User talk:Steven Crossin/Archive 51

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Signpost: 12 November 2012[edit]

Adoption[edit]

Hi! I'm a new user on Wikipedia, and would like to be adopted and take your course. What do I need to do to become adopted by you? B. Jakob T. (talk) 21:57, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there...sorry about the delay. If you wanted to take the course, just introduce yourself here, and we can get started on the policies lesson :) Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 17:55, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, my username is B. Jakob T., but my signature looks like this: Jakob. I have been on Wikipedia since the 19th of October, and I have attempted to create one article, but it wasn't notable enough. I am currently trying to create this. I would like to contribute to articles, i.e. fixing grammatical errors or removing disambiguation, and I would also like to fight vandalism. Thanks, Jakob 21:17, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

British & Irish topic ban repeal?[edit]

Howdy Steven. Would you & DBD review my contributions? see if I'm reformed? GoodDay (talk) 19:41, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I made comments but as I'm unlikely to be active enough to debate them I've withdrawn them by "rollback". Consider them stricken. Pedro :  Chat  21:03, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I read the comments Pedro made, and he makes a good point. I think you should consider taking them on board. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 17:58, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I read Pedro's (now deleted) posts, too. I'm not certain as to what my self-declaration of being a Canadian republican, has to do with British & Irish articles. FWIW, I don't make pro-republican edits or arguments at Canadian monarchial articles. GoodDay (talk) 07:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May I please have my topic ban lifted? I wish to expand my gnome edits. GoodDay (talk) 02:36, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is your evidence that you are a reformed character? Assume we haven't been watching closely; do the work for us. DBD 11:56, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here's 3 examples: [1], [2] & [3]. GoodDay (talk) 16:03, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's almost Christmas, and I'm in a generous mood, and while I've not had any angry mobs on my talk page for some time, it might be best to provide more info as DBD asks above. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 12:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Over 90% of my contributions have been gnome style. My edit summaries will lead you to them: Fix intro, The article 'is' the biography, Removing empty sections etc etc. GoodDay (talk) 15:51, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've given 3 examples. Do you both require more? and if so, how many? GoodDay (talk) 02:33, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here's 3 more [4], [5] & [6], there's more on the way. It may take awhile, but I'll give yas over 50 for starters. Other then that, I not completely certain as to what you're both looking for. GoodDay (talk) 08:48, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How about an argument against? Pick someone whom you've rubbed up the wrong way before and ask them to provide us with reasons (and evidence) why not. DBD 12:12, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't going to comment when I saw this pop up on my watch list because it gets tired having to see the same thing over and over. But seeing the DBD mentioned having someone who had issues with him in the past provide reasons why not. I can say just looking at his current talk page alone and not doing any further digging than that I can find no less than 5 threads going back only to the 29th of November warning him for the same behaviour that lead to both of his topic bans. User talk:GoodDay#Associate justices of the Supreme Court of the US, User talk:GoodDay#A fair warning, User talk:GoodDay#NLP, User talk:GoodDay#Scott, User talk:GoodDay#WP:OPENPARA. I should note I won't get any further into the situation here. I am sure if he went to AN to try and have the topic ban removed others would find a lot more than that if they looked through his edit history. -DJSasso (talk) 13:37, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
May I point out Dan, all but the NLP issue was resolved & within a short period of time. There's going to always be editors who'll throw negativity at me or try & keep me down. I'm not going to humiliate myself by kissing their asses. But I will avoid those continuing disputes on the British & Irish articles. Disputes like 1) What to name Derry, 2) Is a person British or Welsh, 3) Is Scotland a country or constituent country, 4) What is Northern Ireland -- questions such as these are no longer relevant to me. Furthermore, if you recall, some of the editors who agreed to the topic-ban, did so because I agreed to it - remeber the result was 50/50. Otherwise, I never would've been banned in the first place. GoodDay (talk) 16:06, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here's 4 more examples [7], [8], [9] & [10] of the types of edits I wish to make on British & Irish articles. GoodDay (talk) 23:32, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing my appeal. I thought these community topic-bans were suppose to be preventative, not punitive :( GoodDay (talk) 06:32, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we are making it punitive. You've shown places that you've done gnome edits, and that's great, but the reason you were topic banned from these articles is because of how you interacted with others, and because of your attitudes. What I want to know is what's changed with how you deal people? What will you do differently to avoid conflict with other users? Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 07:47, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Along with respecting the aforementioned 4 conditions, I won't be immediately reverting editors who revert my edits & will respect the D in BRD more closely. Furthermore, I'll make greater efforts to AGF with disputing editors. GoodDay (talk) 08:00, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Steven - I made a suggestion to GoodDay about restrictions and mentoring here which he accepted. I may regret it, but willing to give it a go. What do you think? ----Snowded TALK 07:03, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I look forward to seeing it going well. DBD 12:36, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
@Snowded, the conditions seem reasonable. If you could please keep an eye on GoodDay on these articles (I will do my best to as well) and let me know if there are any problems. @GoodDay, your topic ban is lifted subject to the restrictions imposed by Snowded. Please be very careful. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 02:12, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. GoodDay (talk) 04:59, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 November 2012[edit]

User:Dennis Brown/RfA/Steven Zhang[edit]

Due to your prior request, I have started an RfA review for you. I have others ongoing as well, and may not get them completed in order. I will notify you when I'm done, but may also notify you if I (or others) have questions for you to answer. For now, I would request you go and answer the existing questions at the bottom of the review page. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:28, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there...thanks so much, but for the time being, I think I need to focus all my energy on rounding up my fellowship. I'll have much more free time once that's concluded. Raincheck? Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 11:04, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
By all means. Ping me when you are ready, I will be happy to review at any time. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 17:20, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 November 2012[edit]

Information[edit]

I noticed your username commenting at an Arbcom discussion regarding civility. An effort is underway that would likely benifit if your views were included. I hope you will append regards at: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questionnaire Thank you for considering this request. My76Strat (talk) 08:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 03 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 10 December 2012[edit]


did you vote?[edit]

hi there, your vote in ArbCom elections triggered a spoof CSRF alarm. Would you be so kind as to please confirm that you actually voted? :) Apologies for the inconvenience. Pundit|utter 07:33, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to be always causing trouble nowadays ;-). Yes, I confirm that I did vote in the election (I have no idea what that alarm is though :-)) Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 08:33, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Winter Wonderland[edit]

Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension.

Happy Holidays. ```Buster Seven Talk 15:25, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Policies Lesson[edit]

Many policies on Wikipedia are important. Some, like staying civil, signing your post on talk pages, and not vandalizing, are common sense.

However, other policies, such as sourcing, are not as clear. This policy states that you should not make edits that make claims or state facts if you do not have a reliable source. The trick part comes in when you ask the question, what is considered reliable? Sources like Twitter or Myspace are definitely not.

Another policy that is not very clear is notability. This states that if it does not have enough reliable sources to back it up, then it is not worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia.

To sum it up, policies try to keep Wikipedia an encyclopedia, not an advertising noticeboard, and also just to remind users to use common sense. Jakob 15:23, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's good. When you say the policy is unclear, do you mean you don't understand the meaning of it, or you just feel it's vague/unclear? If it's the former, please let me know and I'll try and explain it to you a bit better. If it's the latter, well, a lot of policies are a bit vague, but it's more important at times to follow the spirit of policy, rather than just what it says (the "letter"). But it seems like you've grasped the basics. Let me know when you want to move on to another lesson. Regards, Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 12:00, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for responding so late... When I said unclear, I meant that it's vague, but I understand the spirit. Sure, I'm ready to move on to the next lesson. –Jakob 15:23, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, read over the Vandalism 1.1 lesson - let me know when you've read it and I'll give you the test. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 22:45, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Do you want me to do what you say in the lesson, like, finding three vandalizing edits? Oh, and I use Mozilla Firefox as my browser. Jakob 15:58, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 December 2012[edit]

Letting you know.[edit]

I've made one last request to Djsasso, to leave me alone. GoodDay (talk) 21:36, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation for Jerusalem[edit]

Regarding your suggestion for mediation for Jerusalem, I agree with you that mediation would probably be better. The talk page of the article right now is a disaster, very disjointed and hard to follow, and I imagine the RfC would look no worse. There are already too many cooks in the kitchen, and I doubt anyone else would want to enter. Not to mention that participation in past RfCs hasn't exactly been a cross-section of the Wikipedia community.

But if ArbCom can't enjoin mediation, so you say, um... how would we get mediation? Mediation was attempted just last month, and it was rejected. If mediation isn't involuntary, we could conceivably (perhaps likely) face the same problem, with some people not wanting to participate (thereby preventing the RfM from being accepted). And how would its results be assured to have permanence? -- tariqabjotu 06:02, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Mediation can happen anywhere - it doesn't have to be at MedCom. I'm not naive enough to think such a mediation would resolve the dispute alone (you never know, anything is possible) but I think it is best that we try and work through proposed lede sections and get a few alternatives, then take those to a binding RFC. It's worked well in the past, and I think it'd work well here. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 06:08, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, it doesn't have to. But you'd have to agree it'd be a bit odd for MedCom to reject this issue only for it to be mediated anyway (esp. since I saw the conversation that led to it being rejected). I won't say who that reflects poorly upon... In that case, I don't see why -- if you're up for the challenge -- you wouldn't just give it a shot. Right now, the discussion is in dire need of structure, if nothing else. The state of the talk page now is a set of threads and subthreads running in parallel (or perpendicular perhaps). It's hard to follow what's going on, and it's not clear which ideas are floating to the top. -- tariqabjotu 06:27, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think the problem is that there's no forum that will serve as a location for the dispute. I have no problems creating structure and ground rules, and getting people to compromise, but the Mediation Cabal (where I used to do all informal mediation) was closed earlier this year, so it only leaves us with a few venues. You mention there was a conversation which led to the MedCom request being rejected? Do you mind showing me that discussion? Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 11:50, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What's wrong with doing it on the talk page or a subpage of the talk page? The conversation I was talking about was on the MedCom mailing list (as I am a member of the Committee, and thus am on the list), so I obviously can't show it to you. I don't mean to imply there was anything unusual or damning there, though; I just mean I observed some of the thought process that led to the RfM's rejection. -- tariqabjotu 15:31, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I totaly agree with Tariqabjotu's comments here above. I wrote the same to the ArbCom too.
RfC is difficult to manage. We can already see this on the talk page. Only a Mediation can solve the issue even if this also will be difficult to manage.
What is demoralizing is also that it just concerns 1 sentence (at best 1 paragraph) in a lead.
Reasonnable people could solve this in 15 minutes with some good will.
I suggest that the whole discussion is brought to a dedicated talk page or forum with special rules in particular regarding the interferences of people clearly would not want to discuss a constructive way.
Pluto2012 (talk) 15:09, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thought about this for a while, but I think that my best course of action to proceed would be for me to try and be a closer of the RFC. I put my name forward so I will see how that goes, I guess. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 22:44, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BigzMMA accusation - again![edit]

Hello Steve, not too sure if you remember but a few months ago you were asked by User:Dennis Brown to give him your opinion over whether you believe that a blocked user called BigzMMA and myself were one in a same person.

Well now another SPI has been opened with very little more 'evidence' to this theory to say that we are the same. I am writing to ask if you could contribute to the case. I am not expecting you to defend me, but considering that you are indeed neutral to this situation (Dennis Brown did say that he felt that we are the same person), your opinion would be the most fairest, regardless of whether you don't believe I am BigzMMA or I am. Here is the link for the SPI, so when you get a minute if you could contribute to the case I would very much appreciate it. Thank you. Pound4Pound (talk) 10:53, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Holiday cheer[edit]

Holiday Cheer
Michael Q. Schmidt my talk page is wishing you 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 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. Share the good feelings.

The Signpost: 24 December 2012[edit]

SPI clerking[edit]

Steven, given you have only made three edits in the last three months to SPI cases, it appears you are mostly inactive as an SPI clerk now. Please stand down as a clerk or move yourself to inactive (whichever you prefer) so that we can get a better idea of how many active clerks we have. Thanks. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 16:06, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dan. SPI is something I actually want to get back into in the new year. I'll move myself to inactive for now but will be active again within the next month. Hope you had a good Christmas. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 22:17, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Feel free to move yourself back to active once you return to activity. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 15:02, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Meetup invitation: Melbourne 26[edit]

Hi there! You are cordially invited to a meetup next Sunday (6 January). Details and an attendee list are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Melbourne 26. Hope to see you there! John Vandenberg 06:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in Victoria)

G'day[edit]

Looking at the recent contributions of GoodDay, who lists you as a mentor, I note a series of minor edits to several people who happen to share the same name as a close family member. He has also made several provocative posts over the past few days, trying to draw my attention on trivia and being generally disruptive. The Redirect thing is a case in point.

This is a disturbing trend, and if you could keep an eye on him, I would be grateful. --Pete (talk) 17:24, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How is nominating a redirect for deletion, disruptive? GoodDay (talk) 20:12, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya Steven. I don't understand his "...close family member" comment, but I've gotten over my frustrations with his SPA-style. I'm re-concentrating on my gnoming. GoodDay (talk) 19:20, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 December 2012[edit]

EditorReviewArchiver: Automatic processing of your editor review[edit]

This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 8 January 2013 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7 days. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding <!--noautoarchive--> to the review page will prevent further automated actions. AnomieBOT⚡ 23:26, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 07 January 2013[edit]

Advice[edit]

Sorry to bother you, as I would imagine you've got plenty of other things going on, but I've noticed that you're involved in DR and wondered if you could offer any advice here. There has recently been a contentious discussion at the administrators' noticeboard stemming from the Apteva RfC. I don't think that the status quo over there (deliberating over potential sanctions and occasionally charged discussions about exactly who is correct on certain issues) is going to solve the problem; the problem arises from a persistent band of users who dislike elements of the MoS.

My question is this: what steps would you suggest we (those involved in this discussion) take to resolve the dispute at the root of the commotion? If this isn't very clear, or if you aren't able to reply, please let me know (it's no big deal). Thanks, dci | TALK 02:11, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Sorry about the delay. Having a neutral party guide the discussion into the right direction is generally a good way of keeping things focused. Do you have a neutral party involved? Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 02:44, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I am a neutral party, as are a few of the other editors who have become involved in the current, somewhat quieted discussion. Our main problem has become how best to wrap the issue up. dci | TALK 01:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neophyte has questions about Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#talk:Paul_Krugman[edit]

I would like to ask questions about a dispute resolution RfC, that I initiated, currently under discussion at Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#talk:Paul_Krugman. I am unfamiliar with the dispute resolution noticeboard RfC process and am contacting you per your listing at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Volunteering#List_of_the_DRN_volunteers. Am I asking these question in the right place?

1) The RfC in question seems to be an "Opening comments" phase.

2) As the initiator of the RfC, should I add an Opening comment? When is it proper for me to enter the discussion?

3) Are the phases (e.g. "Opening comments") of the RfC process documented? Where?

4) Will I be messaged/notified when my input is needed?

5) I initiated the RfC on the narrow topic of a specific undone edit, the reason given for that undo, and subsequent discussion of the undo reason on the article's talk page. My reading of the RfC opening comments suggest that some participants are addressing broader, article-level, not edit-level issues. How do I determine what the scope of the RfC is/should be? Who/what specifies the scope of the RfC and associated discussion?

Hello there. With DRN, it's not structured like an RFC at all, it's completely different and volunteers should be able to assist with this for you if it hasn't already been sorted. Regards, Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 02:44, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Deicas (talk) 03:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassadors update[edit]

Hi! You're getting this message because you are or have been a Wikipedia Ambassador. A new term is beginning for the United States and Canada Education Programs, and I wanted to give you an update on some important new information if you're interested in continuing your work this term as a Wikipedia Ambassador.

You may have heard a reference to a transition the education program is going through. This is the last term that the Wikimedia Foundation will directly run the U.S. and Canada programs; beginning in June, a proposed thematic organization is likely to take over organizing the program. You can read more about the proposal here.

Another major change in the program will take effect immediately. Beginning this term, a new MediaWiki education extension will replace all course pages and Ambassador lists. (See Wikipedia:Course pages and Help:Education Program extension for more details.) Included in the extension are online volunteer and campus volunteer user rights, which let you create and edit course pages and sign up as an ambassador for a particular course.

If you would like to continue serving as a Wikipedia Ambassador — even if you do not support a class this term — you must create an ambassador profile. If you're no longer interested in being a Wikipedia Ambassador, you don't need to do anything.

Please do these steps as soon as possible

First, you need the relevant user rights for Online and/or Campus Ambassadors. (If you are an admin, you can grant the rights yourself, for you as well as other ambassadors.) Just post your rights request here, and we'll get you set up as quickly as possible.

Once you've got the ambassador rights, please set up at a Campus and/or Online Ambassador profile. You can do so at:

Going forward, the lists of Ambassadors at Special:CampusAmbassadors and Special:OnlineAmbassadors will be the official roster of who is an active Ambassador. If you would like to be an Ambassador but not ready to serve this term, you can un-check the option in your profile to publicly list it (which will remove your profile from the list).

After that, you can sign on to support courses. The list of courses will be at Special:Courses. (By default, this lists "Current" courses, but you can change the Status filter to "Planned" to see courses for this term that haven't reached their listed start date yet.)

As this is the first term we have used the extension, we know there will be some bugs, and we know the feature set is not as rich as it could be. (A big wave of improvements is already in the pipeline. And if you know MediaWiki and could help with code review, we'd love to have your help!) Please reach out to me (Sage Ross) with any complaints, bug reports, and feature suggestions. The basic features of the extension are documented at Wikipedia:Course pages, and you can see a tutorial for setting up and using them here.

Communication and keeping up to date

In the past, the Education Program has had a pretty fragmented set of communication channels. We're trying to fix that. These are the recommended places to discuss and stay up-to-date on the education program:

  1. The education noticeboard has become the main on-wiki location for discussion of the Education Program. You can post there about broad education program issues as well as issues with individual courses.
  2. The Ambassadors Announce email list is a very low-traffic announcements list of important information all Ambassadors need to be aware of. We encourage all Ambassadors (and other interested Wikipedians) to subscribe to the list; follow the instructions on the link to add your email address.
  3. If you use IRC regularly, or need to try to reach someone immediately, the #wikipedia-en-ambassadors connect IRC channel is the place to find me and fellow Ambassadors.
Ambassador training and resources

We now have an online training for Ambassadors, which is intended to be both an orientation about the Wikipedia Ambassador role for newcomers and the manual for how to do the role. (There are parallel trainings for students and for educators as well.)

Please go through the training if you feel like you need a refresher on how a typical class is supposed to go and where the Ambassadors fit in, or if you want to review and help improve it. If there's something you'd like to see added, or other suggestions you have for it, feel free to edit the training and/or leave feedback. A primer on setting up and using course pages is included in the educators' training.

The Resources page of the training is the main place for Ambassador-related resources. If there's something you think is important as a resource that's not on there, please add it.

Finally, whether or not you work with any classes this term, I encourage you to post entries to the Trophy Case whenever you see excellent work from students or if you have great examples from past semesters. And, as always, let students (and other editors!) know when they do things well; a little WikiLove goes a long way!

--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 20:45, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice to DR/N volunteers! Dispute resolution discussions need attention[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there are currently discussions at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard which require the attention of a volunteer. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. Below this message is the DR/N status update.

You are recieving this notification to request assistance at the DR/N where you are listed as a volunteer. The number of cases has either become too large and/or there are many cases shaded with an alert status. Those shaded pink are marked as: "This request requires a volunteer's attention". Those shaded blue have had a volunteers attention recently

Case Created Last volunteer edit Last modified
Title Status User Time User Time User Time
Talk:LiveJasmin#Latest proposed_"Controversy"_section_improved_after_a_number_of_suggestions_from_the_community Closed Alexfotios (t) 21 days, 11 hours Snowmanonahoe (t) 19 days, 20 hours Snowmanonahoe (t) 19 days, 20 hours
Rafida New Albertatiran (t) 18 days, 19 hours Robert McClenon (t) 3 hours Shadowwarrior8 (t) 14 minutes
Aisha Closed Hakikatco (t) 6 days, 7 hours Robert McClenon (t) 3 days, 16 hours Robert McClenon (t) 3 days, 16 hours

If you would like a regularly-updated copy of this status box on your user page or talk page, put {{DRN case status}} on your page. Click on that link for more options.
Last updated by FireflyBot (talk) at 08:46, 1 May 2024 (UTC)--Amadscientist (talk) 01:46, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I really should help out there more. My fellowship ends today, so I will be back very soon. Regards, Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 02:46, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Whenever you can. Hope the fellowship was everything you hoped it would be.--Amadscientist (talk) 03:18, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Where are all the volunteers? This is a pretty huge backlog :/ Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 03:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 21 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 28 January 2013[edit]

Bendigo workshops 2013[edit]

Hi Steve, you know all about this, but here is an invite for you as an active Victorian wikipedian. Wikimedia Australia will be holding an introductory training day for editing Wikipedia and related projects. With support from La Trobe University and Bendigo Community Health Services, it is for health information professionals across the region. It will also be open to other information community groups as well (regional historic societies, librarians and the like). The workshop is on Thursday, February 21, at Latrobe University Bendigo. If you can help, please contact Leighblackall or Peterdownunder, or register directly at the Wikimedia page.--Peterdownunder (talk) 06:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peter, I'd love to go, but I will be in San Francisco for a week from the 19-26th Feb, so I will miss it. Hope it all goes well though :) Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 09:16, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 February 2013[edit]

The Tea Leaf - Issue Seven[edit]

Check out the Teahouse Easter Egg Badge, awarded for helpful suggestions about improving the Teahouse.
Check out the Teahouse Genie Badge, awarded for solving issues on the Teahouse Wishlist.

Hello again! We have some neat updates about the Teahouse:

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here

Thanks again! Ocaasi 02:25, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 11 February 2013[edit]

hmmm ...[edit]

might work. Heaven knows you've certainly served your time. And in honorable fashion and with extreme dedication I might add. How ya doin buddy? How's the family? — Ched :  ?  14:42, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe one day, Ched. Family is good. I'm gonna give you a ring in the next few days. It's been too long. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 13:16, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 February 2013[edit]

The Tea Leaf - Issue Seven (special Birthday recap)[edit]

A celebratory cupcake from the Teahouse Birthday Badge

It's been a full year since the Teahouse opened, and as we're reflecting on what's been accomplished, we wanted to celebrate with you.

Teahouse guests and hosts are sharing their stories in a new blog post about the project.

1 year statistics for Teahouse visitors compared to invited non-visitors from the pilot:

Metric Control group Teahouse group Contrast
Average retention (weeks with at least 1 edit) 5.02 weeks 8.57 weeks 1.7x retention
Average number of articles edited 58.7 articles 116.9 edits 2.0x articles edited
Average talk page edits 36.5 edits 85.6 edits 2.4x talk page edits
Average article space edits 129.6 edits 360.4 edits 2.8x article edits
Average total edits (all namespaces) 182.1 edits 532.4 edits 2.9x total edits

Over the past year almost 2000 questions have been asked and answered, 669 editors have introduced themselves, 1670 guests have been served, 867 experienced Wikipedians have participated in the project, and 137 have served as hosts. Read more project analysis in our CSCW 2013 paper

Last month January was our most active month so far! 78 profiles were created, 46 active hosts answered 263 questions, and 11 new hosts joined the project.

Come by the Teahouse to share a cup of tea and enjoy a Birthday Cupcake! Happy Birthday to the Teahouse and thank you for a year's worth of interest and support :-)

-- Ocaasi and the rest of the Teahouse Team 20:51, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To add or remove yourself for receiving future newsletters, please update the list here

The Signpost: 25 February 2013[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steven_Crossin/Archive_51&oldid=1160939495"