Jump to content

User talk:MusikAnimal/Archive 10

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12→Archive 15

173.166.159.154

Thank you for assistance with this IP address/proxy. How does one view a filter log? Regards, Yamaguchi先生 17:32, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

@Yamaguchi先生: No problem. If you check the list of contributions of a user, there's a "filter log" link at the top. You can also enter the username/IP at Special:AbuseLog. Finally, and pardon me for advertising my own work, but there is a script called MoreMenu that will supply a bunch of links on all pages. On any given user page you'll have links to all the user's logs. That script does require you use the vector skin, though. Hope this helps. — MusikAnimal talk 17:38, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for that I have never looked at that feature before. I will have to take a look at MoreMenu as well. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 17:41, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Environmental impact of hydraulic fracturing

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Environmental impact of hydraulic fracturing. 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) 00:02, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Hafiz Muhammad Saeed

This page was vandalised 2 times after your protection expired on 25 October. One time by abusing in Urdu language and next time by blanking the page, can you give it permanent protection.

Thanks. Night Fury (talk) 05:10, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Suniesideup81

Hi Musik Animal

I was the one who added the information to Insulin lispro earlier. I added the edits before signing in as user: 29 October 2014‎ 64.54.15.150 29 October 2014‎ 64.54.15.150 29 October 2014‎ 64.54.212.134

I deleted the content bc I want to edit it further. Please stop putting back what I am removing.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suniesideup81 (talk • contribs) 17:33, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

@Suniesideup81: A valid edit summary explaining what you are trying to do is all we need. Blanking sourced content is a common form of vandalism, and if patrollers didn't revert these removals half of the wiki would be gone. I see you tried to use an edit summary at one point, but ClueBot reverted it, and the bot did not take into account your edit summary. Anyway, if you are trying to move things around or reword content, you can do so all in one edit. The preview feature may be of help. Sorry for the confusion. — MusikAnimal talk 17:37, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for getting back to me and I apologize as well for the confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suniesideup81 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
@Suniesideup81: No problem. The last thing we want to is deter you from editing. If you need help with anything moving forward don't hesitate to contact me :) — MusikAnimal talk 17:46, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Emiliehubbrd123

Hi I am sorry i am new at this i am only 10 years oldEmiliehubbrd123 (talk) 21:47, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

@Emiliehubbrd123: It's okay, you still get an A+ for trying to improve Wikipedia. Just know we can't copy and paste from other websites. Contributions must be in your own words, and accompanied by references. I'm going to invite you to play a little game that will help you get started. See your talk page. — MusikAnimal talk 21:51, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello from johnnyg128

Hi, again I am requesting that you fix the edits to the Cultural Marxism page. Today it had been edited to meet the political ideologies of a self proclaimed Marxist user. The user had edited the page to make it seem as though an offshoot of Marxism was only a conspiracy theory. On Wikipedia, we like to keep articles neutral, especially ones dealing with sensitive social issues. Please revert the article back to its former state before all of today's nonsense. Thank you for understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnyg128 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

@Johnnyg128: The edit war seems to go back quite a ways. It's too difficult to determine what should be what. Please request any changes you wish to make and a patrolling admin will respond to them. Just click on view source and there is a button to request an edit. Best — MusikAnimal talk 23:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I just want to see an unbiased article here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnyg128 (talk • contribs) 23:34, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Yoshee08

How am I doing disruptive editing. I am trying to send the old page to an updated page. Yoshee08 (talk) 18:24, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

@Yoshee08: You cannot rename islands to be your own name. You should consult the State of Texas first. Once they have approved and officially renamed the island, we'll redirect the article to the new name. — MusikAnimal talk 18:30, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Talking Angela

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 09:08, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello from 217.196.231.29

RICHARD MOONEY

This biography should not be included as the author is the journalist himself and he neither renowned or well-known in the journalism industry. He is currently a student in Taiwan.

Thanks S

@217.196.231.29: I have checked the article, and it does seem to have several problems, including having references that are not verifiable. I have tagged the article with the issues, so that they may be fixed in the future. Thanks for your effort, but in the future, please do not remove content without explanation because it is frequently interpreted as vandalism. Thanks, Tony Tan98 · talk 13:33, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

could you please restore my entry so i can fix what ever you think is missing?

could you please restore my entry so i can fix what ever you think is missing? i'm still writing. it's a prominent organisation in Israel dealing with Holocaust remembrance, and maybe that is it's importance?. could i get a minute please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schmorko (talk • contribs) 15:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

@Schmorko: Your article is now at User:Schmorko/Memories@Home. I recommend you submit it for review once complete. Please bear in mind that we have a guideline on notability of organizations that must be met. Let me know if you need help. Best — MusikAnimal talk 15:58, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 October 2014

Happy Halloween!!!

 Wilhelmina Will has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween!

'"On Psych, A USA Network TV series Episode 8, The Tao of Gus, Season 6, Shawn refers to pumpkins as "Halloween Apples" because he thinks all round fruits are a type of apple.


If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add {{subst:Halloween apples}} to their talkpage with a spoooooky message!


Cheers! "We could read for-EVER; reading round the wiki!" (talk) 18:15, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Ahh! What am I going to do with all these sugary apples! If I get a cavity you and TheQ Editor are paying the bill! — MusikAnimal talk 18:35, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

GA Cup - Round 2

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 2

Greetings, GA Cup competitors!

Wednesday saw the end of Round 1. Jaguar took out Round 1 with an amazing score of 238. In a tight race for second, Peacemaker67 and Ritchie333 finished second and third with 152 and 141 points, respectively.

Two users have scored the maximum five bonus points for article length (60,000 characters+). Anotherclown reviewed Spanish conquest of Yucatán (77,350 characters) and MrWooHoo reviewed Communist Party of China (76,740 characters). The longest review was by Bilorv who reviewed Caldas da Rainha. The review was approximately 22,400 characters which earned s/he two bonus points (20, 000 - 29, 999 characters).

In Round 1, 117 reviews were completed, making the first round of the GA Cup a success! A total of 86 articles were removed from the backlog during the month of October! We hope to see all remaining users fighting it out in Round 2 so we can lower the backlog as much as possible.

To qualify for the second round, one completed review was needed, which 28 users accomplished. Participants have been randomly put into 7 pools of 4; the top 2 in each pool will move onto Round 3. There will also be one wildcard. This means that the participant who comes in 15th place (all pools combined) will also move on. Round 2 will start on November 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on November 29 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 2 and the pools can be found here

Also, remember that a major rule change will go into affect starting on November 1, which marks the beginning of Round Two. Round 1 displayed a weakness in the rules, which we are correcting with this new rule. We believe that this change will make the competition more inherently fair. The new rule is: Your review must provide feedback/suggestions for improvement, and then you must wait until the nominator has responded and all issues/suggestions have been resolved before you can pass the article. Failure to follow this rule will result in disqualification. The judges will strictly enforce this new rule.

Good luck and remember to have fun!

Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:04, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

About Page Protection for User:ClueBot NG/AngryOptin

Hi MusikAnimal!

I saw that you have declined the page protection request for User:ClueBot NG/AngryOptin and I would like to further explain myself. I understand that there have been few cases of vandalism there and that ClueBot may possibly be watching that page itself, but I would like to explain what I meant by "vandalism" for that page: Usually, users add specific pages to the list to prevent vandalism. However, if vandals are able to remove the pages from that list, that list would not be very useful.

Moreover, going to the "users listing their user page" part, it seems like ClueBot actually does not watch user pages at all, because there has not been a single edit from ClueBot on the user namespace. (A search returns "Database Error".) (Correction: There are no edits to main user pages, only users' sub pages.) One chief example is User:Jimbo_Wales, which is on the Angry Opt-In list; there have been countless cases of vandalism on User:Jimbo_Wales, yet there was not a single edit from ClueBot. The opt in list is really for repeatedly vandalized articles, not user pages. Please reconsider protecting the page.

Thank you! --Tony Tan98 · talk 23:23, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

@Tony Tan 98: Typically, we never preemptively protect pages, though that may more pertain to the mainspace. Something like user pages can be requested to protected by their owner without any disruption ever have taken place, as it's not really a collaborative environment. This then is an exception to the no-preemptive philosophy. AngryOptin however is intended to be edited by anyone. Following that logic I think protecting it without evidence that protection is needed simply goes against the open nature of Wikipedia. I'd also need to come up with some custom rationale as it wouldn't fit with any of the standard protection reasons. I think IPs and unconfirmed users should be able to add pages to the AngryOption, just as anyone else should. Another admin may see different, but I'll have to again have to pass. Best — MusikAnimal talk 22:20, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal: Thanks for your reply. It makes sense that pages should not be preemptively protected, but wouldn't the list be useless if vandals can remove pages listed there? If an editor added a page there to protect against vandalism, can't a vandal just go there and remove the page first, and then vandalize? Thanks, Tony Tan98 · talk 01:07, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
I don't think we're relying on the AngryOptin list that much. Any article that's getting vandalized enough to be listed there will likely be itself become protected, which is the better route to begin with, in my opinion. At any rate, the vandal would have to be aware of ClueBot's one-revert rule, the little-known AngryOptin feature, and also know that the article they want to vandalize is one of the few mainspace articles that are on that list. The likelihood of exploitation seems rather low. Fortunately ClueBot is also not the only set of eyes monitoring recent changes, we have a huge fleet of human eyes monitoring too, such as yourself, who pick up what ClueBot won't revert. I'm truly not comfortable semi-protecting, but of course feel free to post again at WP:RPP to have the request assessed by another admin. — MusikAnimal talk 01:54, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I think you are right. It makes sense that most vandals won't find out about it. I found out about the list only because I have had an incident where the page Egg was repeatedly and continuously vandalized by an User:Winedmoves and an admin was not available to block that user. I didn't even have rollback back then and I had to use Twinkle to constantly revert his edits for an entire 30 minutes. I really think there should be a permission that allows trusted users to block non-autoconfirmed users for up to 30 minutes while admins are notified. :) Tony Tan98 · talk 02:27, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Raaz9695

REPLACE THIS TEXT WITH YOUR MESSAGE Raaz9695 (talk) 14:40, 2 November 2014 (UTC) why are you deleted a page name Darhal Tehsil

Kensington Club

Hi Music Animal,

I deleted the section because it is factually inaccurate and slanderous. I know nothing about editing Wikipedia, but the article in its current form has no business existing. Not to say it should be deleted entirely, but many of the so called facts are concocted and potentially damaging to the continued reputation of the club.

Thanks, BimmerBro — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bimmerbro (talk • contribs)

Happy Halloween!

 TheQ Editor has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween!

'"On Psych, A USA Network TV series Episode 8, The Tao of Gus, Season 6, Shawn refers to pumpkins as "Halloween Apples" because he thinks all round fruits are a type of apple.


If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add {{subst:Halloween apples}} to their talkpage with a spoooooky message!

Call for more investigation of an SPI you closed

I'd like to see here a request a technical/CheckUser check. While the data is fresh, a)I think the unconfirmed socks should be confirmed (or refuted); as someone who was nearly blocked indefinitely, I'd think you'd be OK with this, but I don't want to step on your close, especially as I'm just off a block myself. It would be valuable to b)look for the real puppetmaster, as the nominal puppetmaster has only made a few edits, and that the investigation should c)expand to this edit - removal of same Iranian Jew population information and source by another editor - though I continue to AGF, we've only got a nominal puppetmaster and this is a lead that could be followed up on. May I make it so or can you? It says anyone can request a technical/CheckUser check, so I'm starting here, since you just closed the SPI. --Elvey(t•c) 16:34, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

@Elvey: SPIs are terribly backlogged. We generally only request checkuser intervention if we absolutely have to. Here these socks could not be more obvious, so I was able to close it with very strong confidence. Yes, anyone can request checkuser intervention, but the request is usually endorsed by a clerk before actually being ran. Here I don't think it would be endorsed.
As for my SPI case, it was not obvious. The problem with mine was the person who opened it and how persistent they were to get me and the others blocked. The checkuser confirmed I was not related to the accounts, but possible as I edited in the same metropolitan area (of about 23.4 million people). What I blabbed about there on my user page was more just me being paranoid. In reality I probably wouldn't have been blocked at all. Nonetheless because of this experience I am very careful when closing SPIs today, and the case you opened is no different. Feel free to open it back up, add other possible socks, and/or request checkuser intervention as you see fit. — MusikAnimal talk 16:59, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
(ec). OK, thanks. I see what you mean about your SPI case. I'll add CU pro forma, at least; if it's not performed due to the backlog, so be it. I'm going to point readers of the SPI here to guide the socking user toward more constructive ways of contributing, and point out that we're not arbitrarily censoring these users; we are open to having articles report that Iran has far more Jews than our articles now say it has, provided it is verifiable.--Elvey(t•c) 18:56, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Trangtrang124

Hello, I was the one that edited the Chamomile page. I did some research and wanted to add more information to the page to make it more up-to-date and informative to Wikipedia user. If you look at the history of the page, you can find my explanation as in edit summary behind my action. It is as followed: 17:59, 3 November 2014‎ Trangtrang124 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (15,087 bytes) (+4,239)‎ . . (Editions were made to give the page more structure and make it easier to navigate. More information and references were added to make the information up-to-date and reliable to the public.) After that revision, I also made some formatting to give the page more structure and it could be the reason why you couldn't find my edit summary. My references are all from researches and published journals. Please check on this again. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trangtrang124 (talk • contribs)

@Trangtrang124: This was my mistake. I did not check previous revisions, only the revision I saw when patrolling recent changes, where you removed sourced content without explaining why. The issue is that this is a common form of vandalism. However clearly you were in the middle of moving things around, and not just inexplicably blanking content. I'll take full blame here, but it is important that you use an edit summary for the edit that is removing sourced content. That way everyone is aware of what you are trying to do. Thanks — MusikAnimal talk 04:11, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Galvannij

Hello MusikAnimal, you removed content that I edited quite quickly regarding Andrew Lincoln, do you monitor just his site or others too?

Kind Regards, Galvanni

Hello, I'm MusikAnimal. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Andrew Lincoln, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Galvannij (talk) 16:11, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@Galvannij: Hi, I patrol recent changes so I edit all sorts of articles. I noticed you changed the birthplace of Andrew Lincoln but the sources provided say he was born in London, not Rome. You will need a reliable source to back your change, see WP:REFBEGIN for more information. I might also recommend discussing the change on the talk page before implementing it. Let me know if you need any help. — MusikAnimal talk 16:17, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Maroon 5’s all Wikipages

Can you keep an eye on every Maroon 5’s pages (including album, singles etc.) if whether unsourced genres or not. 115.164.56.162 (talk) 15:22, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

No, I cannot. Unsourced genre changes happens on pretty much all music-related articles, unfortunately. When I see it happen I will respond to it, but I cannot monitor that many pages, especially when I have such little interest in the group. If you might consider creating an account, that way you can add all the Maroon 5 articles to your watchlist, and monitor them yourself. Best — MusikAnimal talk 16:28, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Licensed professional counselors

Re this: really? I've been trying to get CEDstudents to stop adding that crap to the article (apparently Drmies gave up after they simply ignored his actions). I stopped reverting to avoid an edit war, but I was hoping the presence of a third party might help. The material they added (that you helpfully reverted) is completely irrelevant to the topic of the article, and appears to have been tacked on in an effort to simply get their grade. I have offered suggestions on their talk page about where the material might more usefully be added (as well as a warning about their WP:ISU username) but they don't appear to be willing to engage in discussion. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:48, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@WikiDan61: Yeah I noticed Drmies edit after the fact. I'm just patrolling, as you know, didn't actually read the entirety of the content. My original revert was because of removal of sourced content, but I didn't realize that in succession with the other edits was actually an addition of sourced content, something we typically like. But as you say, turns out it's a bunch of irrelevant nonsense. I've again removed the content. If they continue to disrupt, after another warning or two, we can do a brief block to get their attention in hopes they will respond to inquiries on their talk page. — MusikAnimal talk 17:05, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:07, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello. I am HanSangYoon. I've noticed you changed my recent edit.

On 2028 Summer Olympics page, you didn't check my change that Amsterdam canceled their bid. Please revert the edits to where I had it as. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by HanSangYoon (talk • contribs) 20:59, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@HanSangYoon: Okay, sorry about that. Please remember to use an edit summary when you removed large amounts of sourced content. Thanks! — MusikAnimal talk 21:08, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For all of the work you do here. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 20:56, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
@Yamaguchi先生: THANK YOU! Some WikiLove is exactly what I needed :) — MusikAnimal talk 21:10, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Cilla1987

hi are you there? Cilla1987 (talk) 21:06, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

why did you delete Charlotte Devaneys page its been active for 6 years?! Cilla1987 (talk) 21:07, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

everything i wrote was factual and unbiased , can you please restore the post to its original form. thankyouCilla1987 (talk) 21:08, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@Cilla1987: Hi. I have no idea what you're talking about. I did not delete your page. The admins who did delete can be found here. — MusikAnimal talk 21:12, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

"Jingle Bells" by Singing Dogs - - FIVE Dogs, Not Four

I'm not quite sure why you changed my correction. There were FIVE (5) dogs that were recorded for this 1955 Christmas classic. You even have an image with all FIVE (5) pictures of the dogs with their name below. You need to read up on your history, because what you have now is erroneous. The content and picture alone contradict what you have on this page.

Best regards! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.244.44.188 (talk) 23:35, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@71.244.44.188:: Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. The issue has now been fixed. Please be sure to use an edit summary in the future to prevent such edits from being misjudged as vandalism. Best, Tony Tan98 · talk 15:03, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, MusikAnimal. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 19:36, 6 November 2014 (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.

Nikkimaria (talk) 19:36, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

VisualEditor newsletter—November 2014

Screenshot on an iPad, showing how to switch from one editor to the other
Did you know?

VisualEditor is also available on the mobile version of Wikipedia. Login and click the pencil icon to open the page you want to edit. Click on the gear-shaped settings in the upper-right corner, to pick which editor to use. Choose "Edit" to use VisualEditor, or "Edit source" to use the wikitext editor.

It will remember whether you used wikitext or VisualEditor, and use the same editor the next time you edit an article.

The user guide has information about how to use VisualEditor. Not all features are available in Mobile Web.

Since the last newsletter, the Editing Team has fixed many bugs and requests, and worked on support for editing tables and for using non-Latin languages. Their weekly updates are posted on Mediawiki.org. Informal notes from the recent quarterly review were posted on Meta.

Recent improvements

The French Wikipedia should see better search results for links, templates, and media because the new search engine was turned on for everyone there. This change is expected at the Chinese and German Wikipedias next week, and eventually at the English Wikipedia.

The "pawn" system has been mostly replaced. Bugs in this system sometimes added a chess pawn character to wikitext. The replacement provides better support for non-Latin languages, with full support hopefully coming soon.

VisualEditor is now provided to editors who use Internet Explorer 10 or 11 on desktop and mobile devices. Internet Explorer 9 is not supported yet.

The keyboard shortcuts for items in the toolbar's menus are now shown in the menus. VisualEditor will replace the existing design with a new theme from the User Experience / Design group. The appearance of dialogs has already changed in one Mobile version. The appearance on desktops will change soon. (You can see a developer preview of the old "Apex" design and the new "MediaWiki" theme which will replace it.)

Several bugs were fixed for internal and external links. Improvements to MediaWiki's search solved an annoying problem: If you searched for the full name of the page or file that you wanted to link, sometimes the search program could not find the page. A link inside a template, to a local page that does not exist, will now show red, exactly as it does when reading the page. Due to a error, for about two weeks this also affected all external links inside templates. Opening an auto-numbered link node like [1] with the keyboard used to open the wrong link tool. These problems have all been fixed.

TemplateData

The tool for quickly editing TemplateData will be deployed to all Wikimedia Foundation wikis on Thursday, 6 November.  This tool is already available on the biggest 40 Wikipedias, and now all wikis will have access to it. This tool makes it easier to add TemplateData to the template's documentation.  When the tool is enabled, it will add a button above every editing window for a template (including documentation subpages). To use it, edit the template or a subpage, and then click the "Edit template data" button at the top.  Read the help page for TemplateData. You can test the TemplateData editor in a sandbox at Mediawiki.org. Remember that TemplateData should be placed either on a documentation subpage or on the template page itself. Only one block of TemplateData will be used per template.

You can use the new autovalue setting to pre-load a value into a template. This can be used to substitute dates, as in this example, or to add the most common response for that parameter. The autovalue can be easily overridden by the editor, by typing something else in the field.

In TemplateData, you may define a parameter as "required". The template dialog in VisualEditor will warn editors if they leave a "required" parameter empty, and they will not be able to delete that parameter. If the template can function without this parameter, then please mark it as "suggested" or "optional" in TemplateData instead.

Looking ahead

Basic support for inserting tables and changing the number of rows and columns in tables will appear next Wednesday. Advanced features, like dragging columns to different places, will be possible later. The VisualEditor team plans to add auto-fill features for citations soon. To help editors find the most important items more quickly, some items in the toolbar menus will be hidden behind a "More" item, such as "underlining" in the styling menu. The appearance of the media search dialog will improve, to make picking between possible images easier and more visual. The team posts details about planned work on the VisualEditor roadmap.

The user guide will be updated soon to add information about editing tables. The translations for most languages except Spanish, French, and Dutch are significantly out of date. Please help complete the current translations for users who speak your language. Talk to us if you need help exporting the translated guide to your wiki.

You can influence VisualEditor's design. Tell the VisualEditor team what you want changed during the office hours via IRC. The next sessions are on Wednesday, 19 November at 16:00 UTC and on Wednesday 7 January 2015 at 22:00 UTC. You can also share your ideas at mw:VisualEditor/Feedback.

Also, user experience researcher Abbey Ripstra is looking for editors to show her how they edit Wikipedia. Please sign up for the research program if you would like to hear about opportunities.

If you would like to help with translations of this newsletter, please subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Subscribe or unsubscribe at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Newsletter. Thank you!

— Whatamidoing (WMF) 20:41, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 November 2014

MGM & others continua remove of source information by same IP

Note that the IP that you are page protection from editing Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer is unwilling to cooperate and is reverting (on MGM up to 5 RR already) on several other pages:Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#MGM_.26_others_continual_remove_of_source_information_by_same_IP Spshu (talk) 22:52, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

@Spshu: IP blocked by HJ Mitchell. I semi-protected where I saw multiple IPs involved. The other pages I agree with HJ in that they lack enough recent disruption to warrant protection. Thanks for the reports. — MusikAnimal talk 22:57, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for granting me the "pending changes reviewer" rights. Chhandama (talk) 02:02, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

A thing I forgot

Hello again. I forgot to inform you that File:Megadeth - Peace Sells.ogg has two older versions that need to be deleted. Everything the best.--Retrohead (talk) 23:18, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

 Done All the best to you too! — MusikAnimal talk 23:22, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of One Piece characters

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of One Piece characters. 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) 00:03, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Ahmed Hassan Imran

Hi, do you know the context of this article? Please help me rewrite the article and follow the article talk page- Jayanta Nath (Talk|Contrb) 17:54, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

@Jayantanth: Hi, I have no interest in this topic. I'm still watching the page from when I had to protect it from previous edit wars – which seem to be over the same content. Please discuss with other involved editors to decide what's best for the article. I will put preventive measures in place again if need be. — MusikAnimal talk 18:23, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal:, it is quite frustrating, that , I am trting to add content with reference, but some new single purpose user remove the content without any discussion create it as stub article. But all support given to single purpose account. Ok, Thank you for your understanding.- Jayanta Nath (Talk|Contrb) 18:32, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
I apologies if I am in the wrong section otherwise I want add here that I am willing to expand the article neutrally with proper facts. I have taken part in discussion since the beginning of the edit war. I am not a single purpose a/c. I am a reader of Wikipedia but I felt to edit Ahmed Hassan Imran page for neutrality when I saw unproven allegation against him based on unverified news reports.MehulWB (talk) 18:42, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
@MehulWB and Jayantanth: Please continue this discussion at Talk:Ahmed Hassan Imran. If consensus cannot be reached, seek dispute resolution. In the meantime I'd leave the disputed content out of the article. — MusikAnimal talk 18:54, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm only now seeing what you've written on the talk page. A slow progression of re-adding content, working together to ensure neutrality, sounds like a good approach. — MusikAnimal talk 18:57, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Would you please take some sort of interest in the topic or get somebody who is willing to take some interest? Without that, I believe, it will be an endless edit war. BengaliHindu (talk) 19:51, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
@BengaliHindu: I can try, but this is what dispute resolution is for. I've only taken administrative action as necessary. I can't turn a blind eye to disruption just because I don't want to get involved in the discussions. It looks like the discussion is off to a good start. Slowly re-add content, critiquing each other's work as you go along. Note there's nothing wrong with a single-purpose account provided they edit within the confines of policy and guidelines. There is also a conflict of interest noticeboard that you can report to if need be. I'm busy today, but I might be able to help you all out later tonight (my time). — MusikAnimal talk 20:11, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal: Thanks for your support. BengaliHindu (talk) 20:18, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

User talk:Troydevinny545backup11

he started swearing in his talk page now, rm him from editing his talkpage? Avono (talk) 20:45, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Done — MusikAnimal talk 23:03, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Request for Content of Deleted Article

I have a requested for a deleted article. Could I please have Ordes of england copied to me in some way per . note I do not wish to re-write the article or anything like that, I am just curious as to what is said. I wrote the article over 4 years ago when I was 10 years old (*facepalm* sorry Wikipedia). Also, is it possible to have the IP address of the creator too? I want to have a look at my other contributions from that long ago :p I would love you forever for this! Thank! EoRdE6 (talk) 23:26, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

@EoRdE6: I've emailed you a copy of the article. I am not able to retrieve the IP address you used at that time. I can only assume a checkuser could but that tool is strictly used for anti-abuse purposes. Best — MusikAnimal talk 23:50, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a ton :) people like you make Wikipedia great. EoRdE6 (talk) 01:46, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Backlog?

Howdy MusikAnimal, this is waiting for 12 days. Thanks, Jim Carter 06:45, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

 Done Obviously a low-priority type of speedy deletion request, hence why it's been up for so long. — MusikAnimal talk 17:11, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello from the Publisher of Comics Bulletin

Hi, thanks for reviewing my edit to the "Is Batman Gay" article. I'm the owner and publisher of Comics Bulletin. One of my tasks is to update outdated links to my website. The edit I made to the "Is Batman Gay" changed the link from an old 404 page to a current page for that link. Therefore, I would like to ask you to revert back to my previous change. If you'd like to confirm by checking the URLs, please feel free.

If you have any questions I'm at jason.sacks@comicsbulletin.com or @jasonsacks on twitter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.46.191.11 (talk) 22:21, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Apologies :/ While easily mistaken as vandalism, I will try to be more careful. Thanks for letting me know. — MusikAnimal talk 22:27, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

GA count

Just a friendly reminder to update the count of GAs in a section when listing a GA. Adabow (talk) 23:01, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

The one time I forget :) Thanks — MusikAnimal talk 23:03, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Cposting

The content that you have published on the page titled Subhash Kapoor (art dealer) is simply based on news articles and not facts. In legal matters what's true and whats not is decided by law. You cannot simply become an aggregator of links from the web.

I request and suggest that you remove the page. Cposting (talk) 17:30, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

@Cposting: Hi! I recommending discussing this on the article's talk page. The sources look reliable to me. In the future, it would also be helpful if you use an edit summary when removing sourced content, that way others are aware of why you are removing it. Thanks! — MusikAnimal talk 17:45, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Tom Derry

Hello, I am trying to create a wikipedia page for Tom Derry, however when I try to create one I cannot form the table which other footballers have, showing teams played for, goals scored etc (usually down the right of the page). Do you have any idea of how to do so? I tried to make the article as pauladale then made an account under shotsfan, but it does not work on either page. I see you helped delete my previous page, so thought you might be the right person to help! Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shotsfan (talk • contribs) 17:05, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

@Shotsfan: Hello! I am not familiar with the article you said I deleted. I may have deleted it, but it looks like you didn't create it with your current account. Anyway, let's create a draft of your article. Use the article wizard to start the draft, and once you've got the content in place let me know and I will help you with the tables. Best — MusikAnimal talk 17:49, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

184.152.17.217

Can you block this IP, currently vandalizing a large swath of music articles with this sort of crap. Frietjes (talk) 21:34, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

and it continues. Frietjes (talk) 00:12, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
@Frietjes: I'm apologize, as I'm unfamiliar with the subject. What exactly is wrong with the edits? Just that they are unsourced? Is it deliberate false information? — MusikAnimal talk 00:23, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Obvious Sock puppeting

Hello MusikAnimal. Yesterday you deleted Obat Tidur Wanita. It was recently recreated, along with Obat Bius Wanita‎, by Liashoppper3. I speeded it and the CSD tag was removed by Liashoppper4. Obvious sock puppetry. Also would you ming SALTing both titles. - NG39 (Used to be NickGibson3900)Talk 04:54, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Could I have some feedback please Wvyver

Hi there MusikAnimal

19:21, 10 November 2014 MusikAnimal (talk | contribs) deleted page Draft:LEAP Science and Maths Schools (G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page)

Could you please explain why this was removed or deleted. Wvyver (talk) 17:26, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

@Wvyver: I don't know... I'm going to have to blame this on the semi-automated tool I use, Huggle. I'm guessing it looked like you blanked the page and you were the page creator. You apparently did not blank the page. This could be human error too, but I think that's not the first time I've ran into this problem with Huggle. From now on I'll do it the old fashioned way, open up the page in the browser and decide whether to delete or not from there. I've restored the page in full. Sorry for disruption! — MusikAnimal talk 17:29, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

MonaPisser blocked

by Ponyo.[2] Dougweller (talk) 22:00, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

SPI

Hi, MusikAnimal, thanks for your note on the case where I pinged you. I'll wait for the CU. However, on another case, although I notified you, I didn't wait - I just acted: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Fanofvan. First, I assure you I'm not stalking your closes. . I'm just going through the overly long list of closed cases and archiving them. Second, I rarely question the action of the closing administrator even if I don't agree with it. A good example is when an admin blocks the master for a shorter time than I would have done. However, yours were different because you didn't block at all, and although I've certainly seen that happen when there's no signs of abuse, in yours there were signs of abuse, just perhaps an insufficient amount to justify a block in your opinion. I confess that as an SPI clerk I have a somewhat jaundiced eye when it comes to socks, but I try to be fair. Anyway, I appreciate your helping out at SPI (we can use all the help we can get), and I don't want to offend you by my comments or actions, but I am a bit concerned that you are being overly lenient in your judgments. I'd naturally like to hear your views on this. Regards.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:01, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Overlapping indeed! I will reply here. As I stated on your talk page the big thing for me was to help reduce the backlog. Admittedly I am very lenient, this is a result of my past. It's not that I haven't gotten over that on a personal level, but at SPI I still have that ringing in the back of my head. Moving forward I will make a point to comment rather than close, unless it's clear another admin would take the same action. Rest assured I'm not all offended by you overriding my actions. It's a learning experience, and I appreciate all the input you/others have. I look forward to working regularly at SPI, gaining confidence over time. Best — MusikAnimal talk 16:18, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
You're always such a pleasure to deal with. I think it would be great for you to come up to speed. We could use another (active) clerk. Did you want to apply perhaps and I could be your trainer initially? Often when clerks start they do so with a trainer (I did).--Bbb23 (talk) 16:35, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
@Bbb23: I'd like to read up on it a little more before saying yes, but the idea sounds good to me. It'd be a great opportunity to further aid the project, in a way that I would especially take pride in given what I went through in the past. One concern is that I don't have an enormous amount of time to devote. As you've probably noticed I always pick up the smaller cases. However I guess in a given "session", if you will, I could work on one big case rather than several smaller ones. I will get back to you on this. Thanks for your guidance and kind words. — MusikAnimal talk 17:14, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Take as much time as you need. A few comments while you're pondering. You can start clerking and then stop if you find it isn't working out for you. Obviously, it's better to decide in advance and make a commitment, but sometimes that isn't possible. For example, I became an arbitration clerk and then not too long after doing so (months?) I went inactive because it wasn't working out for me (I won't go into the details). As for your "past", I read through the report. I didn't pay much attention to the behavioral allegations, but the technical findings were pretty much a no connection. I can see, though, that it must've been painful for you at the time, and depending on your temperament may not be something you let go of easily. Finally, I'd forgotten (silly me) that you only recently became an admin. It should give you a good feeling that the vote in your favor was unanimous. I certainly didn't have that luxury. Whatever happened to crusty New Yorkers? You appear to belie the stereotype. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
@Bbb23: Hahaha! I love your humour! Glad I could change your mind about us :) Anyway, about my SPI... the problem was that I was right on the cusp of getting really into Wikipedia. The SPI by itself was no big deal, but this MBaxter1 guy was relentless. That gave me an awfully bad impression of the community we have here. As you say, DQ is probably the one that saved me. At the time, however, I didn't know any better. I thought MBaxter1 had a lot of pull in the outcome, and I was just about ready to give up, but finally got him to change his mind. Ruthlessly accusing me of violating policy when I was trying to do good. Why bother... then... is what I think a lot of other users would have concluded. I never understood MBaxter1, his entire editing history was devoted to that single SPI. All I'm getting at is that is those early days are a fragile moment in a Wikipedian's lifespan, we have to be careful how we treat those users. I don't want to anyone else to have to go through what I did! And this is precisely what scares me. Barring the most obvious of cases, I'd want to request CU nearly every time. At least as it stands now. I'll keep your offer for clerk training in mind, but for now I'll continue to work at SPI as I have been, taking in what I've learned from you with these past two cases. Bold but not reckless, cautious but not reserved. Many cheers — MusikAnimal talk 01:40, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Ha! The CU on the SPI report was the height of irony. Both of us believed it was the same person. The only issue was abuse, and lo and behold, they were different people. Surprised the hell out of me and went right back to your original close of no action but per a different rationale. As for training, if you change your mind, let me know. It would have to go through channels as I can't unilaterally dub you a clerk-trainee, but I would certainly recommend it. In the meantime, feel free to raise any questions you have about SPI in your role as non-clerk-helper. I'd be happy to give you my worthless perspective. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 02:14, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Haighton

Hi MusikAnimal, you deleted my entry for Fernando Ricksen's wiki. I dont know what I did do wrong but he is diagnosed with ALS. Haighton 21:47, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

@Haighton: Hey there! Wow, you're getting back to me pretty late! That was back in October 2013. Anyhoo, yes, I did revert your edit. That's because it was unsourced. Verifiability is important, especially on biographies of living persons. For this reason, your addition had to be removed. However, it looks like someone has re-added the content and properly sourced it. Moving forward if you want to make changes like, please, feel free, but sure to accompany them with references. See WP:REFBEGIN on how to do that.
I've also noticed no one ever welcomed you to Wikipedia. You joined nearly eight years ago... but based on your limited editing history I thought you might find the welcome template I added to your talk page useful. Those links can help you get more comfortable with editing. Hope this helps, and cheers! — MusikAnimal talk 22:09, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

You got mail!

Hello, MusikAnimal. 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.

Blake Gripling (talk) 23:49, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 November 2014

RfPP

Hey, I really appreciate your help there! It's lovely to have another admin pitching in (many hands make light work and all that). Anyway, I thought you might like this handy little script, which makes life a little bit easier—it allows you to semi-automate the template responses, and it produces those lovely consistent edit summaries I leave (seriously, life's too short to actually type out "semi-protected for a week" in an edit summary!). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:30, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

@HJ Mitchell: Brilliant! I use Twinkle to do the actual protecting/tagging, but this script will definitely speed up the responding to reports. I have a question for you... do you often hit the "edit source" link on RfPP and get the wrong section? As I'm sure you know, this is because the software uses numbers to assign to each section, so if a new report is created between the time you view the page and hit edit, you end up editing the wrong section. This happens to me all the time. So anyways, I was thinking maybe I could take this script a step further and do some extreme automation. I could tie in with the Twinkle script so that after the actual protecting/tagging, it will load the RfPP page, find the right section and hit edit. The idea being with a refresh of the page, you're likely to get the right section when you hit edit. Here the JS would load the page and hit edit for you. It'll take a while to develop, but seems like it would be worth it. Any thoughts?
I also want to make some sort of script to help expedite blocking. Do you know of any existing ones?
Thanks HJ! — MusikAnimal talk 00:16, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
No need for the ping—you're on my watchlist. ;) I don't normally bother with tagging, personally, except for full protection. Either Cyberbot will do it or somebody else will if they think it's important. Twinkle's fantastic for mass protections, though (and for a great many other things—admin Twinkle is like Twinkle on steroids!). And yes, that happens to me all the time (though I've disabled the VisualEditor, so it's just "edit" for me) and occasionally makes me swear loudly at the computer screen! I've actually made a proposal at WT:RfPP to change the format of the page to make it less of a pain to edit; you might want to weigh in—it would be good to have the perspective of other regulars. I'm all for making tedious tasks easier, so that script sounds like a great idea if it's not too much effort to develop. I'd certainly use it.
I'd love something to expedite blocking. I use Popups quite a lot to get straight to Special:Block and I can make a 31-hour vandalism block on autopilot, but the only script I know of that blocks without you having to go through Special:Block is Tim Canens' mass block script (which I don't use often, but is fantastic when I need to block more than a handful of accounts with an identical duration/log summary—handy for sockfarms). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:37, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
I agree 100% with both of your proposed changes at RfPP. Reversing the order of the requests would essentially solve my main problem... makes perfect sense... and frankly I'm not sure why it isn't like that already. I'm guessing the RfC never materialized? This seems like a semi-noncontroversial reworking of the page. I say let's get crackin on the RfC and make this happen already!
Either way, the script I've thought up should still work, and greatly expedite the process. I plan to get working on that soon. In the meantime, now that I've added both protection.js and massblock.js per your recommendation, my browsing experience is starting to slow down because of all the scripts. So... I made scriptManager. This just lets you selectively enable scripts – the ones you wouldn't use a lot. Massblock is a good example, the script is unnecessarily loaded on every page when you likely rarely use it. Probably too technical for most people to set up, but thought I'd let you know about it :) Cheers — MusikAnimal talk 22:37, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Oooh, that could be handy. Will it work in Monobook? (Yeah, I'm old-fashioned!). Would it be possible to knock together something similar for parts of Twinkle? Much as I love some of the functions, I don't need the bulk deletion/protection bits on every page and they make the page noticeably slower to load.
I put an RfC tag on the discussion but I'm not sure it had much effect (I've just un-archived it). Still, there wasn't any opposition and most of the tiny number of admins who handle RfPP requests chimed in, so I could probably JFDI but I'd have to coordinate with Cyberpower and the Twinkle team. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:25, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
It works in Monobook now :) And it just so happens that the Twinkle developers decided to break up all the functions into separate files. This means yes, you theoretically could pick which parts you want and ditch the others. The full list of them is at Special:Gadgets. I'm going to assume some scripts rely on others though, e.g. Gadget-Twinkle.js is probably required for the others to work. It could be a mess trying to set all that up. Maybe it's even worth asking the devs to allow configuration of which components to include in the preferences.
I say let's get in touch with Cyberpower about the RfPP reworking. I know he's on wikibreak so email would be best. I think he said he was working on overhauling the bot anyway. I'm confused what role Twinkle plays at RfPP. Is the it the P-batch feature? I guess there's more to Twinkle than I thought! I should really read the documentation. — MusikAnimal talk 00:00, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
Great. :) A lot of requests come in via Twinkle, but I'm told it wouldn't be too difficult to modify it to cope with the new format. I'll drop Cyberpower a line and see what he thinks to modifying the bot. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:55, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-47

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Software changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki (1.25wmf8) has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since November 12. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from November 18, and on all Wikipedias from November 19 (calendar).
  • The new search tool ("CirrusSearch") will be on the English Wikipedia from November 19. [3]

Move from Bugzilla to Phabricator

  • The tool to track bugs will change on November 21.
  • You won't be able to add or edit bugs between November 21 and November 24.
  • You can make the change easier for you by creating your account.
  • Bugzilla will be frozen after the change. You will see, edit and report bugs in Phabricator.
  • You can join two IRC chats to learn more about the change. The chats will be on Tuesday, November 18 at 16:00 (UTC) and 23:00 UTC. [4]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:28, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Vagina

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Vagina. 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) 00:03, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello MusikAnimal. 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)

Hello from Yama jlac

Hi thanks for moving the page I am writing to /sandbox. I am clearly a beginner. I misunderstood the comment on the tutorial sandbox and thought all sandboxes were deleted everyday.

While I am here, I noticed that you are interested in studying and fighting vandalism (presubably on wiki). I am a little concerned that the two articles I am writing could be subject to vandalism. Is there some sort of review process I can put my entries through (prior to making them live) that can reduce vandalism in someway? Yama jlac (talk) 21:35, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

@Yama jlac: Nope, the only sandbox that gets cleared is Wikipedia:Sandbox. You can create and edit as many sandboxes in your userspace as you want.
I would not worry about your articles being vandalized. Vandalism is a natural consequence of the wiki. We have an army of people protecting the wiki's integrity, though :) Rest assured if the article becomes vandalized, it will be cleaned up and we can take preventive measures such as page protection to prevent further disruption, if need be. That's handled on a case by case basis, and only after disruption has already happened. The core philosophy is that anyone should be able to edit, so we don't do anything preemptively. — MusikAnimal talk 21:58, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! Yama jlac (talk) 04:35, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Dfrontani

Hi MusikAnimal!

Recently you deleted a page of mine about artist "John Dileva Halpern". You deleted it for unambiguous copyright infringement. The page from which I drew information was written by Halpern and myself, from the site "Waking Buddha" which is a personal creation of his. I am wondering (forgive me, I am a new user) if there is a way for me to recover the deleted page. Because I was given permission to use the text from wakingbuddha.com I do not believe I must retool the article; however, if I must, I would like access to everything that has been deleted, as it is the most complete structure in which all of the information sits. Thank you for your time and concern. Dfrontani (talk) 20:34, 8 November 2014 (UTC) Dfrontani 11/8/14

@Dfrontani: Hi! No worries, this is a common scenario on Wikipedia. The fact is we don't know who owns the copyright unless there's proof of such, otherwise we could get in trouble (legal trouble). So it's very important either the text is properly licensed publicly or is specifically donated to Wikipedia. The full instructions on what you need to do can be found at WP:DONATETEXT. If you take the route of donating the text, someone will contact me informing that the content is licensed and I can restore the page. Until then it must remain deleted for legal reasons. Thanks for your understanding, and let me know if you need help! — MusikAnimal talk 21:12, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal: What would be considered proper proof? We can certainly (and gladly) prove our ownership of the site, and we would prefer (if possible) to do it while retaining ownership. Thank you for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfrontani (talk • contribs)
@Dfrontani: Again, see WP:DONATETEXT for the full instructions. You can donate the material, but once it is on Wikipedia it is under a CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GDFL, meaning others can share and remix the work. In some cases it's easier to simply reword everything. PS – on talk pages we have to sign our posts, which will automatically insert your username and a datestamp. Just put for tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. Thanks — MusikAnimal talk 15:42, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: I would be happy to reword, but I no longer have access to the page. Is there a way for you to make it available without the flagged section so as not to break copyright rules? Any way I could get the page back; we aren't too keen on donation so I would be happy to rework it. And thanks for the advice. Dfrontani (talk) 20:34, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello from 23.241.240.229 I posted on the gabriela and rodrigo page

I just saw the their commercial as an advertisement on youtube. It's called the "speaker duet"

I am unable to find a link for it though, but I just saw the commercial right now so there isn't really a source.

Hello from Swaggercatz101

Thanks Musik, I did not edit that page my friend did thanks for tracking his edit down and fixing it!!!!!!! :D -Swaggercatz101

Lance Franklin

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 13:57, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

@George Ho: I'm going to say request at WP:RPP. Personally I think things have cooled off enough, but another admin may see different. Best — MusikAnimal talk 16:29, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Question for the Survivor Series article from Adham2911B

MusikAnimal. Hi, I have a question. For the Survivor Series 2014 article, is it supposed to be Fandango alone, or Fandango (with Rosa Mendes)? Because people say that it's Fandango alone.Adham2911B (talk) 15:23, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

@Adham2911B: I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with the Survivor Series. I can tell you however the content should be based off of the sources. So if the source says Fandango with Rosa Mendes than that's probably what the article should say. Consider starting a discussion on the talk page. Best — MusikAnimal talk 16:04, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello from 174.241.128.130

Hello. You recently deleted a page on American Alarm Company citing copyright infringement and then referenced my company's Facebook page. I am the owner of American Alarm Company and also the owner of the American Alarm Company Facebook page. What do I need to do to get the page reinstated? Thank you, scott. 174.241.128.130 (talk) 17:06, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey there! Although this came from your Facebook page, which is unverified, we have to assume it is copyrighted as there is no indication it is released under a compatible license. You can explicitly say it does have such license, you can donate the text for use on Wikipedia, or you could simply reword it. See WP:DONATETEXT for the full instructions. You should also be aware of our notability guideline on organizations. Your article will need to be backed by reliable sources to establish notability. Wikipedia:Your first article is a good guideline to go by when preparing your article. Hope this helps! — MusikAnimal talk 17:19, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Edit conflict: 7digital

Hi there, thanks for taking a look just now, but can you remove all of the info, this was meant to resolve the copyright problem that Moonriddengirl put on our talk page on Aug 14 2014. Thanks :) Llamalady28 (talk) 17:40, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

@Llamalady28: Can you point me to source of what you claim is copyrighted material? I did some quick searches that turned up nothing. Either way, if there is copyrighted material anywhere it needs to be removed. Finally, if you are removing large amounts of sourced content, for any reason, you should state why in your edit summary. Thanks — MusikAnimal talk 17:50, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, my bad, apologies on the rookie error :) Won't happen again!
I couldn't find any copyrighted material either which confused me, as to why she then hid all those sections..hmmm confusing!
Can you remove the flags from the page, now that this has been removed? Or, does this happen automatically? Thanks Llamalady28 (talk) 17:54, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
@Llamalady28: First off, I did not realize this was commented out content. In that case you're not removing something that was already there, but thank you for using an edit summary that second time. Don't worry about any mistakes you make, you're new here and we don't expect you to be perfect. I believe this is the copyrighted content removed by Moonriddengirl.
As for the "flags", are you referring to the maintenance templates at the top ("appears to be an advertisement", etc)? Those should be left until those issues are addressed. In my opinion the article may still have a promotional tone. We should work to neutralize it. It also sounds like you are affiliated with this organization, so you should be careful not to exert a conflict of interest. — MusikAnimal talk 18:06, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your quick response :) Can you help neutralize this? It'd be much appreciated! Llamalady28 (talk) 17:30, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

I noticed you deleted User talk:CannaLink. Since it contained messages left for the user (which we're never supposed to delete), I undeleted it and removed the spam by hand. Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:32, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

@Jackmcbarn: Hey! Thanks for restoring it, I guess. Clearly I'm missing something. What was wrong with deleting it? The user has been blocked indefinitely, with talk page access revoked. The talk page clearly met G11 criteria, and also G12, although I didn't bother putting the latter in the deletion summary. Anyways, I of course don't mind you restoring it, and I do appreciate you letting me know :) — MusikAnimal talk 05:24, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
WP:OWNTALK and WP:DELTALK cover it. Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:56, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
@Jackmcbarn: Hi again. Allow me to ask for further clarification, because I certainly don't want to be doing the wrong thing. To be clear, the user definitely saw the messages, or else they wouldn't have blanked them. I try to use my best judgement when taking administrative action. I would not delete just any talk page (I don't need a guideline to tell me that), but here this one was used solely for disruption, and doesn't appear to contain any meaningful history. It clearly met CSD criteria (which applies to talk pages), so I deleted it. If you wanted to go by the book, this seems like it would be a WP:DELTALK "exception". I guess the bigger thing I'm trying to understand is what we've accomplished by restoring it. With the user blocked, talk page access removed, it was sort of a "case closed" situation, if you ask me. I doubt we'll be trying to provide diffs of ClueBot's warning or that CSD notice in the future. — MusikAnimal talk 16:37, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
The word "exceptions" there is a bit unclear, but my interpretation is a user talk page that only ever contained disruptive content, not messages left by other users, such as User talk:Acerstimberflooring. Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:41, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
@Jackmcbarn: The only messages left on User talk:CannaLink were the ClueBot warning and CSD notices. Both were put there by automation or semi-automation. The user removed the notices, which is fine. How then does that make User talk:CannaLink anymore meaningful than User talk:Acerstimberflooring? I still fail to understand how deleting it was inherently wrong. I think sometimes it's safe to ignore some rules, especially on such a trivial matter as this. We're not breaking policy here, but a guideline. — MusikAnimal talk 16:56, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
I guess it really is a grey area. Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:34, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Protection required

Rudolf Virchow is frequently disrupted and/or unconstructively edited, and is quite annoying for those who keep watch on the page. I don't know about the ground rules, is it better to assign pending changes or some level of protection? Kindly take action. Chhandama (talk) 10:47, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

@Chhandama: I wouldn't call it "frequent" (compared to a lot of other pages), but I can see that this has been going on for quite some time. I've added pending-changes protection for a duration of one month. Let's see if things settle down after that. Thanks for the report. — MusikAnimal talk 15:57, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. Chhandama (talk) 02:12, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Rudolf Virchow

I don't know what it is about Rudolf Virchow that attracts so much vandalism, but can we perhaps protect it indefinitely? I've requested for it to be protected multiple times from User:Jmh649 (Doc James) if I remember correctly. I've been introduced to the subject through my contributions to deep vein thrombosis, FWIW. Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. {{U}}) while signing a reply, thx 16:41, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

@Biosthmors: I've settled on pending-changes protection given the reasonably low edit rate. I can see that abuse has been going on for some time, but it may be too soon to warrant indefinite protection. Unaccepted edits aren't visible to the reader, so unless we're getting an abundance of revdel-like edits I think PC will suit well. Feel free to contact me again if you think abuse is starting to get back out of hand. — MusikAnimal talk 02:34, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MusikAnimal/Archive_10&oldid=1211538393"