings my fellow faculty have echoed frequently. Since I am at a major university with thousands of potential young users I wonder if this is the outcome Wikipedia wants?

To a lesser extent I had a similar experience with the Hannah Arendt page. I really simply didn't even try to edit it, but just pointed it out to my students (I teach in multiple disciplines as part of an honors program) as an example of how female philosophers still, even on Wikipedia, suffer from misogyny. You will not find a male philosopher being defined by his relationships in the "life and career" section.

I would appreciate your advice as to how I should approach the above issues. Investing in days of work on a talk page does not seem a good use of my time, particularly to get very basic things on Wikipedia that are found in many textbooks. I had the impression this is what you advised before, the "talk it out" approach. Please correct me if I have misunderstood? I am writing you because you are a Wikipedia administrator and we had some previous interaction. If you think I should write someone else, please let me know. Thank you. 13209hajfhd098 (talk) 20:57, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

(Doug asked me if I could reply since we've had some recent interaction on one of these articles.)
With respect to the CPU article, I reverted one of your most recent edits simply because it lacked a source. You may not be able to find a good source for your statement since it's difficult to prove a negative so the statement simply may not belong in an encyclopedia article. I recommend that you bring the issue up in the article's Talk page so other editors with an interest in the article can chime in. That would also be a really good idea since it sounds like you may have a connection with the topic so you might not be as objective as we'd ideally like editors to be when editing an article.
The comparison to the University of Phoenix article is a bit messier but I think you have some good points so please raise them in the CPU talk page if you post there. That specific article has had some history of edit warring about controversies. And it wouldn't surprise me at all if some people with an interest in the company have routinely taken an interest in the article although I have no specific evidence supporting my hunch. ElKevbo (talk) 22:25, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

ElKevbo I appreciate your answer. It doesn't really answer my concerns about multiple editing situations and Wikipedia standards though, which I am asking more as a university professor. Concerning CPU, I added an edit and also put an explanation on the Talk page for CPU -- we can continue discussion there if you like. It is correct I am not the best person to be making edits, but as CPU alumni overall appear to have given up in frustration, I may be the only person willing to correct the page. In the meantime it would be great if you or Doug could get back to me on Wikipedia standards and some of my other questions. It would be fine to just point me to relevant Wikipedia reading. But, it is not good for this information resource if large swaths of faculty at major research university (like mine) are getting a poor impression of Wikipedia, as I described. See e.g. the situation with the nuclear physics page, Hannah Arendt, etc.

Your arguments about sourcing don't seem to me to be valid when the non-neutrality criterion is not satisfied. Listing only negative comments or points, when they happen to have sources, while not stating obvious things that simply don't require sources, is non-neutrality. Many political persecutions start with pulling out a bunch of negatives from a person's speeches without any other material. It's called spin, right? The CPU article has negative spin, very obviously, as many people complained on the talk page, in detail.

13209hajfhd098 (talk) 23:13, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

ElKevbo I ended up deciding to no longer being a Wikipedia editor. I just wanted to thank you for your thoughtful comments and time. 13209hajfhd098 (talk) 22:28, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Re:12th Night

Dear User:Dougweller, thanks for your message and for the thanks for my edit to the article. I actually didn't look at the talk page until you alerted me to it. Since some sources do list Twelfth Night on the 6th, I think it is a good idea to include that date, as you suggest. However, do we have any sources on which Christian denominations observe Twelfth Night on the 6th? If so, it might be a good idea to include that information--right now it seems that we have sources that state that some people recognize Twelfth Night on the 6th but we don't really know who does that. On the other hand, if some individuals (rather than large denominations) mistakenly think that Twelfth Night is on the 6th rather than the 5th, it might be best to omit that information. I look forward to hearing your thoughts. With regards, AnupamTalk 19:31, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Anupam. Take a look at [25], [26] and [27]. Dougweller (talk) 19:54, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Dear User:Dougweller, thanks for your reply. Yes, I understand that some sources do state that Twelfth Night is observed on the 6th. However, I was wondering if we had any sources on which religious groups observed Twelfth Night on the 6th. We know that Anglicans observe Twelfth Night on the 5th. Do we know who observes Twelfth Night on the 6th? I look forward to hearing your thoughts. With regards, AnupamTalk 20:42, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 December 2014

Arch and Anth notability

Paulette Steeves doesn't seem to be notable per WP:PROF unless the awards listed in her bio lift her into that realm. Do you recognise any of them? - Sitush (talk) 10:57, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

A comment from a page stalker... they don't look notable to me from an encyclopedic perspective. Hchc2009 (talk) 11:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I am particularly concerned about the status of the SAA grant, which seems likely to be the most significant among them. But I do not know much about this stuff. - Sitush (talk) 02:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
User:Sitush, User:Hchc2009, this seems to be fringe writer in the mould of Vine deLoria Jr. See her list of hidden/blocked sites[28] which includes some sites reported by Virginia Steen-McIntyre such as Hueyatlaco, an article which I note is now pretty bad, pushing a ridiculously early date. The list also includes Clovis sites although her article implies it doesn't. I don't see notability yet. Dougweller (talk) 14:46, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
I have done a lot of searching and fail to found to find anything of significant enough importance / notability that would qualify her for a Wikipedia article. Basically, the most that I can find was that she has contributed possibly to a few cultural resources management (CRM) reports, published articles in the Pleistocene Coalition Newsletter, and published three articles in Springer's Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology. According to a departmental web page, she has been a PhD. graduate in anthropology at Anthropology at Binghamton University of New York since 2008. None of this strikes me as being very special as nowadays the typical archaeologist, and even a geologist like me, literally have dozens of CRM reports that they are listed on as a coauthor and the encyclopedia articles are not considered special as contributions to the science. Paul H. (talk) 19:07, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Additional note - The number of grants, scholarships, and awards, including the SAA grant, are typical of what any PhD graduate student would have and, in fact, are expected to have if they want to compete as a scientist. There is nothing exceptional about them and many graduate students have more of them. Paul H. (talk) 19:15, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
I've sent the thing to WP:AFD. Thanks to all of you for your comments and I hope that you do not mind that I've linked this thread in the discussion there. - Sitush (talk) 01:48, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Speedy keep

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Speedy keep. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Roger O'Connor

Hi, I've recreated the Roger O'Connor article. I just saw I was supposed to contact you just as I was completing it, but took the liberty of hitting save anyway. I hope this is OK. Paul B (talk) 14:10, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Admin identification

Hi Dougweller, I really appreciate the green background box that you have at the top of this page that outlines relevant information on the/your administrator role. I know that not all admins do this and that confusion can arise in relation to editor understandings of who is an admin and who is not.

I was wondering whether there may be ways to encourage/raise a level of clarity as to which Users are administrators and which are not.

Thanks GregKaye 12:47, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure how that could be done. Most of us are in the Admin category, but that shows up on our User page. I don't know, make a suggestion at one of the Admin talk pages (I don't mean ANI, I mean pages about Admins, maybe the stuff for new Admins). Dougweller (talk) 12:57, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
One option that I just thought of could be to provide talk page template resources via Category:Wikipedia administrators perhaps via the creation of a subcategory such as Category:Wikipedia administrator user and talk page banners. With a reference point like this perhaps there could be a sharing of good practice. I don't know whether you would want to share your template contents but I would think that the various elements of your content at User:Dougweller/talkheader would get a page banner resource pool off to, I think, a greatly beneficial start. Many admin's present nothing. GregKaye 18:37, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
I borrowed it, see my edit summary "borrowing J.delanoy's talk page header". Dougweller (talk) 18:39, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
TY. I didn't see objection from you and, after seeing that J.delanoy seems to have been inactive for a while, I just left a message there. I've saved the green box content as Template:Admin talk page banner via the newly created Category:Wikipedia administrator user and talk page banners which is given connection within Category:Wikipedia administrators. I personally think that this may be of value and that it may get a ball rolling as related to shared good practice. Credits were given in edit summary. GregKaye 18:05, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Breath of fresh air

Re: [29].... thank God you're on the Committee. And please don't quit! :) MastCell Talk 17:27, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Related: You might wish to rephrase your comment after reading the NHS' modern position on homeopathy, which is discussed rather more directly at this page. LeadSongDog come howl! 18:34, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
LeadSongDog, was that meant for me? Because I'm well aware of the NHS position on it. I'm not sure what your point is. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 19:25, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
It was. Mostly as a matter of tone and implication. Your comment leaves the impression to the reader that the NHS makes homeopathy generally available. To the contrary, they state: "Homeopathy is not available on the NHS in all areas of the country, but there are several NHS homeopathic hospitals and some GP practices also offer homeopathic treatment." Further, the NHS has, over time, been closing or repurposing homeopathic hospitals. LeadSongDog come howl! 19:50, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Ok, I am aware of all of that but didn't see it as necessary to point it out, but I have now. Dougweller (talk) 13:12, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Question on Shapur II

Hey, I hope this isn't a burden to you, but I was hoping you could unprotect the page on Shapur II. The reason I ask is I was hoping to edit it and it doesn't seem to be in imminent danger of being moved again any time soon, so I think it might be safe to remove the protection. But, what do you think? I Feel Tired (talk) 19:09, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

User:I Feel Tired Done, hit the wrong button anyway. Dougweller (talk) 19:27, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! I Feel Tired (talk) 20:38, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec

Looking At Volga. Kustodiev

Shouldn't the IP editor who has repeatedly vandalized Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec today be blocked? CorinneSD (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2015 (UTC) Sorry. The editor has already been blocked. CorinneSD (talk) 19:18, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Portugese page stalker: (in Portuguese) If you find an other one just doing its deeds you can report him/her at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. After properly warned - that is important. (No I am not Portugese - but I always forget the sign of page stalker. {{pt}} ...? Hafspajen (talk) 19:24, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Hafs, this made me laugh. A Swedish Portuguese talk page stalker. ;) It's {{tps}} – t for talk, p for page, s for stalker. I didn't know I was permitted to warn someone. I don't even know how to warn someone. CorinneSD (talk) 20:51, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Holy. Well, you are so much more innnocent like all those new accounts popping up everywhere going strait to FP and know everyrthing. Well, there should be some small things sticking up above your page, where you push you watchlist like warn and well. Push warn and chose level and incident. Hafspajen (talk) 22:07, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Those show up only if you are on a talk page, by the way. Now I am going to warn Doug, just to demonstrate. Hafspajen (talk) 22:22, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
CorinneSD, you can use WP:TWINKLE. Hafspajen, I'm not bothered, but I've noticed a number of people spelling my name "Dough" instead of "Doug". I hope you don't take offense if I ask you why you spelled it with an 'h'. Dougweller (talk) 09:47, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Unsure

Hi Dougweller,

I am unsure why you started this thread concerning blocks that I have previously received. I am happy for you or other editor to review the, I think, controversial contexts concerned or the edits that raised the specific problems which I contend were made in good faith. When I am able I will write something up to present this case. You had said "I'm not actually reading all the threat so I'm not clear on the issues". Feel free to make any review of the full context of this thread. GregKaye 12:01, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

GregKaye - simply because the editor (who I see was blocked a few hours ago) was mistaken. And 'threat' was certainly a terrible typo, which I've corrected. Dougweller (talk) 12:19, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
In turn I had also misread/misremembered the end of the exchange that you were referring to. In this context your comment may act as a stub, while not knowing if one would be needed, of an olive branch at least between the two of us. GregKaye 13:54, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Gnosticism

If you have time, could you review the latest edits to Gnosticism? [30] CorinneSD (talk) 23:22, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 9

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 9, November-December 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

  • New donations, including real-paper-and-everything books, e-books, science journal databases, and more
  • New TWL coordinators, conference news, a new open-access journal database, summary of library-related WMF grants, and more
  • Spotlight: "Global Impact: The Wikipedia Library and Persian Wikipedia" - a Persian Wikipedia editor talks about their experiences with database access in Iran, writing on the Persian project and the JSTOR partnership

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Questions regarding copyrights and similar

There are some I guess maybe reasonable questions raised at User talk:John Carter#Daisaku Ikeda regarding copyright concerns on the article in question and related matters. I know you're busy, being a arb and all, but I remember seeing you in the past talk about copyright issues in an apparently informed way, which is more than I can say for myself, and would welcome any input you might have. It shouldn't take more than a few minutes to look the discussion over. John Carter (talk) 17:35, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

I do not regard the deletion of the toride link as a set back, but rather as an impetus to edit the article and cite the article in question myself. Since you seem to be versed on copyright issues I would therefore ask if the article on Daisaku Ikeda could be investigated on further copyright violations. --Catflap08 (talk) 18:59, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Caftlap08, you can ask at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Dougweller (talk) 19:37, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

This is an answer I expected but will do so.--Catflap08 (talk) 19:42, 9 January 2015 (UTC) What irritates me most is that I have to speak in defence of something that anyone waiting for a bus bus could have purchased 30 years ago. --Catflap08 (talk) 20:32, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 January 2015

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Harassment

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Harassment. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Zheng He

Sorry, my mistake, I was meant only to retrieve its Muslim status, accidentally retrieve the vandalized parts. Go ahead with your edit. Gunkarta  talk  11:58, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Birmingham

Really? How is this crap not WP:UNDUE WP:TRIVIA WP:NOTNEWS. Why not focus on some actual controversies rather than bloat the article with tripe. You are an admin, you should help reign this crap in, not propagate it. Arzel (talk) 18:17, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Really, Arzel. You've spent the last few weeks arguing at great length that a couple of Neil deGrasse Tyson's tweets are matters of extreme encyclopedic importance ([31]), even though they've attracted virtually zero coverage in reliable sources. Now comes this controversy, which has been covered by many reliable sources (e.g. New York Times/Associated Press, The Guardian) and drawn comment from the Prime Minister of the U.K., and you think it's beneath mention? Your concepts of "trivia" and "undue weight" seem a bit inconsistent, to say the least. MastCell Talk 19:07, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Really. This has nothing to do with FNC, you will notice I have not tried to remove it from his article...which is where it belongs. Also, your last sentence added is WP:OR, you (Doug) as an admin should realize this. Arzel (talk) 21:29, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

RevDel

Hi Doug, can you please remove this edit summary? [32] Thanks. --NeilN talk to me 12:21, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 January 2015

Doug, I would delete what you just wrote at Talk:Nibiru cataclysm

He is using RS, and to claim he isn't would just throw more fuel onto the fire. I think I've managed to quiet him down for now. Let's not give him an excuse to start up again. Serendipodous 14:08, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

User:Serendipodous It's an RS for another article, but as it doesn't discuss Nibiru it can't be used at that article. Dougweller (talk) 14:19, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Shahnameh

Please watch and protect Shahnameh. Attacked by a Pan-Turkist: [33], [34], [35], [36], [37]--188.158.72.218 (talk) 15:07, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

La Ciudad Blanca

User:Culmi02 has begun editing La Ciudad Blanca in order to promote personal opinions and speculation in a way that looks to me like it violates the standards of WP:NOR. However, as someone who has done quite a bit of editing on that article myself, I'd appreciate an objective opinion from an experienced Wikipedia editor. If you know of another editor who would have an interest in this, please give them a heads-up. Thanks! Hoopes (talk) 18:40, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Without deleting anything, I've moved most of the problematic content to two new sections of the article. I hope that the person who has added it will look over it carefully and re-edit the material to conform to Wikipedia's WP:NOR policies. I don't have time to tackle it in more detail than that right now, but it should be reviewed by someone familiar with Wikipedia policies lest the article be used as a venue for self-publication of highly speculative, idiosyncratic theories that have not held up to scholarly peer-review. Hoopes (talk) 17:25, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Mass POV-pushhing and WP:NOTHERE

Ethnocenterist user with a lot of unhelpful edits and disruptive edit summaries:

Your advise

Hello, can you take a look at the List of massacres of Azerbaijanis article. User Yerevantsi has removed large portions of the article without engaging in talks, see [48], [49]. I want to avoid a edit-war, your advise would calm the situation down. Mursel (talk) 20:42, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

A pity

This is sad news. You do great work here. I hope we don't lose you completely, and I hope you enjoy your off-wiki time... bobrayner (talk) 21:13, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't think Doug's going off-wiki. He's probably having so much fun as a member of Arbcom that he wants to devote more time to it. Amiright? --NeilN talk to me 21:22, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
That's right. There's quite a bit to do, and a lot to read, digest, analyse, etc. And don't forget OS and CU. Ban appeals. And more. bobrayner I'm not stopping editing entirely, just cutting back. And my main interest in any case is archaeology, including the fringe stuff. That'll be my editing focus. Dougweller (talk) 21:27, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Groovy. I have never seen any aspect of Arbcom described as fun, but who knows what could change? :-) bobrayner (talk) 19:04, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Doug, maybe you could post your watchlist? I had been thinking an FTN watchlist may be useful, and yours would be a good start. Manul ~ talk 23:15, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Interesting idea, User:Manul, but tricky. I have a number of articles on my watchlist which are not fringe but where editors have tried to insert fringe information. I don't think posting my watchlist would be very helpful. However, we do have categories that do the trick, eg Category:Archaeological forgeries and Category:Pseudoarchaeology. And Category:Pseudohistory. These aren't all inclusive because editors sometimes remove such categories, but they are a start. There are similar categories for other types of fringe material. However, articles such as Olmec colossal heads don't have appropriate categories. User:Bobrayner, I think we need a category to cover Hyperdiffusionism in archaeology. Perhaps we should discuss this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Archaeology? Dougweller (talk) 19:19, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Good plan. bobrayner (talk) 21:00, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

User:Rarevogel, again

Rarevogel is again removing references and referenced information from articles with no explanation or clearly an opinionated reason for removal, "Has no place here". In the Islam in Russia article he removed two different referenced sentences with the accompanying references.[50][51] Has this editor been given enough rope? --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:15, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

You could try ANI. You'll have to carefully build a case. Dougweller (talk) 16:21, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 January 2015

Please comment on Talk:Kurds

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kurds. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Request for semi-protection on Turkish Kurdistan

Heya Doug, long time no see. I hate to say hello again for such a bad reason, but it appears the Turkish Kurdistan article is being attacked, I'm reverted the changes, but the fellow keeps changing it back. Most uncool. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 3 Shevat 5775 19:55, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

done. Dougweller (talk) 21:11, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Cheers! Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 3 Shevat 5775 22:46, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello!

Hello Doug! its been some time since we wrote to each other. Ever since that Copyright issue was over, i have been expanding many articles without breaking the copyright rule (321 articles have been created so far :D). But.. there is someone who keeps reverting me, which halts my expanding. That person is Qara xan. I got blocked some days ago for a ridiculous reason after he used a dirty trick by reverting and not replying to me after i had proven him wrong. He then reported me and i got blocked. I felt absolutely cheated. Anyway, now i am back and he is continuing his disruptive edits. After having made several reverts and ignored me at the same time (because i had proved him wrong) in these two articles [52] [53], he has now gone to this one [54].

I discussed about the issue with him, but after i had proven him wrong once again, he kept reverting and added unreliable sources such as Britannica. I don't know what to do. If you had the time and will, could you please help me? since I am completely lost I have done everything i can. --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:11, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Pálinka

Doug, I know you're very busy, but I don't know who else to ask. In the article Pálinka, editors keep changing "Romania" and "Hungary" back and forth. I've seen this happen a number of times over the last few weeks. [55], and on January 5, and January 3, if not further back. I don't know what is correct, but I know this flipping back and forth isn't productive. CorinneSD (talk) 00:41, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Contaldo80's statement

Is his comments at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Christianity and Sexuality/Evidence a statement or evidence? If statement, should it be transferred to another page? --George Ho (talk) 05:40, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

User talk:George Ho I've hatted it since it contains no evidence, with a note saying that we are awaiting diffs. Contaldo was notified yesterday that he needed to provide diffs, hat it or move it, but he obviously hasn't been back on Wikipedia since that and in any case it will take some time for him to document the evidence. We can consider everything on case pages and indeed elsewhere but material on the evidence page should be more than just a statement. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 09:15, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

New mail

Hello, Doug Weller. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Regards, Manul ~ talk 20:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

67.180.239.103

Thank you for this, and I'm happy to see you are still active. This seems to be about an academic spat in real life, and the anonymous edits show clear signs of COI, so I assume it's going to come up again. --dab (𒁳) 11:38, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Please help.

Hello Dougweller, I am in need of some urgent help. There is an editor who I feel is bullying me at the moment. I have simply had enough of this users constants attempts to discourage my work. How does one deal with an issue like on wikipedia. I want to have a pleasant time editing here and I have had my fair share of disagreements with other editors but none have acted so inappropriately with me. I know how to deal with disagreement but something needs to be done in this exceptional case. I will accept all consequences if I am found to be at fault. Also could you advise if I can revert this[56] as I do not want to go against the 1RR. I have asked the involved editor to revert but that request is being met with no action. Mbcap (talk) 17:20, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

No time but if you are in doubt, don't. Dougweller (talk) 18:04, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Off course, I will not revert. Thanks Mbcap (talk) 18:11, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Question regarding uploading a screenshot from a game

I was about to upload a screenshot image of my character from a game or virtual world (ie: ROBLOX) to Wikipedia but I am unsure on how I upload as free work or non-free work. I use Print screen on the keyboard to take desktop screenshots or screenshots from virtual world or game, and maybe do image editing like placing a logo I made. How can I upload screenshot as free or non-free work?

Image in question is http://i57.tinypic.com/rkc47p.png. (I made the RDK 3000 logo) Ryan (talk) 09:22, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Ryansworld100000. I'd have to look it up, it's probably best if you ask at the WP:Help desk where you are more likely to find an expert. Dougweller (talk) 11:47, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Mail 2

Hi Doug, in my email to you and others I have tried to be polite and sympathetic regarding the time demands that enormous arbcom case must require of arbcom's volunteer members. With that in mind, I am still perplexed at being unable to establish a basic level of communication for over six weeks. If you do not plan to respond to my email, would you at least indicate why, or offer some kind of pointer on what to do? I am afraid this will come across as pestering, but by all indications the matter will fall by the wayside if I don't pursue it. Manul ~ talk 18:10, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Note

Before casting your vote in the Wifione case, please be sure to have read and understood this thread. If you have any questions, please ask. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 13:15, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Read most of it this morning before you posted. I presume you've seen that the IP address has been checked. I'll let you know if I have any questions. Dougweller (talk) 13:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, that IP discussion was an irrelevant tangent. It's the rest of that thread I was referring to. It sums up the COI/sock case. There's a link in the last thread on that page to a table summarising the tendentious editing case, and a link to some comments by DGG. The abovementioned thread and those links are basically the entire case. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 19:19, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Doug Weller. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:37, 28 January 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Query about presenting evidence for ArbCom! –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:37, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Roscelese Haven't seen it, send it again please. Dougweller (talk) 05:56, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Hm. Sent again (through regular mail channels, not WP mail, because I got a kickback the first time I tried - persistent issue, not sure of cause). –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 05:59, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Chris Bennett

Hello Dougweller, I'd like to write an article about the Egyptologist Chris Bennett but I'm somewhat restrained, maybe due to the fact that he was an autodidact although he published several papers on peer reviewed journals. Another thing that is holding me back a little is that the only sources I managed to get are his obituary, his academia.edu page and the website he used to run. What do you think, are these enough? And is he notable enough? Khruner (talk) 21:22, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Those don't look enough, Khruner. Our page on notability of people says "Many scientists, researchers, philosophers and other scholars (collectively referred to as "academics" for convenience) are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources." Our guideline for scholars is at Wikipedia:Notability (academics). You're going to need more than you seem to have I think. Dougweller (talk) 11:06, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
I see, I won't write it then. Thanks, also for the "Notability (academics)" link, I will use it in the future. Khruner (talk) 13:29, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Doug Weller. You have new messages at Roscelese's talk page.
Message added 16:17, 28 January 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

–Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:17, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 January 2015

Question

Doug,

I recently retired, so I intend to do further research on the Gospel of Judas and the effect the gnostic texts have on the canonical gospels. You undid my editing on the Gospel of Judas page, and rightly so, most likely. But I see other edits there which have less merit than mine and stay up (my sin is posting from self-published work). The final line is an example ("original research?"). It stays up. Above that is a comment by Tom somebody-or-other from the Catholic perspective who lumps Gospel of Judas in with all other gnostic texts and claims they are all figments of Dan Brown's imgination (Davinci Code), for heaven's sake. Why is this up? I'm not by nature a Catholic-basher, but what's good for the goose is good for the gander in my book. Let's keep the Gospel of Judas on a higher level than this. If you want I can go through it and catalog all my objections. Cite in question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Judas#cite_note-vatican3-35

But my main purpose here now is to hopefully enlist you AS AN ALLY. I know you take exception to my having a mystic Master (you say something about it in your revert of one of my edits) but I assure you that you will learn from me if you open yourself to me and what I have learned. The Gospel of Judas is completely and utterly misunderstood by everybody! Yes, except me. I can prove it, from other gnostic texts which I know intimately. I won't go into it here because it is a case only made in the details, but suffice to say that this is a *gnostic* text and must be read that way, not in an orthodox way. Scholars or amateurs will never understand it reading it through orthodox eyes. Even the 'revisionists' ('bad Judas', led by Dr. April DeConick, Rice U.) have it WRONG. Judas is the gnostic, or mystic, SELF-sacrifice at the climax passage at 56,20 and it makes all the difference. I know this is true because, yes, I have learned mystic teaching from a mystic Eastern Master, Charan Singh. Gnostics were mystics. They practice the sacrifice of SELF to the Master. Maybe citing one of Master's books in support of my contention will not meet with WP guidelines, or maybe it will, but the truth is that Judas is the mystic self-sacrifice in the Gospel of Judas and it will always be that way, the same as it has been since it was written (when, we don't know, as it is a copy of an originally Greek text). The 'Betrayal' scene in all four canonical Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John is a tendentious reversal of a disciple becoming a Master in the Gospel of Judas. I know because I have witnessed a succession event myself, *first hand* (Charan Singh - Gurinder Singh, 1990), not in person, but as a disciple overseas, and I can prove this from details in the texts of First and Second Apocalypses of James and the Apocalypse of Peter, all from Nag Hammadi.

I hope you will help me to learn how to do Wikipedia editing regardless of your opinions of the above. There is much to learn and you are obviously experienced. I hope to hear from you soon and maybe we can work together on improving understanding of this amazing discovery, and others as well. The implications are immense. I think in fact the Gospel of Judas is the most important discovery in all history and will one day take its place there. Take care, and hope to hear from you soon. Sahansdal (talk) 19:48, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Sahansdal - I'm sorry, but I'm not in a position to do this now. For the next two years I am one of the 15 members of the WP:Arbitration Committee, and I will be doing very little editing and that almost only in the field of archaeology. Dougweller (talk) 20:35, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Sahansdal - It appears that you don't really understand what Wikipedia is. You really need to read a bit to find out. Read: Wikipedia:Training/Newcomers/Welcome, WP:5P, H:GS, WP:RS, WP:OR, WP:NPOV, WP:VERIFY, WP:HEP, WP:PG, WP:COI. After you've read all of these articles, you will be probably be able to answer your own questions. If after that you still have questions, you can ask at the Wikipedia Teahouse, Wikipedia:Teahouse, or you might ask an editor that has been editing the articles in which you are interested. Happy editing! CorinneSD (talk) 22:52, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Vinland Map

Hi Doug,

I've just added references to the original 1985 report on the PIXE analyses of the Vinland Map to the page Vinland Map. One of the two refs I added (currently #15) is my own compilation image of samples from the original pdf, to which I have added a minimum of explanation, but I still wouldn't object too much if it was ruled as OR.

If you received my emails yesterday, you'll know that this could get messy.

David Trochos (talk) 12:57, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ban appeals reform 2015

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ban appeals reform 2015. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:11, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ottendorfer Public Library and Stuyvesant Polyclinic Hospital

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ottendorfer Public Library and Stuyvesant Polyclinic Hospital. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Etruscan civilization‎

I see you have been editing in Etruscan civilization‎. Earlier today the article was cut-and-paste-moved to Etruscan civilisation‎. I have posted a message on the talk page of the editor performing the "move", but have not got a reply. Personally I don't care which spelling is used, but if moved the revision history should be preserved. Thanks, -- Sam Sing! 12:22, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Redrose64 took care of it seconds ago. -- Sam Sing! 12:24, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 February 2015

realhistoryww.com

Hi! I've taken the gross liberty of moving your post about WP:LINKVIO in relation to this website from the daily listing of articles for attention to WT:Copyright problems, where I hope it will receive some attention (which means I can archive that day). I hope that's OK with you, and am confident that if it isn't, you will promptly undo it. For what little it's worth, I think you make a good and valid point there. Do we have a linkvio blacklist? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:07, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, that's great. Justlettersandnumbers, we can put copyvio links on the spam blacklist (well, we can request it, I wouldn't mess with the list myself). Dougweller (talk) 16:51, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Salvio's oppose

Please consider the merits of Salvio's oppose. I think it's the best idea in front of the committee now for this situation and will help vastly address both peoples complaints. Nothing say it has to be a popular result but a fair result that benefits the encyclopedia that stops disruption is the way to go. Those sanctions of admin boards removal is something that has seemed to work well with Tarc. I would ddefintely sacrifice my pride for such an equitable result. It doesn't address the off wiki issues butI don't follow people on private websites and can easily ignore the attack page. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 14:02, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

hi, my name is Giacomo. can we fix toghether the problem about Megalithic page? i try to explain my thought in easy way : there was anything about an important civilitation of Sardinia and of course, i did mistakes because i'm beginner, but i try to complete the page and to put important information. nothing else.

can you help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prc90 (talk • contribs) 17:35, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

SPA and two maps

There a series of pages under Wikipedia:General sanctions/Syrian Civil War and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant which have unusual editors editing them. The pages are the maps of the conflict:

There are a shedload of Wikipedia:Single-purpose accounts or accounts close to it that edit these two maps.

They also tend to contribute to:

Please could you take a look and see if you think there are any sock-puppets among them as several of the accounts appear to act as tag teams and the edits are of a technical nature it is more difficult than usual to spot similarities by edit style. -- PBS (talk) 01:10, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Please watch and protect Andronovo culture page

Banned editor (a sock master) tries to restore his edits. As WP policies, there is no room for the socks' edits on articles. Returned as IP/anonymous user. Further info: His archive on sockpuppet investigation--187.177.83.4 (talk) 13:37, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Rollback 2015

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Rollback 2015. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:09, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

List of participants in the creation–evolution controversy AfD

An article you once tagged for POV List of participants in the creation–evolution controversy has been nominated for deletion. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_participants_in_the_creation%E2%80%93evolution_controversy , it appears that after 9 years of editing by dozens of editors Manul has decided the article is not worth keeping. It seems the hot blooded nature of the debate continues... --Kaptinavenger (talk) 09:29, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Funny and unending edit war

Just watch these two, horrible edit warring:

Eternal content dispute between some users, their socks, and their IPs. Someone should solve their issue, either by full-protection, or RfC, or user blocking. --188.158.69.207 (talk) 09:30, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the help

Best wishes DBaK (talk) 19:57, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Protection for Andronovo_culture page

First of all thanks for protecting the page. A page protection was requested by another user before but it was declined. The accusations of sock puppets are simply an appeal not to look closely at the wholesale removal of references by a single editor's objections. The matter is the use of the word "strongly" vs "associated by the consensus among archaeologists." The previous word is inappropriate in this case, you can read it at page 145, paragraph 2:http://books.google.com/books?id=NDRRNGj17EMC&pg=PA169#v=onepage&q=neither%20textual%2C%20ethnohistoric%2C%20nor%20archaeological%20evidence&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.113.98.12 (talk) 10:20, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Faith mission article

Hi - I see you deleted my edit to the Faith mission page (along with the other organizations without articles). Thanks for the link to WP:ORG. I am kind of new to page editing, so I would like to get some clarification about the notability concept. If you search for Christian Missions in Many Lands on Wikipedia, you will find that the organization is mentioned in several articles, so I thought that might make it notable. Also, does this article count? Thanks for your help. Bedogus11 (talk) 17:54, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Bedogus11. You might wish to look at WP:Notability as well. It has to be independent sources that meet WP:RS. Wikipedia has a steep learning curve, I still haven't started back down yet! Dougweller (talk) 18:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

WoolSalesman

Thanks, I (obviously) had my suspicions but I've never come across Mikemikev before so couldn't place him. Thanks for letting me know. GiantSnowman 20:33, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 February 2015

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Tanit

Could you review recent edits? Given a comment by the editor that seemed to be utter BS, I started checking what needs to be reverted, but I see you accepted some of their edits for this article. — kwami (talk) 21:47, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

kwami, he copied stuff from Religion in Carthage so far as I could tell. Is that what you are referring to? Off to bed now. Dougweller (talk) 21:48, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Mehmeett21's massive sock puppetry

Someone report this user on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. He should be banned from this topic (any Turkic, Euroasian, and related historical articles). --188.158.116.74 (talk) 06:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Disruptive editing on articles about Central Asian history

Thanks for ensuring that Andronovo culture was finally protected. I'm currently attempting to repair the article Wusun after extensive additions of WP:Fringe by the WP:Socks of User:Tirgil34, but the effort is being obstructed by ducky IP's and User:Yagmurlukorfez, who displayed the same behaviour at Andronovo culture. The situation appears similar to that you adressed on Paleolithic Continuity Theory some months ago. Krakkos (talk) 13:50, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

List of Turkic States

The Tuoba are disputed by scholars as a Mongolic people, since their status is disputed, (see sources at theTuoba article) they don't belong on the List_of_Turkic_dynasties_and_countries, yet some nationalist users keep adding Tuoba states like Southern Liang, Dai State, Northern Wei, Eastern Wei, and Western Wei to the list. The User:Madyas was edit warring along with Mehhmeet to get his version of the article and got the last edit before an admin fully protected the page. Can you delete them from the list?- List_of_Turkic_dynasties_and_countries#China.Rajmaan (talk) 19:41, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Many "Turkic" states are bound to be controversial, thanks to syncretism and naturalisation - if an area is taken by "Turkic" conquerors who then gradually pick up local culture & language, for how many centuries do we label them as "Turkic"? One? Ten? The waters are further muddied by nationalists in each place spending the last 100 years rewriting history to fit modern borders. We must have a system for dealing with debated states, dealing with the grey areas, rather than treating them all as black and white. bobrayner (talk) 22:26, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Bobrayner This isn't the same issue as originally Mongol states like the Golden Horde where an ethnically Mongol ruler was Turkified. We know the Golden Horde Khan was originally Mongol and got Turkified. The Tuoba's original ethnicity is outright disputed- scholars don't actually know for sure what they where, some scholars say their language and ethnicity are Mongolic and others say Turkic and others say its an isolate. The Tuoba's language only exists in fragments and no one has any idea what it sounded like. The Golden Horde issue depends on a variety of factors, whether you view the ruler's ethnicity, or the language and the ethnicity of the subjects as more important. The Tuoba issue is something else entirely, it needs to be deleted because the entire ethnicity of the Tuoba is disputed.Rajmaan (talk) 01:26, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Tirgil34 SPI

This message has been sent to you to inform you that a case involving Tirgil34 has been filed at SPI, and it has come to my knowledge that you may have prior history with this user. As such, your input may assist with the case. That case can be found at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tirgil34. Krakkos (talk) 17:10, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thank you for your help as I am new at Wikipedia! Suksesi (talk) 20:04, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Free Imperial City of Cologne

Hello Dougweller, as you handled problems with this article (or redirect) in the past, could you check the latest major re-adding of removed content please? (see article history) I don't know the background story (and probably don't want to know), but it looks like a new editor just created an account to make this change. Thank you for handling such difficult situations in Wikipedia as administrator. GermanJoe (talk) 02:31, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

How's that look?

I hope it isn't too much of a synth violation, but I changed the list to reflect the years found in Cline's book up to the Babylonian Exile and left Mercer for everything after as Cline's table doesn't go that far. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 28 Shevat 5775 15:32, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Hopefully ok. User:Flinders Petrie “1177 BC: The Year Civilization Collapsed”
A lecture by Dr. Eric H. Cline, Professor of Classics and Anthropology, Chair of the Department of Classical and Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, and Director of the Capitol Archaeological Institute at The George Washington University, in Washington D.C. For more than three hundred years during the Late Bronze Age, from about 1500 BC to 1200 BC, the Mediterranean region played host to a complex international world in which Egyptians, Mycenaeans, Minoans, Hittites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Cypriots, and Canaanites all interacted, creating a cosmopolitan and globalized world-system such as has only rarely been seen before the current day. It may have been this very internationalism that contributed to the apocalyptic disaster that ended the Bronze Age. When the end came, as it did after centuries of cultural and technological evolution, the civilized and international world of the Mediterranean regions came to a dramatic halt in a vast area stretching from Greece and Italy in the west to Egypt, Canaan, and Mesopotamia in the east. Large empires and small kingdoms, that had taken centuries to evolve, collapsed rapidly. With their end came the world’s first recorded Dark Ages. It was not until centuries later that a new cultural renaissance emerged in Greece and the other affected areas, setting the stage for the evolution of Western society as we know it today. Blame for the end of the Late Bronze Age is usually laid squarely at the feet of the so-called Sea Peoples, known to us from the records of the Egyptian pharaohs Merneptah and Ramses III. However, as was the case with the fall of the Roman Empire, the end of the Bronze Age empires in this region was not the result of a single invasion, but of multiple causes. The Sea Peoples may well have been responsible for some of the destruction that occurred at the end of the Late Bronze Age, but it is much more likely that a concatenation of events, both human and natural — including earthquake storms, droughts, rebellions, and systems collapse — coalesced to create a “perfect storm” that brought the age to an end.
The lecture will be recorded for subsequent viewing on the Oriental Institute’s YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/JamesHenryBreasted Dougweller (talk) 20:38, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
You know I'm thinking of proposing a standardisation of Neolithic, Bronze, and Iron Age dates ranges across Wikipedia on the Arch Wikiproject. I know the dates are constantly argued over, but I think there should be some degree of uniformity in the context of Wikipedia, and we should look at all the sources, not just Cline, and see which is best.
Ha, I went to that lecture a year ago and he pointed me out and a few other former students. Pretty fun and filled with his corny jokes that never get old no matter how many years pass or how many times you hear them. Definitely worth seeing. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 29 Shevat 5775 02:41, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:War in Afghanistan (2001–14)

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:War in Afghanistan (2001–14). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 February 2015

Bitafarhadi !!

hi, user:Bitafarhadi is backed with Sina s88 account, thanks --Florence (talk) 22:18, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Florence thanks, how did you know? I'll take care of it and related accounts and am asking CUs on other Wikis to check. Dougweller (talk) 10:27, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
hi , i member in SWMT and know his edit, he like only edit in Elam, Izeh and and backtiari pepole and need change 1/000/000 bakhtiari people to 10/000/000 pepole and Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Bitafarhadi and he have any user name with this edit user:Tina s25 and you can check global Contributions for this user and check user , np , thanks --Florence (talk) 14:24, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

WUSHU

I am am totally confused. I have been taught by the world experts in Kung Fu. All taught me Da Mo was the origininator of Kung Fu. I was even taught this at the Temple. So WHO was the originator of Kung Fu? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CWatchman (talk • contribs) 15:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

User:CWatchman - I'm not surprised. There are several "founding myths", take a look at [58] - that's an academic publication.

Azerbaijani language

Hallo Doug,
there is a fellow user who, for reasons which I don't understand, keeps removing the figures of Azerbaijani language speakers (and, of course, does not go to the talk page to explain why he is doing it). Could you please have a look at that? Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 15:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Deletion process

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Deletion process. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

Head of state autobiographies

Hello, I saw a comment on an africa-focused list about the article disappearing. I didn't realize you'd want a note, I will bear that in mind. The historical import seems clear, and I tried to write it to avoid potential OR or controversy.

If you don't think the article should exist at all, it could be merged into the author's article.

Warm regards, – SJ + 23:23, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Ararat arev

One more. [59] --NeilN talk to me 04:44, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Harassment

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Harassment. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

POV-pushing editor

Could you put on a lock on the article Isaiah 7:14 until a dispute there is settled?

The problem is the meaning of the Hebrew word almah. The pov-pushing editor has posted there on the talk page and I've replied.

Could you also tell me how I go about reporting this behaviour? I find it outrageous - if Wikipedia is be respected we need to use reliable academic sources for religion-related articles. PiCo (talk) 00:49, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (films)

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (films). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 10

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 10, January-February 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

  • New donations - ProjectMUSE, Dynamed, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, and Women Writers Online
  • New TWL coordinator, conference news, and a new guide and template for archivists
  • TWL moves into the new Community Engagement department at the WMF, quarterly review

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 March 2015

About ISBN change of Archaeology of the Southeastern United States

Hi, I changed ISBN as with the previous code book was not found with Google Book Search. --Mario1952 (talk) 08:19, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Your question on nl-wiki

See here. Regards, MoiraMoira (talk) 13:29, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Loka

Sir, I didn't copied the content from the source you mentioned (yes, the content is same), but the writer (Dr. Ing. Jeoraj Jain) have written it for free distribution & the website doesn't have the article's copyright. Though, I will now write in my language, as Loka word is very often used in Jain texts and it's very important, that it be mentioned in the Wikipedia article.Rtalk 13:51, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Also, I removed Hindu views on evolution from 'See Also' subsection on Jainism and non-creationism page, as I thought it was a not relevant on a page dedicated to a Jain theory, but I was wrong, SorryRtalk 14:05, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Legobot (talk) 00:07, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions involving articles related to Christianity and sexuality

I've already notified Roscelese and Dominus Vobisdu about sanctions placed upon them. Besides Talk:homosexuality and Roman Catholicism, are there any other talk pages that I can add "discretionary sanctions" template into? Also, how do restrictions work for those not yet blocked? Will their privileges be affected by this? --George Ho (talk) 02:05, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

George Ho, we didn't place discretionary sanctions. They really need to be removed. The list of sanctions is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions#Current areas of conflict and we always use specific templates, which are at Template:Ds/alert. Thanks however for your interest and effort, I know that discretionary sanctions can be confusing. Dougweller (talk) 08:13, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Query to the Audit Subcommittee

Hello. As per Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Audit_Subcommittee#Procedure, I have twice emailed the audit subcommittee regarding a potential misuse of CheckUser tools. I have not received a response to either of those emails, so I am attempting to ask the relevant questions here without revealing private information.

Multiple editors (Manul, Astynax, and John Carter) are claiming that a member of this audit subcommittee has (off-wiki) provided them with evidence of sock puppetry by me. I deny that any such evidence could possibly exist (given that I have never engaged in puppetry of any kind, ever), but that is not why I am coming here.

I am coming here so that this subcommittee can determine if a member performed a CU, despite a recent SPI request being declined, and – if a check was run – what the reasoning was per Wikipedia:CheckUser#CheckUser_and_privacy_policy (“The onus is on an individual CheckUser to explain, if challenged, why a check was run.”). And finally, why CU results would possibly be given off-wiki to other editors to resolve.

I find it extremely unlikely that an audit committee member is in any way involved in providing personal or other non-public information to editors, or in discussing any off-wiki “evidence”, but the editors are claiming such.

My questions:

  • Was a CU run against my account?
  • If yes, by whom and at who’s request?
  • What was the rationale for running the check (why was a check run)?
  • Did a CU provide personal or other non-public data of any kind, including insinuation or anything that could be interpreted as linking my account to others, to other editors off-wiki?

I request an Audit Subcommittee investigation of this situation and the involved editors' claims.

Thank you, Tgeairn (talk) 23:25, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank for this update on the status of things. I have assembled a partial list of diffs demonstrating where multiple editors have based statements on the supposed off-wiki statements of a committee member. Hopefully this list will assist in the investigation. Thanks again, Tgeairn (talk) 20:14, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Removal of The Beatles as terrorist group

Hi Dougweller, apologies, I removed that ref from Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant without checking if The Beatles was a terrorist group, looked like vandalism to me. I'l be more careful in future! Xtal42 (talk) 07:34, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Xtal42, no problem. Confused me at first too. Dougweller (talk) 09:59, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Edit summary removal for an edit

Hi there, Dougweller. I found your name on the Revision Deletion admin list. Would you mind taking a look at this edit and consider hiding the entirely unjustified attack on me in that edit summary? —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:36, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, —Largo Plazo, didn't notice this. I don't think it reaches the threshold but I've reinforced your talk page comment. Let me know if you want more attention from me. Dougweller (talk) 15:51, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
That's terrific, thanks! —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:36, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Ebla

Hello, today I created this article Ebla-Biblical controversy. This controversy was taking much space in the article of Ebla and it really dont have much to do with the city but with a modern ideological conflict. I moved all about the controversy from Ebla to the new article and wrote a small summary with a link to the new article. However, when I tried to do the same in Ebla tablets, a user was annoyed and he reverted. Now the new article looks like a fork. This user want the information to be repeated on both articles ! Isn't it forking ? I approached him on his talk page User talk:92slim, and in the Ebla Tablet talk Talk:Ebla tablets#WP:OR. Shouldent the infos in Ebla tablets be moved to the controversy article and a small summary be kept ?. Isnt this the procedure WP:Summaries ?--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 15:10, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Attar-Aram syria, looks like you all are discussing this now on the talk page. And do you know about WP:RFC? Dougweller (talk) 15:50, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes, its solved now, and I felt that I shouldn't have approached you for such a small problem. Apologies.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 16:10, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Attar-Aram syria, really not a problem. I can't always respond promptly, but I don't mind you bring even small problems here. Dougweller (talk) 17:14, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Cake

Supply Poodle

I tried to fix what I thought was a single instance of vandalism at Cake. I thought I was reverting to a good version; perhaps I got confused; if I did, I am sorry. I would never vandalize any article. Now I see that it is being vandalized over and over again by several different editors. Can you do something? CorinneSD (talk) 16:20, 11 March 2015 (UTC) P.S. You can see my good intentions at User talk:CorinneSD#Cake. CorinneSD (talk) 16:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

CorinneSD, we all do that sort of thing at times. I blocked a vandal there and protect the article for 3 years (again- the same type of candalism has been going on for quite a long time.). Dougweller (talk) 16:29, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. (cake + a few candles + vandalism = candalism - fm ur cmt ;) I hope my mistake won't count against me in any way. Is it all right if I go into the article, find the last good version, and revert to it? CorinneSD (talk) 16:32, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
CorinneSD Of course. Dougweller (talk) 17:07, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
How adorable is that poodle! What an expression! CorinneSD (talk) 21:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 March 2015

Titles

Hi Dougweller. I have a policy-related query I was hoping you could perhaps clarify for me. Let's say an editor proposes a page move to a title he or she believes is more appropriate. Is it normal policy-wise for any of the responding editors to then attempt to reorient the discussion by ignoring the proposed title and suggesting instead one of his or her own? I mean, isn't that like hijacking the move discussion? Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 15:43, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Not really, Middayexpress. Once anyone suggests that the existing title is in some way incorrect, it's relatively common for people to discuss more than one possible title. Dougweller (talk) 15:55, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 15:56, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

BC vs. BCE ("Prehistory")

Dougweller - thank you for your guidance re: the subject line. Dave Peters (talk) 21:03, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Aesop + Fables again (sigh!)

Hi, Dougweller. I see you left a comment on K._Q._Duane's talk page, about his intervention on the Aesop talk page. He mentioned first coming across CE dates while in Israel 'about 15 years ago'. User 74.105.5.116 claims much the same thing in his edit note for 11 March over on Aesop's Fables, except it's 20 years ago this time. Then we get User 76.168.96.219 starting up two days later. You're probably in a better position to check out collusion and stuff. All I know is that over the last month I've been making changes on WP from at least three machines as circumstances have dictated. Most times I logged in but I'm wondering whether someone is giving us the run-around. Thanks for your vigilance. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 00:24, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Mzilikazi1939, that's quite possible. At the moment one page is protected and I'm sure the other one will be if this continues. I'm an involved editor at both Aesop articles so can't take action myself. Do tell me or Bishonen if you see anything else odd. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 19:19, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:History of Scotland

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:History of Scotland. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion

I thought you might be interested in some of the discussion at the above, and, maybe, if there is anything you feel like adding to the discussion, you are obviously free to do so. John Carter (talk) 18:53, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Kemetism

Thank you for that. I left a message for you on my talk page, and a general comment on Talk:Kemetism which you might be interested in. Seemed like an amiable solution. Quinto Simmaco (talk) 14:31, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Misclick

Misclick, sorry! -- KTC (talk) 15:21, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

KTC, I figured as much. No problem, I've done that before. Dougweller (talk) 16:00, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

re. email

Doug, thanks for the email. I totally get what you say, and feel very similarly regarding the issues you raised so eloquently. When we next meet, let it be with continued respect and peace. (20040302 (talk) 17:26, 16 March 2015 (UTC))

Question

Hi, I really appreciated your help before. I noticed that you have a long presence within Wikipedia and I need help. I am currently having a problem with one user who keeps reverting sourced material (it seems to me based on his own perception) within the following articles:Sunni Islam in Lebanon and Shia Islam in Lebanon. Could you help me with this issue? Thanks in advance. MaronitePride (talk) 21:07, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

I am not sure why he is restoring copyrighted material especially since it blatantly violates WP:COPYRIGHT. Anyways, MaronitePride was already warned by you Dougweller just yesterday about copyright. See here: [60] Although I too made four reverts, according to WP:EDITWAR exempts include: "Removal of clear copyright violations". If this wasn't allowed I would have not done so. Also, I am not sure whether or not he is aware of source misrepresentation. He states that the claim that "within the Lebanese context, especially political, the group is seen as an ethnoreligious group" is sourced but neither "source" claims such a thing. He is also states that it's in the National Pact and the Lebanese Constitution when it's not. See here: National Pact and the Constitution. After clearly explaining to him what the problem is he still somehow doesn't get it. See here: "What's the problem?" He has also opted not to discuss the matter with me on the talk page. See here: [61] AcidSnow (talk) 21:08, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
[[User:AcidSnow|AcidSnow] No time for about 16 hours unless I'm lucky. I did revert some more copyvio and posted to his talk page. Dougweller (talk) 21:50, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
What? He has also engaged in WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH. See here: [62][63]. MaronitePride please provide proper page numbers for your "sources". AcidSnow (talk) 21:51, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm about to go to bed, then tomorrow morning I'm out, back after lunch. Books need page numbers. Dougweller (talk) 22:01, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
I see, goodnight. AcidSnow (talk) 22:04, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Hel (being)

Dougweller, could you take a look at the article and the associated talk page? It seems to me, at least in my opinion, an editor is exercising WP:OWN. He keeps referring me to the talk page, apparently for consensus, but it seems he's both editing against previously established consensus, and to things that were never even actually discussed. He removed every category the article had, most that have been static for twelve years, because he objected to Hel being called anything but a "being(?- I believe the only instance of this on Wikipedia)". Take a look, especially at my last comment. I'm absolutely baffled, as there was never any such consensus. It appears that most users actually opposed his ideas, and only he and another editor wanted to call it "being", and moved it to that location, and reverted others. I absolutely loathe contentious editing, but given my interests, I guess I'm going to run into this more often than not. GregKaye is trying to unify the article dab naming, as per Wikiproject Religion, and I'm trying to get the categories restored, so that it's not without any categories. He doesn't seem to be responding to any requests for discussion. Thank you, in advance. Quinto Simmaco (talk) 17:38, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

This relates to my own comment above. OK, I guess I can grant that there might be a question as to whether this page is right about Hel the entity being a personification of the Underworld, but the fact that GregKaye seems to believe, without any apparent support, that he is justified in his claims of NPOV being the driving factor for removing "myth" and related words from articles, despite the fact that such terminology is used, well, everywhere else, including the major reference works related to these topics, and thus qualifies as COMMONNAME, makes me think that there might be grounds for ANI discussion here regarding an editor who seems to perhaps think his personal POV regarding NPOV takes priority over CONSENSUS and possibly pretty much everything else. John Carter (talk) 17:56, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
You might also want to see the latest contributions by the editor in question. I'm beginning to wonder whether some sort of broader discussion at perhaps a noticeboard regarding his recent history of attempting to establish his own view in policy and guidelines might not, sometime soon, be indicated. John Carter (talk) 22:50, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Aryan

I am unsure how one can determine whether it was one person or the other who 'started' an Edit War, but I do not see a "talk" option in the page: Aryan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pahlavan Qahremani (talk • contribs) 14:52, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

See under Iran etymology. Under Aryan Etymology. Check reference in Airyanem Vaejah. Indo-Aryan languages is listed under Indo-Iranian languages on its own page. The areas listed within are best summarized as Greater Iran and South Asia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pahlavan Qahremani (talk • contribs) 15:09, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I'm new here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaumeAl (talk • contribs) 17:27, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Dr Ben'S DEATH

How did you finf d out about Dr Ben's death? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.83.124 (talk) 21:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

someone added it without a source to the info box, so I just did a Google search. Dougweller (talk) 21:12, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Reference desk

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Reference desk. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Just a forewarning: it's a bit of a madhouse, and not the fun type. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 28 Adar 5775 21:57, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

SPLC

Gee, I injected my own opinion about SPLC and ADL because the articles involved have their own biased POV about the subjects of those articles, in which they are characterized as allegedly "right-wing." I will keep editing them until you stop labeling those persons and organizations as such or allow for parity. Wikipedia has a reputation now as the province of left-wing petty tyrants masquerading as editors. ESAD, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.215.242.83 (talk • contribs)

Adding your own opinion is a violation of basic policies WP:VERIFY and WP:NOR. The articles you are discussing are John Tanton, who is not described as right-wing, a term not even in his article, NumbersUSA also not described as right-wing, and Virginia Abernethy. She's described as a leader of the radical right (which she might well agree with, by the way), but we don't call her right-wing, we say that the SPLC sees her as a leader. In all the discussions we've had about the SPLC it's been agreed that it is a reliable source for such descriptions as long was we make we attribute them to the SPLC and don't state as fact that the subject is, eg, right-wing. And the lead to her article says nothing about her being right-wing, that's a mention further down. Copying this to the IP's talk page. Dougweller (talk) 07:06, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

interests

I just want to fuck your sister, and laugh at you activists, I mean no harm to anyone. You don't want none (Jewish provocateurs) won't be none. Take care

I don't have a problem with Jews, it's the Zionism and Templars shit they try to run my life with. Can't even work cuz of it.

Clear enough to add to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Unavailable.undisclosed. Dougweller (talk) 12:18, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 March 2015

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:34, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

.

Please comment on Talk:2015 University of Oklahoma Sigma Alpha Epsilon racism incident

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2015 University of Oklahoma Sigma Alpha Epsilon racism incident. Legobot (talk) 00:06, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Doug_Weller/Archive_36&oldid=1160124845"