User talk:Mrjulesd/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 < Archive 1    Archive 2    Archive 3 >
All Pages:  1 -  2 -  3 -  4 -  5 -  6 -  7 -  8 -  ... (up to 100)


Thanks from MOTD and Happy 2014!

Thank you for your help and support at Motto of the Day in 2014. Our best wishes for the New Year. We hope to see you around in 2015. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:25, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Happy New Year Pjoef!

Thank you, Mr. Jules D.! Best wishes for the New Year, I hope your best dreams come true. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Dear Mrjulesd,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--FWiW Bzuk (talk)

This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").

The Signpost: 31 December 2014

The Signpost: 07 January 2015

The Signpost: 14 January 2015

Another failed notification

Hi, if you're still collecting data about pings that didn't work, this edit containing a perfectly well-formatted ping attempt did not generate a notification for me. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 03:22, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MANdARAX Yeah I'm still interested. Thanks for that, and also our earlier discussions. The diff looks fine and should have generated a ping I think.
I've got a couple of questions, if you could answer them I would be grateful.
(a) Have you ever experienced missed pings from messages on "User talk:" namespaces at all? As far as I'm aware this has never happened to me, but of course it could have happened and I didn't notice.
(b) I recently failed to get a ping for this diff on the Village Pump (technical): [1]. I was wondering: you were also mentioned in it, did you receive a ping at all? I think maybe the reason is that apparently he only uses three tildes to generate a signature, but there is some sort of code in it that generates a timestamp. He explained it here: [2]. Or it could be unconnected to this. ----Mrjulesd (talk) 14:28, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(a) Well, in case you hadn't noticed, my diff above is for a "User talk" page. I think there may have been others, but I really don't recall for sure. (b) As I noted on the VP page, I did not receive a notification either. I don't know how he generates a timestamp within his signature; as far as I know, the Preferences page does not allow you to include any templates or parser functions in your signature. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:40, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
MANdARAX (a) You're right, I didn't notice. Thanks for pointing it out. (b) Well whatever code he's using I think it's not working for him correctly, as far as pings are concerned.
Anyway, you've probably seen Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Phabricator report, there is already a couple of bugs open on Phabricator for this already. Also an interesting proposal that maybe the sender can get feedback over whether a ping has "worked". I've added some diffs to to the bug which hopefully might help. I haven't really been able to get a particular pattern for it happening unfortunately, it seems to be mostly random. I don't think there is much more I can do, unless you can think of anything. But I'll keep an eye on those bugs and hopefully something will come of it. --Mrjulesd (talk) 01:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 January 2015

"Topic" ban

Hello. Did you miss this (to which I've just added a response)..?

Regards, Sardanaphalus (talk) 14:50, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sardanaphalus . Yes I read your comments, but I'm afraid I wasn't swayed by them. Now you may agree or disagree with some or all of my comments, but you should at least accept that I was being sincere in my views expressed, as I can assure you that this is the case.
Look, what I would suggest you do is to say to Edokter that you are prepared to be mentored by Technical 13 to avoid a TBan. Technical 13 has kindly agreed to do this on your behalf. Now even if a TBan is imposed, you should still see if you can work in partnership with Technical 13. If that was successful, then a successful appeal to any TBan may be possible.
I think what is needed from you is a little humility, and an acceptance that some (but certainly not all) of your work has been sub-standard, and that you will make efforts to improve by collaboration with other template editors. Posting proposed changes on a talk page before you make them would go a long way in persuading other editors that you are sincere in this regard. Also I feel you should refrain from template editing while this ANI is active. --Mrjulesd (talk) 18:01, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I apologize if something I've done suggests that I think you – or anyone – weren't/aren't being sincere. I also apologize if the post I added to the ANI thread seems meant to sway people.
Thanks for recommending the mentorship. Perhaps you meant to suggest that I put it to Mr. Stradivarius and/or anyone reading the ANI thread..?
I'm sorry if it appears that I'm lacking humility. I appreciated your contributions to the other ANI thread (mentioned by Mr. Stradivarius in his proposal).
Sincerely, Sardanaphalus (talk) 14:58, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Sardanaphalus thanks for your message. I'd like to make a number of points.
  1. I haven't felt that you have doubted my sincerity. It was just that I felt that you might not agree with my views. So no aplogy on that score is needed.
  2. Look I've got to say that the tone of this message is exactly right. You've got to post something like this at ANI, I'm afraid your apologies so far at ANI feel a little half-hearted.
  3. Obviously I can't influence what will happen at ANI. But if you suggest something like mentorship I think you've got a good chance. But even if the TBan took place you could probably work with Technical 13. And if that was successful after a few months you might be able to reverse the TBan. I think Technical 13 has a lot of clout, and if he could vouch for improvement then it could go a long way. --Mrjulesd (talk) 17:26, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 January 2015

The Signpost: 04 February 2015

The Signpost: 11 February 2015

The Signpost: 18 February 2015


Advice on dealing with sock puppets

If you are concerned that someone is a sockpuppet, the best thing to do is to use the process at WP:SPI. I recommend spending time building up a case for why you think someone is a sockpuppet. At all stages ask yourself, would someone uninvolved be convinced of this. You may want to use a personal sandbox to help you edit your posting.

(I have created a link that if you use it will create a personal sandbox for you.)

I found that grumbling about someone being a sockpuppet on noticeboards such as WP:ANI, is worse than ineffective. When I did it, it made me look bad. If someone really is using sockpuppets abusively, the process at WP:SPI is the best way of dealing with them.-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:59, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

The Signpost: 04 March 2015

Invitation

A gummi bear holding a sign that says "Thank you"
Thank you for using VisualEditor and sharing your ideas with the developers.

Hello, Mrjulesd,

The Editing team is asking for your help with VisualEditor. I am contacting you because you have switched out of VisualEditor several times. Please tell them what they need to change to make VisualEditor work for you, so that you didn't need to switch to the wikitext editor. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and try to fix these small things, too.

You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.

More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:57, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Done --Mrjulesd (talk) 00:43, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Posts like this

A post of yours was pointed out to me: this. When I see things like that, it really does help to keep me from walking away from the editing end of Wiki. It can be depressing to see that some folks who are adequate at content editing, have absolutely no social or people skills whatsoever. Running across people like you however; make it a pleasure to see the better parts of humanity. Thank you. — Ched :  ?  03:12, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

good faith
Thank you, editor interested in languages, with a helpful clear user page, for your disclaimer, for welcoming users, adding details and templates, supporting a neutral pov, for assuming good faith, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:11, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jules

Hi Jules, I'm Kevin. I rolled-back your edit to IDoH's userpage. Meant to drop you a note earlier but got distracted. While the horizontal stacks of userboxes didn't display well on a small screen, I did think your organizing them into categories with subsection headings seemed like a good idea. However I was unsure how to adapt it to the present layout so I reverted, rather than adapted. Would you perhaps be able to adapt the organizational aspect to the present vertical sequential layout? You seem to have a broader grasp of formatting with wikimarkup than I do and I look forward to an opportunity to learn by example. --Kevjonesin (talk) 06:24, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Kevjonesin: Hi Kevin. I'm afraid I don't really agree with your view. On my system at least, having a lower resolution merely leads to horizontal scroll bar in the browser, and is far from "an awkward side-scrolling jumble on low-res (netbook) screens". I don't know what config you have but I do not feel it is a common one. And can't you see that having several columns of userboxes would lead to an identical issue?
I really feel that the best thing would be for me to get Idoh's view on the matter. If she is favorable to my views on userbox organization then I would be likely to return to my preferred layout, and I would hope you would respect her wishes. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 18:46, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't intend to suggest categorized vertical columns lain out side-by-side, but rather category headings within the existing vertical display. I've some ideas for possible 'hack' solutions ... As it seems you may be disinclined to collaborate on this, I'll likely just copy some stuff to a sandbox and play around a bit on my own. Mrjulesd, it seems you may have inspired a learning adventure. Thank you, --Kevjonesin (talk) 22:22, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please Review articles !!

Dear Sir,

Thanks for your advise. Please review the artiles updated and submitted.

These are genuine in nature and few immediate reference to verify by testimonials may not be presently available. However in my opinion and others in their respective field and profession state that there is sufficient scope for this to be published which will certainely be of good reference for the next generation.

Such autheticated information from my side will be truely justifiable and shall ensure apt accuracy from my side before submission and shall adhear to the credentials of Wikipedia.

More relevand source of material shall be added and edited from time to time.

Kindly advise.

Regards.

PS Prasad Warrier.. ref< https://in.linkedin.com/pub/--s-prasadwarrier/39/61b/730.& ref< www.google.com/+prasadwarrierpsprasad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PS Prasad Warrier (talk • contribs) 04:29, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bots


You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages ), it's time to fix your code!

Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.

Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration motion regarding Arbitration enforcement

By motion, the Arbitration Committee authorises the following injunction effective immediately:

  1. The case is to be opened forthwith and entitled "Arbitration enforcement";
  2. During the case, no user who has commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page, may take or initiate administrative action involving any of the named parties in this case.
  3. Reports of alleged breaches of (2) are to be made only by email to the Arbitration Committee, via the main contact page.

You are receiving this message because you have commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page and are therefore restricted as specified in (2). For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration enforcement arbitration case opened

By motion, the committee authorises the following injunction effective immediately:

  1. The [Arbitration enforcement] case [request] is to be opened forthwith and entitled "Arbitration enforcement";
  2. During the case, no user who has commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page, may take or initiate administrative action involving any of the named parties in this case.
  3. Reports of alleged breaches of (2) are to be made only by email to the Arbitration Committee, via the main contact page.

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has, per the above, accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Evidence. Please add your evidence by July 13, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. Apologies for the potential duplicate message. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:43, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Change from announced time table for the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case

You are receiving this message either because you are a party to the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case, because you have commented in the case request, or the AN or AE discussions leading to this arbitration case, or because you have specifically opted in to receiving these messages. Unless you are a party to this arbitration case, you may opt out of receiving further messages at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Notification list. The drafters of the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case have published a revised timetable for the case, which changes what you may have been told when the case was opened. The dates have been revised as follows: the Evidence phase will close 5 July 2015, one week earlier than originally scheduled; the Workshop phase will close 26 July 2015, one week later than originally scheduled; the Proposed decision is scheduled to be posted 9 August 2015, two weeks later than originally scheduled. Thank you. On behalf of the arbitration clerks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Strong reactions

Well, mine was just normal, - when I notice a candidacy for admin I look up Precious. On top of that, Rich was my lone supporter for the message remembered on top of my talk (archived on my user under "flower", in case I change), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Me too Gerda! I think we're among the calmer ones on here. Keep calm and carry on...
Well I felt instinctively right about Rich. I read some of the ArbCom case and somehow it just didn't seem right. Maybe he's better without automation, but if he doesn't go there I think he has a heck of a lot of good intentions and actions for the place. I also believe people can learn from mistakes, I certainly have. But as you said before I do like to assume good faith! --Jules (Mrjulesd) 21:48, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I try to learn, - today I enjoyed quoting "unbearably ridiculous and detestable" ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:05, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Pavlov's RfA reward

Thank for !voting at my recent RfA. You voted Support so you get a whopping three cookies, fresh from the oven!
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 18:50, 16 July 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Read my mind

You read my mind, closing the ANI thread in which I had compassion with the victim and suggested a slightly different wording, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:45, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration case opened

You may opt-out of future notification regarding this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 8, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:43, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're Invited!

{{WPW Referral}}

Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration case proposed decision posted

Hi Mrjulesd. A decision has been proposed in the Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration case, for which you are on the notification list. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 20:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC) (via MediaWiki message delivery (talk))[reply]

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 October 19#Template:Tracy Hepburn films

Since you participated in the previous discussion regarding the above topic, its revival may be of interest. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 02:26, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vested contributors arbitration case opened

You may opt-out of future notifications related to this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 5, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 01:19, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vested contributors retitled Arbitration enforcement 2

You may opt-out of future notifications related to this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 5, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. For this case, there will be no Workshop phase. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 12:40, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 22 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:08, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration enforcement 2 case closed

You are receiving this message because you are a party or offered a preliminary statement and/or evidence in the Arbitration enforcement 2 case. This is a one-time message.

The Arbitration enforcement 2 arbitration case (t) (ev / t) (w / t) (pd / t) has been closed, and the following remedies have been enacted:

1.1) The Arbitration Committee confirms the sanctions imposed on Eric Corbett as a result of the Interactions at GGTF case, but mandates that all enforcement requests relating to them be filed at arbitration enforcement and be kept open for at least 24 hours.

3) For his breaches of the standards of conduct expected of editors and administrators, Black Kite is admonished.

6) The community is reminded that discretionary sanctions have been authorised for any page relating to or any edit about: (i) the Gender Gap Task Force; (ii) the gender disparity among Wikipedians; and (iii) any process or discussion relating to these topics, all broadly construed.

For the Arbitration Committee, Kharkiv07 (T) 02:41, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Arbitration enforcement 2 case closed
May our mouth be full of laughter, a comment from a psalm, with music 290 years old today, Forget arbcom (I didn't keep that on my talk), and celebrate Christmas! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:24, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your readdition of the contentious material on Star Wars: The Force Awakens.

Please read WP:STATUSQUO. From that you will see: During a dispute, until a consensus is established to make a change, the status quo reigns. We are in a dispute. Check. We don't have consensus (that's what we are discussing), so the status quo reigns. And that status quo is not including the "also known as" text. If you can't accept that, please refrain from continuing to edit on the article. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:42, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mrjulesd/Archive_2&oldid=1146769061"